Skyscript Astrology Forum

waybread - yes of course.. including aspects is even more of a barrel of monkeys that thinking about tropical verses sidereal signs.. which aspects will you include, or will you go a step further and think of how aspects are a type of harmonic and just start working with harmonic charts too?

actually growing up on that kind of stuff, i am a sucker for aspects and the importance for them. one problem with them or not, is some folks don't bother using anything outside the ptolemaic ones... people see what they want to see. really i suppose i am talking about the art of perception more then i am astrology at this point!

there is such a thing as putting blinders on in order to look in a more focused way on something.. or, it means you are never going to see something becuase of a refusal to even consider an alternative way of looking at something.. i think i am guilty of all of it, lol..

James-M wrote:

..... i am more attached to house position- not so much the 12 house system as an appreciation for the importance of the angles in astrology which is a much more obvious basis for all house systems... going back to cobains chart, assuming it is very close to accurate - the presence of pluto/mercury along the ascendant axis weighs more heavily then the moon in many respects.. of course we have to combine all this in some type of synthesis but i would be vying for planets on angles demonstrating the strength of their nature more strongly then signs.. i realize astrologers typically use all these elements to further a better understanding of the chart.. i would like to strip some of the extra layers away to see what it might look like, that's all..

Hi James,

One thing I would like is software that just displays the planets and angles as you suggest above. I have an out of sign hard aspect in my chart which is less obvious with signs displayed. Things like that are arguably easier to study without signs initially. I have never agreed with those astrologers that dont look at out of sign aspects. Even traditional figures like Lilly considered them if planets were in orb.

Jame_M wrote:

actually growing up on that kind of stuff, i am a sucker for aspects and the importance for them. one problem with them or not, is some folks don't bother using anything outside the ptolemaic ones... people see what they want to see. really i suppose i am talking about the art of perception more then i am astrology at this point!

there is such a thing as putting blinders on in order to look in a more focused way on something.. or, it means you are never going to see something becuase of a refusal to even consider an alternative way of looking at something.. i think i am guilty of all of it, lol..

I know you are a fan of the minor hard aspects ie 45 + 135. I suppose my experience was formed a lot by horary. I just never found these minors that useful there.

Hence I dont tend to bother with them much in natal or mundane.

I think there is a fundamental philosophical difference here in what modern and traditional practitioners even mean by the word aspect. Basically , traditional aspect theory derives from the 'orbs' of the respective planets not the aspect type. Hence even without signs we are going to see things differently in terms of when an aspect is being formed.

Traditional technique also gives us several factors that modify the influence of planets beyond signs. In particular planetary sect and the solar phase of a planet. I always look at these in a chart.

Another topic I am personally interested in in declination. This is a very clear example of planets operating outside the dimension of signs. I have found 'out of bound planets' quite useful in mundane work.

I wonder if there is a difference in the usefulness of working without signs or houses depending on the branch of astrology? This approach seems hard to contemplate in horary. It has some uses in natal but I think most astrologers would miss the house dimension not just for topics but as a measure of planetary strength.

On the other hand I have seen some good mundane work that doesn't rely on horoscopes at all. For example the work of Bernadette Brady with looks at the visual phases of the planets. Maybe as we move to the more impersonal perspective there is a stronger case for this kind of approach?

Mark

Nixx wrote:

Therese Hamilton wrote:
Certainly the examples I gave above for Neptune either conjunct or trine the ascendant support what Cayce said in trance about Neptune. By the way, during one trance discourse on astrology, a person asked Cayce "who is giving this information?" Cayce replied "a student of Zoroaster!"

The examples I gave reflect astrological or occult interests, activities or professional occupations. But isn't there some psychology behind those choices? What causes one person to be fascinated with the occult or astrology and another person to be more interested in law or business?? As for the Neptune link to psychology (mentioned by Cayce), the professional symbol for psychology is Neptune's trident.

Nixx replied:
I can't see any evidence for something in your post, empirical or otherwise, I'm also not sure what your hypothesis is. Off the top of my head, Neptune in the 9th tends to be seen as a disposition towards 'blind faith' the wrong side of the Law at Waco sort of thing, do you agree?

