Display posts from previous
Sort by

97 by Nixx
Mark wrote: My approach to the nodes is broadly traditional. In terms of energy flow one can see the North Node as a point of expansion and augmentation and the South Node relating to discharge and limitation.

Having said that I don?t find a lot of traditional texts describing the nodes terribly helpful. Firstly, they tend to be OTT benefic/malefic in their descriptions. Secondly, the nodes are seldom if ever treated as an axis in traditional sources. I have therefore been scouring around Indian and modern western astrology for the most useful approaches to the nodes.

I personally, have found some merit in mixing the two meanings together as an axis as part of their delineation. Hence in Chart 1 I get the SN linked to the ASC weakening the sense of self. It doesn't mean such a person cannot be famous. Many are. However, the flow of energy is going to the North Node ie others. So if we see the 1st-7th as an axis the focus is self vs others.

Beyond this I look at dispositors of the nodes. In President Polk's chart Saturn disposits the SN from the 6th WS house. Saturn is about duty, responsibility, and hard work. The 6th house is about hard work too and even drudgery. Its also about illness. Hence I pulled all this together to get self sacrifice. I suspect all this effort in office weakened Polk's metabolism which was a contributory factor in his early death. Looking at the North Node in the 7th the dispositor is the Moon. The Moon is in its own domcile of Cancer and in the 7th house too. This is a pretty clear indication of popularity.
I don't think we know, or ever will, if self-sacrifice is a 'correct' assessment for Polk. It is not the usual way of describing big slave owners, nowadays at least.

You may know the Psychological view of Nodes is the South talks about familiar patterns and Inner talents and the North the lack of. It occurs to me I can't think of a lineage for where these ideas came from. But your 'traditional' lens suggests some for the North, I'm not sure about this '' discharge'' you mention for the South, what does this mean?

I rarely notice the Nodes unless they are bang on an angle or within a degree or two of an aspect to the Luminaries. The Indian crowd(s) seem to find them a touch sinister and more important than both 'traditional' and many ?modern? Western astrologers.

Do you know where the idea an angular, or 7th house, Moon in domicile indicating ''popularity'' comes from? Is this about how you may be seen by others as it's the 7th ? Again this may resonate a little with the Psychological Schema where a 7th house Moon needs to be popular or liked so it may follow if the Moon is in good 'condition' then this is more likely to be the outcome. Not that I know how popular Polk was, presumably not by his slaves who doubtless dreamt of slitting his throat of an evening..............

98 by Tom
I don't think we know, or ever will, if self-sacrifice is a 'correct' assessment for Polk. It is not the usual way of describing big slave owners, nowadays at least.
Polk and every other member of the human race is not one dimensional. There is more to him than the fact that he owned slaves, and therefore judging every aspect of his character by that one fact surely distorts the whole picture. I don't see any problem with viewing a slave holder as self sacrificing, if it is true. George Washington owned slaves, yet he risked everything he owned not to mention his life, for a cause. He was more than a slave holder.

This is not limited to Polk either. Business executives are not one dimensional either, nor are rich people, nor are poor people and so on. Our objective is to get a feel for the native and describe what we see in the chart. We won't always be right, but if we judge a person by one characteristic, particularly when we look at an 19th century person through a 21st century lens, we're sure to miss quite a bit.

Polk made an observation that we would do well to remember. He said the Presidency of the US should never be sought nor declined. He is reiterating the noble ideal that holders of high office serve. They do not rule. They are entrusted as stewards of the nation and its laws. They are responsible for its security. The Presidency is not four years of absolute rulership and when one is done another takes his place and he rules for four years (or eight).

In short the President (and Congress) gives up their personal well being in the service of their country. That idea has been turned on its head. No one leaves Congress poor any longer. In fact very few leave Congress at all until they draw their last breath or get arrested. We've come a long way since Polk's ideals held sway.

99 by Nixx
Redford has Neptune conjunct the Moon, Mercury and Venus. With Neptune being seen, by some, as a planet which says something about fantasy, escapism, glamour and therefore the phenomena of Film Stars this would probably have made the choice easier for me. Pluto and Uranus seem peripheral for him. As far as I know he has been pretty mainstream film wise. i.e he is no Derek Jarman or even Mike Leigh.

