With Pluto’s first (hesitant) ingress into Aquarius imminent, I've just posted a review of Fritz Brunhubner’s book Pluto – the most influential and important book in terms of defining the astrological meaning of Pluto.

https://www.skyscript.co.uk/rev_pluto.html


In view of how much of a legacy he has left on astro-technique, it's surprising how little is known about Brunhubner. If any of our members have extra biographical details to add, it would be great to collect them here

One detail that fascinates me is the point illustrated in the review about the disputed discovery date of Pluto. Generally said to be 18 Feb 1930, Brunhubner claims it was actually 21st January 1930. Given his expertise and close attention to that detail as someone ‘on the ground’ and invested in the topic so heavily, I’m inclined to think his report cannot be ignored. I don’t have a time, but here is the noon chart for its location of discovery: Flagstaff, Arizona, USA.



Being one month earlier than the usually reported date, the Sun in the chart is at the very start of Aquarius and not at the end of it as in the February chart. Hence my brain-twisting question in the review …
“...when Pluto ingresses into Aquarius in late March 2023 will it by feeling its own effects (Pluto transiting Pluto’s natal Sun)????

His own perspective was somewhat shaped by the fact that on the day of its discovery exalted Mars was opposed by Pluto from its sign of debility – he talked about this in terms of it being like two hostile brothers about to fight over rulership of Scorpio: “Unfavourable aspects between them almost always bring unrest, quarrels, strife, deaths and catastrophes???.

Comments on Brunhubner, his book, that detail, or Pluto's ingress generally are welcomed in this thread!

Deb wrote: One detail that fascinates me is the point illustrated in the review about the disputed discovery date of Pluto. Generally said to be 18 Feb 1930, Brunhubner claims it was actually 21st January 1930.

January 21st, 1930 was the date the first photographic plate was taken by Clyde Tombaugh used in combination with another plate taken 6 days later using blink comparator to look at every image from one plate to the other and see if any changed position. Tombaugh didn't get to compare the plates until weeks later on February 18th, 1930. Tombaugh logs the time at about 4pm when he actually 'discovered' the object later to be called Pluto.

It must have been Brunhubner's opinion this was the actual discovery, the first plate taken by Tombaugh.

So was it the first photographic plate of Pluto that was the 'astrological' birth of Pluto or the cognitive realization of a new planet being seen?

Large scale photographic surveys of the heavens began in the 1880s and over the course of the decades until 1930 Pluto must have been photographed many hundreds times. Many astronomers over the ages including Hipparchus and Galileo observed Uranus but of course was only considered a very dim star until it's discovery by Herschel in 1871.

Just a little food for thought.

Interesting detail - thanks for adding that AJ! I now understand why the moment of discovery is debatable.

I have a copy of the book to give away so I've created a draw which will be made on 23 March (day of the Pluto-Aquarius ingress). To enter, just add your name and email address to this Google form:

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIp ... g/viewform

(Information collected will not be used for any other purposes)

https://www.astro.com/astrowiki/de/Frit ... %C3%BCbner

Not much much more, some more details concerning Brunhübner.

According to the Sabian Symbols, commentary by D. Rudhyar, the 2nd degree of AQU (position of the Sun in the chart above) is characterized by "an unexpected thunderstorm". True, literally and metaphorically spoken.

In Brunhübner's chart you find Pluto dir. conj. native sun in the solar arc for 1934, the year he published his text on Pluto.

Whenever I utilize the placement of the stars to extrapolate potential manifestations and life-affirming directions for my clients’ life experiences, it’s very important for me to correlate factual information about these planets (as the planet itself is {or the planets themselves are} more tangible than ever given our scientific progress and technological achievements).

The magical language and power that is astrology is evolving with us, after all.

So, with Pluto in particular, I find it to be necessary to point out that A) it may point to a facet of the existence-experience that might prove to have been blown out of proportion or suggests a misleading exaggeration of some sort (because Pluto’s now dwarfed status represents a warning about a potential miscalculation/misconception/wrongful classification), and B) it sometimes appears closer to the center of our solar system than Neptune does (so it perhaps can be experienced via the mysteriously or transcendentally powered technology of dreams/drugs/divinity during these ‘occasional’ cycles).

How can we tell stories about something moving so far beyond Saturn’s (and Uranus’ and often Neptune’s…which can be FAR OUT) orbital field, yet that allegedly can be perceived influencing these most-durable and boundary-forming constellations?

How do we honor this change in our educational approach to what makes up ‘THE’ planets of our solar system? Losing a member that future generations might forget about entirely unless a group of sentimental folks continue to feed it the social/fictive power (which is not unlike a law or religious theory) is on topic.

What can be said about the occasional dip into the field of Neptune’s influence, like it was for folks born in the 80s and 90s?

Pluto’s straddling through Saturn’s dual-sign domain exerts itself through the very center of our boundaries…but can this subatomic behavior be perceived?

Given the cold, collective, service-oriented and scientific significations of our steady, mentally-airy sign, my mind keeps going to A.I. challenging the notion of what it means to actually be sentient. It points to the ecological crisis becoming fundamentally integrated (about fucking time). It points to death itself being re-conceptualized and way more accessible for folks who have had enough of the embodied experience.

It’s late, but I’ll close with this before getting my lovely sleep:

The meditation masters of old experienced (or if you are skeptical, at the very least theorized) that atomic structures/energy existed long before the verbiage or technological capacity to experience these subtleties was manifest. Sure, they called it something different, but how did they come to this conclusion in the 8th century? A lucky guess? Is our current theory correct? Answer this and we will have totally new boundaries to contend with.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalapa_(atomism)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_theory

Call Pluto whatever you want, but that word points to a fascinating facet of sentient (human) achievement (even setting astrology aside)…and we’re going to have to level-up! Astrology and Aquarius have a history, eh? I perceive astrology to be valuable at the same time as seeing it as very ungrounded/unscientific. It doesn’t need to be anything other than an art form that helps us all enjoy our mental capacity.

????????

I just realised that I didn't update this thread with the details of who won the draw for this book.

The draw was made on 25 March and the winner was Geoff Gronlund from America.