No, I don't agree. I believe a planet needs to be in aspect to the Sun or Moon or perhaps Mercury for psychological traits of that nature. A planet in a house relates to life emphasis more than psychology. "Topics" as the ancient astrologers would say.

I have no hypothesis. I simply correlated what Cayce said about Neptune with charts of those who have Neptune conjunct or trine to the ascendant. But I see that I didn't include any quotes from the Cayce readings. I've been working on an article on Neptune, and it was an oversight not to include Cayce quotes on the forum.

To remedy that I'm including here a few of the many, many hundreds of statements Cayce made about Neptune. (I will post an article on Neptune on the sidereal part of the forum because there are fewer discussions there, and I want to correlate the outer planets with signs. Here there are several discussions, and I don't want to dominate this topic.)

Edgar Cayce on Neptune

One loving mystery...and of the sleuth or detective nature. (2213-1) (Gilbert who became a secret agent from the list in my earlier post)

One who will find the...greatest abilities...in the study of occult forces. (22-13-1)

Those influences in Neptune and the Moon make for the interests in those of spiritual influences, mysticism and rites. (355-1)

In the application of the influences, we find in that of Neptune, and of the influences in the occult--these being for unusual experiences in visions, in dreams, and in that of the occult and mystic forces...(543-11)

In Neptune we find an influence that is most in the making of the present experiences of the entity so that those things that are mysterious, those things that are psychological, those things pertaining to the mental mind of man and the mysteries of life... (585-2)

In Neptune, those of the mysticism, mystery, spiritual insight, spiritual development...(900-14)

In Neptune, the artistic temperament--both as to material things and the mental or spiritual relationships...(1533-2)

It might be an idea to start a thread on Cayce one day and we can look at his chart, explore his regurgitations of Blavatsky or lack of and ponder on his role, if any, in the gassing of the Jews, Disabled et al by the Third Reich. Some background reading if this gets off the ground here

Cayce did not ?regurgitate? Blavatsky or anyone else. His sources were spiritual, and his only concern was either helping to cure his clients of physical illnesses or advising them on ways to live a life more attuned to spiritual principles.

Neptune?s postulated linking to Psychology seems a little odd...

Not odd at all. All you need to do is study the charts of those who have devoted their lives either to the study or practice of psychology. It?s no accident that Neptune?s trident is the Psi symbol. Cayce freuqently linked psychology to Neptune. In his time psychology was more of a "mystery" as it dealt with emotions and motivations that hadn't been talked about before.

Cayce also attributed the influence of Neptune to inspiration in music and the arts, and frequently advises those with a Neptunian influence to live near large bodies of water. But I?ll cover that in more detail in my article on the sidereal forum and later a more expanded article on my web site. Or perhaps I?ll submit an article for publication in an astrological journal.

Here is a fascinating quote on Uranus and Neptune I found when researching Cayce's statements on Neptune. The quote is especially interesting in light of the discussion of the possible affinity of Uranus and Aries on the thread Mark started. Those present at Cayce's trance readings generally asked various questions after the readings. (ALL Cayce's statements were made in deep trance. He had no knowledge of what he said upon waking.)

Edgar Cayce on Uranus and Neptune

Q-9: Explain our urges from the Uranian and Neptune influences as they affect us in the present life.

A-9: These of course come as innate urges. One [Uranus] as of the philosophical nature, the other [Neptune] rather as of a passive nature. These we find then become as sudden conditions arising, extremes. And these are as dashing fire and water together. [my bolded text] For they represent the elements in the earth and those differences. Yet doth not water temper the steel? Doth not the steel supply the manner or means for the preserving of the influence of the water forces...?

Hence these understand; and as has been indicated, seek not the differences but seek rather the oneness. See the beauty in each...(688-4)

james_m wrote:

i sorta fit the description in the first paragraph, lol! i guess i am 30 years late though. oh well.. as for astrologers attitudes being hard to shift - that is how i see it..

I was confident in time, with support, you would emerge as a valuable human being and an astrologer with integrity!

nixx - i suppose i am throwing a bit of a curve ball their with the elevated moon concept.. i do think it is a factor, although how to explain a deep instinctual bond with the mother has to be explained astrologically somehow.. interestingly my wife has a moon in cancer and she has no deep instinctual bond with her mom.. how much of this in cobains chart has to do with it being a night chart with an elevated moon? i have no idea, but like you, i am tossing ideas around to see if we can remove some of the layers to our approach to planets - naked planets if you will - dancing around in a particular way, but not boxed into the format we usually define them.