100 by james_m
Tom wrote:
Jupiter rules his MC and ASC and is very strong in Sagittarius in the 9th. If a strong planet has to be in a cadent house, it may as well be the 9th. But for whole sign advocates Jupiter is in the 10th sign and the Venus, Mercury Moon in Virgo are then angular in the 7th sign. Moon Mercury contacts are nice as they give a balanced mind or one that is both rational and imaginative. Only 7 months older than Billy Carter, Saturn is in Pisces, too, but tucked away in the 12th house.
if one is going to entertain whole-sign houses for some of redfords planets, it will put redfords saturn rising in his first, not tucked away in the 12th.. in a nocturnal chart with moon/mercury applying to it, i recall valens harsh words for saturn rising in a nocturnal chart.. the jupiter in the 10th would be a big help, but i don't know if it washes out what i recall reading from valens on saturn rising in a nocturnal chart..
Tom wrote:
Mars in the 7th shows interest in athletics and Redford was a decent baseball player and tennis player.
i suppose that is a typo and you mean mars in the 5th..
Tom wrote:
With all those planets in Virgo and Virgo on the 7th I was curious about his first wife, Lola Van Wagenen. I can only find a birth year (1940), not a date. He did marry her when the Sun was in Virgo, however. Their marriage lasted 30 years before ending in divorce.
that sounds about right if you think of 1 cycle of saturn where those virgo planets are in direct opposition to.




does anyone have any astro thoughts on what would be a big distinction astrologically for an actor verses a politician? would one base it on a sign or signs, a particular house, or houses, planet or planets? i note regular mention of popularity associated with the moon on an angle.. what about jupiter's role, or saturn role if on an angle as they apparently were in 2 or 3 of the charts? do they imply more actor or politician for the folks here?

thanks again for doing this tom.. it is a none stop learning fest, lol...

101 by Atlantean
Great challenge... first off, let me say...
Image
I got all three correct with very little muss and fuss. The actor was easy to pick out of the three because his chart is the one that most obviously fits the "Performing Channel".

After Tom told us that there was a politician and a business executive, it was then easy to see the business executive from the remaining two.

I highlighted (in my posts) the methods that I used, but basically they follow Noel Tyl's vocational profiling as explained in his book, Vocations
Image
I regularly do group readings, where I read for 10 to 20 people in a sitting. The methods in this book have been vital to discussing vocational issues with only a very brief look at the natal chart. Though it's not a traditional text, I am still sure that it can be immensely helpful to anyone.

Peace...and, ....more challenges, please! :)

James

102 by Deb
Well done James :' I?m kicking myself now. Tom, if you'd said "which one of these charts belongs to Robert Redford?" I feel sure I?d have gone for the one with Sun in Leo straightaway ...:)

I'm a bit disturbed by this comment from Yuriy:
That's right, typical American president has all detriment planets related to career (in this case Venus and Mercury). No need to be a good person to become a president...
G.Bush has most planets in 12th house...
Apart from the fact that it's potentially offensive with regards to national characteristics, I'm imagining how someone like Sue Toohey would have reacted to the suggestion that people with detrimented planets and difficult house placements are not good people! Most of her chart was in the 12th house and most of her planets were afflicted. That was descriptive of the circumstances she faced in a life full of challenges.

Ghandi, born just after sunrise, had a 12th house Sun, with its dispositor Venus is in detriment in Scorpio conjunct Mars. I've published elsewhere on how the similarity between Ghandi's and Hitler's charts are striking. Ghandi practiced celibacy but he is on record for saying that he struggled to overcome the temptations because he wasn't naturally inclined towards that practice. That's the kind of correlation I note for an afflicted Venus, we can only assume that there is some kind of struggle with what it represents. Many noted politicians (and others who have sacrificed their lives for a cause) have 12th house Sun's - this tells us something about their life, what they are suited to, or how they might feel oppressed with restrictions in areas related to their own solar expression. It tells us nothing at all about whether the person is a good one or not.

103 by Tom
First let me thank all of you for your kind words and encouragement. I have fun with these, too, but I am always deeply impressed with the level of astrology at Skyscript. I mentioned this before, even people who get things wrong, have solid reasoning behind their choices. I will do another one soon. I think I'm going to be more deliberate with all choices and not just one and two others at random. Let me ponder that.

