The rumored death of Noam Chomsky

Yesterday morning, several publications, including Jacobin and The New Statesman, prematurely published obituaries for the renowned linguist and activist Noam Chomsky, leading to widespread rumors of his death on social media platforms. The Brazilian news site Diario do Centro do Mundo also initially reported Chomsky's passing,[1] and links circulated on Twitter for published obituaries surfacing from across the globe.

As it turned out, Chomsky was alive and well. In response to a text message from a Jacobin Brasil reporter, Chomsky's wife, Valeria Wasserman Chomsky, confirmed that the reports of his death were false:

Translation from Brazilian Portuguese –

Reporter: "Valeria, good afternoon. News is circulating that Chomsky has passed away. Is it true?"

Valeria Chomsky: "LIE."
Valeria Chomsky: "He's well."

Reporter: "Wow, really..."

Valeria Chomsky had previously informed the AP that the 95-year-old had been hospitalized in Brazil while recovering from a stroke he suffered a year ago. However, the Beneficencia Portuguesa hospital in São Paulo stated that Chomsky was discharged on Tuesday to continue his treatment at home.

Following the confirmation that Chomsky was still alive, the publications that had erroneously announced his death took swift action to rectify their mistake. Jacobin Brasil changed its headline from "We Remember Noam Chomsky" to "Let's Celebrate Noam Chomsky," while The New Statesman removed its essay altogether. I was able to screenshot how their article showed up on Twitter before it was deleted:

It appears that these publications had published their obituaries without confirming the accuracy of the information, likely basing their reports on the initial erroneous announcement by a single source. The incident serves as a reminder of the importance of verifying information before publishing, especially when it concerns the life and death of a prominent figure like Noam Chomsky.

Saturnian blight

This is the kind of situation that has Saturn's name all over it. Rumors, of course, might be more wisely attributed to the Moon or Mercury, as a general thing, and all the more-so when the rumor is uninteresting, without major impact or mundane.

This rumor, however, was about death – the death of a wise, learned sage. Saturn through and through. I was eager to take a look at the astrology of this mess, having never looked Chomsky's chart myself which I later found odd, considering how influential his work was in my academic life. (I have a bachelor's in linguistics, a field that Chomsky helped define.)

While I don't have the time the original obituary was published, we do have the time that Chomsky's wife responded to say he was alive – 4:21pm BRT. Centering that on São Paulo, where I believe that conversation initiated, we can create a bi-wheel comparing that moment to the nativity.

Chomsky was born with the Sun and Saturn in conjunction on his ascendant. At the time the rumors were circulating, transiting Saturn (death) has come into very close square with the ascendant and Saturn. The Moon (rumors, messages) ruled the 8th house (death), and transiting Mercury (networks of communication) was conjoined Chomsky's natal Mars Rx (irritating mixups) on that cusp. The position of Chomsky's natal Neptune (confusion, dissolution of strength) was on the midheaven of Valeria's text message – and! Chomsky's 3rd house cusp (rumors, messages, news outlets) at 28° Aquarius was on the rumor chart's 4th house cusp (the grave, death, endings).

Deeply grateful that Chomsky is alive. I'm also a little grateful that small blunders like these do happen from time to time. They give astrologers a chance to whet the stone, so to speak, to see how rumors and misinformation intermesh with nativities and birth charts when they hit the world stage.