I'm not tossing ideas around here much, I'm quite comfortable at the moment with the idea the Moon in Cancer predisposes one to drink 342 pints of milk a day, need a safe and emotionally nutritious home environment and a tendency to cuddle up with ones loved one and/or the cat (both mother surrogates of course) of an evening. For me without the sign component, a third give or take, depending on the chart, of the brain/psyche/life is missing.

Where the 10th house,(Career/Vocation, Ambition / Status - both ?topically? and as regards their psychological underpinnings), comes in is narrating how the pubic behaviour ( perception of others) is manifested. It could be a shame Cobain did not pop into see me as I might have said to him give up this grunge muzak nonsense and do a Degree in Nursing, then you might want to live, we?ll never know.............

do planets operate outside or above the sign, or house position they hold? i would say that they do, although i am more attached to house position- not so much the 12 house system as an appreciation for the importance of the angles in astrology which is a much more obvious basis for all house systems... going back to cobains chart, assuming it is very close to accurate - the presence of pluto/mercury along the ascendant axis weighs more heavily then the moon in many respects.. of course we have to combine all this in some type of synthesis but i would be vying for planets on angles demonstrating the strength of their nature more strongly then signs.. i realize astrologers typically use all these elements to further a better understanding of the chart.. i would like to strip some of the extra layers away to see what it might look like, that's all..

I?m exploring the pros and cons of factoring in more layers rather than less, thus my interest in the ?forgotten? older notions, and newer bodies. If someone gets ?mystery charts? right consistently with options such as Time lords, Lots, Eris...blah blah blah, to date not in my toolbox, I?ll be raising my eyebrows and probing into their matrix. Common sense, as I see it.

With Cobain, we can speculate a little knowing he had this very nasty, at times all consuming, stomach pain. Mum has flown the nest early doors apparently, aged 8 or so? And there could be a link here (psychosomatic ? issues around emotional digestion?), tight (Cancer-stomach) symbolism if nothing else. He claims he becomes addicted to heroin to help him tolerate/dull this pain and eventually albeit indirectly perhaps he dies aged 27 a physical and emotional wreck. So was this behaviour fundamentally related to Mum not giving him what a typical Moon in Cancer boy needs, and if so to what degree was this 'played out' in public. Or am I nibbling at the wrong breast as the Moon is strong in Cancer supposedly and not on the face of it bombarded with tricky aspects. Although we can advance his chart to a later age and see ?heavy? Uranus, Saturn and Pluto squares in childhood to the natal moon.

It might be interesting to analyse his lyrics. The only classical aspect the Moon forms is with Mercury (a trine,) and ruler of the MC! So he might want to talk/write about this 'mothering' , and find it relatively ' easy? to do so. Mercury is in the 6th (the my craft is/what am I good at /how can I make a living with my abilities - house ) so he is potentially drawn to and good at linguistic communication. Plus the nodes, so the Moon has a ?fated? quality to it perhaps, (no amount of ?consciousness? is going to change the inevitable?!)

I was just trying to isolate this sign/planet/house dynamic, conflation of meanings question, which you were interested in initially, with his Moon, I?m sure the rest of the chart has some narratives which could modify the above brief and abstract (never met him) impression.

Mark wrote: Hi James,

One thing I would like is software that just displays the planets and angles as you suggest above. I have an out of sign hard aspect in my chart which is less obvious with signs displayed. Things like that are arguably easier to study without signs initially. I have never agreed with those astrologers that dont look at out of sign aspects. Even traditional figures like Lilly considered them if planets were in orb.

if you remove the aspect lines across the chart, i find that helps. i don't bother with aspect lines partly for this reason. i probably miss some stuff, but one can see an out of sign square pretty quickly. that is a novel idea though for the software makers.. i am sure that would be easy to do for them. i am curious how you have resolved the issue of signs that can't see one another and the quincunx or 150 type aspect whatever one calls it? this is a clear separation between trad and modern astrology that seems strong. i suppose if one goes with this older view of signs not seeing one another, then it is harder to integrate this with the concept of orbs as defined by lilly - 15 for the sun and etc.. when did this orb idea start anyway? it is a curious twist that i would be curious about how trad astrology resolves..