That comment bothered me, too but for slightly different reasons. My whole life I've heard people rant and rave about politicians and businessmen and whatever other group happens to be more out of favor than usual. My father did it. And while attitudes based on stereotypes will always be with us, the venom that seems to accompany it today is disturbing.

George W. Bush has two planets in the 12th house, not "most." He is not an evil man, and in point of fact, by any standard he is a thoroughly decent one. It does not follow that anyone is required to think highly of his Presidency or anything he did or did not do while in office because of that decency. He had to make choices as President, and there will always be critics, legitimate and otherwise. But all the hysterical prophecies of concentration camps, suspension of the US Constitution, oil companies taking over the world, etc have proven to be just so much wind. When his term of office was up, he went home.

James K. Polk was not an evil man, either. The knee jerk reaction to the fact of his slave ownership says more about the current state of our educational system than it does about Polk. Like all Presidents and politicians, Polk needs to be considered in the context of his age. The US was inching towards a devastating civil war. This was not an easy time to be in charge.

Someone mentioned Noel Tyl. I recall Tyl writing something about a chart and the vocation. He took a chart and waxed eloquent on all its virtues and the virtues of the individual to whom it belonged. He went point to point showing students how this easily could have been the chart of a Roman Catholic Pope, then revealed it was the chart of American gangster, Lucky Luciano. Success comes in a variety of ways.

I can't change human nature, but the astrology that motivates such thoughts should be explored. One of the things that fascinated me about George Patton's chart is the lack of essential dignity. Yet despite that or in his case perhaps because of it, he climbed to the highest level of his profession. Abraham Lincoln, regardless of birth time, has 5 of the 7 classical planets in detriment, 1 is peregrine, and one, Jupiter in Pisces, is in great dignity. That's not a lot to work with, and many consider him our greatest President. Certainly he had the most difficult job.

The first thing we need to dispense with is: Lots of dignity = good person; lack of dignity = bad person. At most a lack of dignity represents difficulties and let's face it, we all have difficulties in our lives. Patton had learning disabilities, and diplomacy was hardly his strong suit. Like it or not the military is a political place and being a tank commander in a world war is no place for dopes - not if you want to win. He overcame both problems by sheer force of will. There is hope for weak charts.

However one facet of chart reading that few of us do, and I'm not one of the few, is determining character. In the American educational system, anyway, being "judgmental" is thought to be wicked in some way. I think for that reason many of us shy away from looking at the chart in an effort to determine some kind of judgment as to character. Yet what we do is called "judicial astrology." We make judgments, why ignore the most important part or our makeup? Didn't Alan Leo say, if not originally, "Character is Destiny?" You will not hear me quote Leo very often.

How do we do that? That's not easy, but we shouldn't shy away from a challenge. There is the part of spirit. All charts have a 9th house and a ruler for it. Morin used the ASC to determine character. Now we cannot and should not condemn anyone to eternal damnation for his or her chart, but we can notice red flags or green ones for that matter.

Finally speaking of Morin: actually Mark, I thought of that. Morin gives us a system for looking at houses and delineating and I've spotted things here and there that are noteworthy. I'll post them on this thread when more time permits. There should be nothing radically different from what others have seen. Usually it's just a different way of getting there.

Thank you all again I enjoy these exercises as much as you do.


104 by Atlantean
Hello Tom,

Re: "The first thing we need to dispense with is: Lots of dignity = good person; lack of dignity = bad person."

I have the Moon, Mercury, Jupiter, and Saturn all in signs they rule. I am sure what Tom is saying is correct! ;)

Planets in dignity express more freely...for better or worse.

Great challenge, ...again, thanks...

James

105 by Tom
Right James, but I don't want anyone to get the idea there is anything wrong with having planets in great dignity. The chart is what it is, and our job is to determine what it is.

There are many ways astrologers can express how planets work under different conditions. I like the key word "independence" to describe planets in domicile. They act without benefit of the influence of a dispositor. This shows us that the dispositor is of great significance as well. I'm going to explore this idea in more depth later on or tomorrow.

107 by cor scorpii
Congratulations to all who got the whole package right :)

I was very impressed by Mark's reading and I've learned a lot from it :'

Tom,

I hope we don't wait too long for the next challenge. You're doing an outstanding job here.

Goran
!! Read first: forum policies
Recent topics
Post Reply

Return to “Traditional (& Ancient) Techniques”