Mark wrote: I know you are a fan of the minor hard aspects ie 45 + 135. I suppose my experience was formed a lot by horary. I just never found these minors that useful there.

Hence I dont tend to bother with them much in natal or mundane.

I think there is a fundamental philosophical difference here in what modern and traditional practitioners even mean by the word aspect. Basically , traditional aspect theory derives from the 'orbs' of the respective planets not the aspect type. Hence even without signs we are going to see things differently in terms of when an aspect is being formed.

it seems with the re- release in the late 80's there has been a huge interest in horary to the point it seems to have overshadowed what was typically a huge interest in natal when i first started doing astrology. i know very few people that were practicing horary in the circles i was in way back when first starting astrology. needless to say it is the one area of astrology i am weakest in and the one area that relies heavily on rules and general agreement with house systems and etc. etc. i have a pet theory that anyone with a strong emphasis on the cap or cancer signs have more of a predisposition towards rule based astrology. for those with more of an aries/libra focus - not so much.. depends on which axis is emphasized - but it is just a pet theory.

Mark wrote: Traditional technique also gives us several factors that modify the influence of planets beyond signs. In particular planetary sect and the solar phase of a planet. I always look at these in a chart.

well those are good techniques to use as i understand them too. they don't get discussed much and it would be nice to see more discussion on this.

Mark wrote: Another topic I am personally interested in in declination. This is a very clear example of planets operating outside the dimension of signs. I have found 'out of bound planets' quite useful in mundane work.

this is another area that i think gets largely overlooked by many in the astrology community today. it was taken up by astrologers like jansky and johndro, that i remember reading, but for the most part one has to go out of their way to read other astrologers talking discussing declination or being given examples where this is emphasized. it is an ignored area that i am interested in too.

Mark wrote: I wonder if there is a difference in the usefulness of working without signs or houses depending on the branch of astrology? This approach seems hard to contemplate in horary. It has some uses in natal but I think most astrologers would miss the house dimension not just for topics but as a measure of planetary strength.

On the other hand I have seen some good mundane work that doesn't rely on horoscopes at all. For example the work of Bernadette Brady with looks at the visual phases of the planets. Maybe as we move to the more impersonal perspective there is a stronger case for this kind of approach?

Mark

good question! that was part of my motive for the topic thread and i do think practicing horary for example has signs and houses as fundamental to it's practice.. well, natal does too and maybe mundane not so much. it is interesting to think about why this might be, aside from your suggestion of the moving from personal to impersonal might be part of the reason for it. i suppose one could go further and suggest that heliocentric placements might have more to say about mundane or financial astrology too. i know some financial astrologers put more emphasis on helio positions - george bayer for one.

Nixx wrote:
I was confident in time, with support, you would emerge as a valuable human being and an astrologer with integrity!

lol! it is an uphill battle and i am still working on it - trust me! don't want to completely let go of my masochistic judeo-christian heritage quite yet!

Nixx wrote: I'm not tossing ideas around here much, I'm quite comfortable at the moment with the idea the Moon in Cancer predisposes one to drink 342 pints of milk a day, need a safe and emotionally nutritious home environment and a tendency to cuddle up with ones loved one and/or the cat (both mother surrogates of course) of an evening. For me without the sign component, a third give or take, depending on the chart, of the brain/psyche/life is missing.

Where the 10th house,(Career/Vocation, Ambition / Status - both ?topically? and as regards their psychological underpinnings), comes in is narrating how the pubic behaviour ( perception of others) is manifested. It could be a shame Cobain did not pop into see me as I might have said to him give up this grunge muzak nonsense and do a Degree in Nursing, then you might want to live, we?ll never know.............

nixx - those are good astrological insights into cobain.. ultimately we will never know. i forgot to mention how the moon is at the sun/neptune midpoint in cobains chart. i think this is a stronger statement of a few things -stomach weakness, drug dependency and early absence of the mother figure being the most obvious connections back to this midpoint as i read it.. how important are midpoints verses the use of signs without them? i think signs are only one part of the astrology - all be it - a very old part of astrology that is considered so central to it, that other ways of looking at the chart may be overlooked or ignored.

Nixx wrote:
I?m exploring the pros and cons of factoring in more layers rather than less, thus my interest in the ?forgotten? older notions, and newer bodies. If someone gets ?mystery charts? right consistently with options such as Time lords, Lots, Eris...blah blah blah, to date not in my toolbox, I?ll be raising my eyebrows and probing into their matrix. Common sense, as I see it.

With Cobain, we can speculate a little knowing he had this very nasty, at times all consuming, stomach pain. Mum has flown the nest early doors apparently, aged 8 or so? And there could be a link here (psychosomatic ? issues around emotional digestion?), tight (Cancer-stomach) symbolism if nothing else. He claims he becomes addicted to heroin to help him tolerate/dull this pain and eventually albeit indirectly perhaps he dies aged 27 a physical and emotional wreck. So was this behaviour fundamentally related to Mum not giving him what a typical Moon in Cancer boy needs, and if so to what degree was this 'played out' in public. Or am I nibbling at the wrong breast as the Moon is strong in Cancer supposedly and not on the face of it bombarded with tricky aspects. Although we can advance his chart to a later age and see ?heavy? Uranus, Saturn and Pluto squares in childhood to the natal moon.

It might be interesting to analyse his lyrics. The only classical aspect the Moon forms is with Mercury (a trine,) and ruler of the MC! So he might want to talk/write about this 'mothering' , and find it relatively ' easy? to do so. Mercury is in the 6th (the my craft is/what am I good at /how can I make a living with my abilities - house ) so he is potentially drawn to and good at linguistic communication. Plus the nodes, so the Moon has a ?fated? quality to it perhaps, (no amount of ?consciousness? is going to change the inevitable?!)

i wish more astrologers would participate in the mystery chart exercises as i think we can all learn from one another. yes - we would be much more tempted to try on other ideas if we saw someone with a high success rate using certain astro techniques we don't use too. the use of a different type of house system - like 8 houses which graham mentioned earlier would be a case it point if it seemed to help in the analysis..

how much do you think astrologers rationalize with astrology after the fact of knowing the life of the person - in this example - cobain? i think they do it a lot. i know i do, and although i try to get outside of this habit, it is easy to fall into explaining away something astrologically afterwards.. perhaps this is one obvious beauty of horary astrology - you have to put the astrology up front before the outcome is known.. one can do it with natal astrology too by making a prediction in advance, but we don't see much of that..

Nixx wrote: I was just trying to isolate this sign/planet/house dynamic, conflation of meanings question, which you were interested in initially, with his Moon, I?m sure the rest of the chart has some narratives which could modify the above brief and abstract (never met him) impression.

thanks nixx. i always enjoy your posts and find your input very informative and educational. reading any good books on psychology lately?

No, I don't agree. I believe a planet needs to be in aspect to the Sun or Moon or perhaps Mercury for psychological traits of that nature. A planet in a house relates to life emphasis more than psychology. "Topics" as the ancient astrologers would say.

You're unusual, in this zeitgeist, thinking takes us back to James's question as to whether one can or should delineate ?blind faith' as a Neptunium aspect to a planet, or one of these 3, or a house position, or a sign position or does one need or rely on confirmation or clues from all of these components plus others. What is generating your own belief in Edgar?s imagined abilities for example. Ordinarily for someone with these persuasions I?d have my eye out for Sun, Moon, Asc or all 3 in Sagittarius, one or both of the luminaries in the 9th, Neptune in the 9th etc. How do you explain it?

Casting an eye over Deb H?s book on houses it seems the 'old fellows? House 9 topics tended to include religion, travel, foreigners and philosophy. If you can find something important in an astrological chart that is not psychological I think you might be up there paradigm shift wise with the likes of Darwin and Copernicus.
.

Edgar Cayce on Neptune

I didn?t recall Edgar coming up in any books but I checked and found this in Greene?s Neptune ?Cayce who had the Sun Mercury, Venus and Saturn in Pisces and Neptune conjunct the Moon in the 9th house (!!,) provides us with a good astrological example of a Neptunium individual pursuing Neptunian work??.

Cayce did not ?regurgitate? Blavatsky or anyone else. His sources were spiritual, and his only concern was either helping to cure his clients of physical illnesses or advising them on ways to live a life more attuned to spiritual principles.

You might seek to edit Wikipedia one day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edgar_Cayce

Not odd at all. All you need to do is study the charts of those who have devoted their lives either to the study or practice of psychology.

Which has been done many a time, but here?s a quick fairly non contentious list of 10 of the top twenty re influence to peruse.

Asch, Dewey, Eysenck, Freud, James, Jung, Pavlov, Piaget, Skinner, Watson.

It?s no accident that Neptune?s trident is the Psi symbol.

Seems it?s a symbol for a lot of things http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psi_%28letter%29

Pharmacology might be a tighter fit time line wise and its link to drugs and ?altered? states of mind.

The Psychological Neptune resonates with Transpersonal Psychology, therefore Cayce?s interest in Faith Healing / Trance. Scofield in his Circuitry book links Neptune to Robert Anton Wilson's 5th Neurosomatic Circuit idea.

Neptunian behaviours such as dissolution, masochism, narcissism, salvation, renunciation, atrophy, fusion, addiction, deception, illusion, ecstasy, etc ,are of interest to Psychologists, particularly of the Depth variety. They are somewhat removed from the main thrust of Psychology which is concerned with language, learning, thinking, perception, conformity, motivation, gender, intelligence and so forth.

Cayce also attributed the influence of Neptune to inspiration in music and the arts, and frequently advises those with a Neptunian influence to live near large bodies of water.

Which is more normal, at least the link to Music, Neptune is somewhat pre or post verbal so a writer with a strong Neptune could end up psycho babbling like Rudhyar or Tyl (before and after language).

nixx - those are good astrological insights into cobain.. ultimately we will never know. i forgot to mention how the moon is at the sun/neptune midpoint in cobains chart. i think this is a stronger statement of a few things -stomach weakness, drug dependency and early absence of the mother figure being the most obvious connections back to this midpoint as i read it.. how important are midpoints verses the use of signs without them? i think signs are only one part of the astrology - all be it - a very old part of astrology that is considered so central to it, that other ways of looking at the chart may be overlooked or ignored.
i wish more astrologers would participate in the mystery chart exercises as i think we can all learn from one another. yes - we would be much more tempted to try on other ideas if we saw someone with a high success rate using certain astro techniques we don't use too. the use of a different type of house system - like 8 houses which graham mentioned earlier would be a case it point if it seemed to help in the analysis..

I remember now your focus on midpoints. Not that I see your logic here re his stomach pain, etc? I?ve seen folks bring interesting ideas to the plate with tools I don?t employ, for now. A closed mind is an empty one.
With the MC?s if the information there is enough for you to think your system could solve the puzzle, and it consistently doesn?t, then it makes sense to rethink, even radically.But as we saw with the Under One Sky book those who appear to be in the wrong job might be ploughing on regardless. I agree a very good learning exercise if designed well.

how much do you think astrologers rationalize with astrology after the fact of knowing the life of the person - in this example - cobain? i think they do it a lot. i know i do, and although i try to get outside of this habit, it is easy to fall into explaining away something astrologically afterwards.. perhaps this is one obvious beauty of horary astrology - you have to put the astrology up front before the outcome is known.. one can do it with natal astrology too by making a prediction in advance, but we don't see much of that..

Inevitable to varying degrees. I wouldn?t have known he had stomach issues, or that his mother left him (if she did, I forget where I read this now),.
I see his third album was called In Utero! Cobain may well have known the common meanings given to someone with a Piscean Sun, even a 10th house Cancer Moon before entitling this album. Also as you know I follow music fairly closely, and I suspect would have seen this album?s title, so perhaps subconsciously I remembered it and imagined ?mother? was a big issue before seeing his chart.

One day perhaps a Horary astrologer will be tested in controlled conditions, assuming this hasn?t been done to date. But on the face of it perhaps easier to measure than PA where the objective is for the person to become a more useful or valuable person after a reading or two.

thanks nixx. i always enjoy your posts and find your input very informative and educational. reading any good books on psychology lately?

Not sure about books but I was reading this t?other day , if you have not read about it might be of interest to you.Has a number of astrological implications as you will doubtless notice.
http://www.psmag.com/magazines/magazine ... ics-53135/

After I write this I?ll be dipping back into my latest purchase , which so far is proving to be a page turner.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Western-Eso ... 0195320999

hi nixx,

thanks for sharing! i don't have much time today as i have a lot going on, but will make a few quick comments.. - thanks for that paper down at the bottom. i found it fascinating and just finished reading it this morning. yes - there are obvious parallels to the astrology community and made me think of how our cultural background would shape our views on astrology different from another culture.. and this doesn't scratch the surface of it really, as our place within it may be viewed so differently too as the article highlights.

the moon is a symbol of the breasts and stomach. we have taken the sign cancer and given it the same symbolism.. which came first? was it an observation on the moon or an observation on the solstice 30 degree slice turning point? or perhaps it was the constellation connection as a siderealist would suggest.. at any rate, i don't think anyone is going to be able to answer this question definitively. i made the connection to stomach issues with moon at the sun/neptune midpoint as i make a connection with weakness of health to sun/neptune - sun here being a symbol for health and neptune being a symbol for physical weakness.. these planets/planetary bodies could just as easily mean other things to me as well, but that is how i got to where i did astrologically - all hindsight with regard to cobains chart of course.. i think the midpoint picture could also point directly at cobains musical abilities with the greater sensitivities implied in that combination..

thanks for sharing!

james_m wrote:
the moon is a symbol of the breasts and stomach. we have taken the sign cancer and given it the same symbolism.. which came first? was it an observation on the moon or an observation on the solstice 30 degree slice turning point? or perhaps it was the constellation connection as a siderealist would suggest.. at any rate, i don't think anyone is going to be able to answer this question definitively. i made the connection to stomach issues with moon at the sun/neptune midpoint as i make a connection with weakness of health to sun/neptune - sun here being a symbol for health and neptune being a symbol for physical weakness.. these planets/planetary bodies could just as easily mean other things to me as well, but that is how i got to where i did astrologically - all hindsight with regard to cobains chart of course.. i think the midpoint picture could also point directly at cobains musical abilities with the greater sensitivities implied in that combination..

thanks for sharing!

The lunar link to female physiology came first as far as I know; this would seem probable in respect of noticeable sky movements, the ovulation phenomena and brain development. The Zodiacal - Cancerian meanings, again as I hazily recall, started appearing in the 500-300 BCE period. The feminine anatomical fusing, if it was, with the Moon would presumably have happened around the time of the birth of Horosocopic astrology some time later. It might be interesting to examine early meanings for Cancer in this respect. If I?ve seen any they weren?t encoded semantically or seemed interesting/relevant/astute enough to enable easy dredging out from the long term parts of the hippocampus.

Today with so many Cancer meanings to choose from I guess it partly depends on how Crab like each of these is perceived to be. I don?t see it as a moving sideways hesitant or even devious sign, it being cardinal for one thing. Also aren?t crabs active at night, in my experience Solar Cancerians enjoy the daylight. Moon in Cancer may be night birds seeking comfort in the darkness or the 'feminine?. Cancer is not that changeable a sign, those with the Sun there seem to like a more structured ordered lifestyle even if the aim is shaky emotional (familial) contentment, whereas the Moon shifts into various goddesses, shapes, cycles from our perspective. Moon in Cancer is seen as needy, manipulative, smoking, scoffing sweets or eyeballing voluptuous ladies full of ?mums? milk.

I process the Cancerian breast/stomach symbolism more in reference to it being the Asc of the Thema Mundi, which is speculated to symbolise the primordial uroboric mother. From what i've read, or remember, about these myths or cosmologies the birth of the universe/life is not seen as a fraught or needy phenomena more a necessity and a positive. Solar Cancers seem to have a fair bit of joie de vivre, the early Hellenists may have, subliminally or not, noticed this thus confirming the sacred geometric June/July summer loving rulership placement!? The Moon isn?t an extraverted/masculine planet, it is understood more so like the Freudian Id, its function is to get the basic needs met, if they are then sleep, relax, cuddle, and after a while refocus on the next 'feed'. Although this ?food? if the Moon is placed in say Sagittarius, is psychically guzzled on a train trip into the wilderness, not following mum around or keeping the fridge in sight. So the Moon and Cancer may have commonalities but at root manifest quite differently.

Back to midpoints about 5 years ago I thought one day I?ll sit down with 50 charts/ people I know well and explore them, as to when though.