skyscript.co.uk
   

home articles forum events
glossary horary quiz consultations links more

Read this before using the forum
Register
FAQ
Search
View memberlist
View/edit your user profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Recent additions:
A Correct Prediction: the NYC buiding strike, 1991
by Robert E. Zoller
Book II of Carmen Astrologicum by Dorotheus
translated by David Pingree
Compiled by Deborah Houlding
Astrology and Cosmology in Early China: Conforming Earth to Heaven, by David W. Pankenier
Reviewed by Gill Zukovskis

Skyscript Astrology Forum

Mystery Chart Exercise March 3 2012
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 10, 11, 12  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Traditional (& Ancient) Techniques
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
jill elinore



Joined: 22 Aug 2010
Posts: 48
Location: Worthing, West Sussex

Posted: Sun Mar 11, 2012 10:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Deb

If the outers are not personalised in any way, much can be gleaned from a chart without them. I believe a lot can be gleaned from a chart without even the asc/mc. Obviously, some charts are so much more interesting than others and these usually provide us with the most 'interesting' personalities and are easier to read. For me, the relationships between the planets provide the most information. Rulerships are interesting but with the variance in house system usage can become almost pointless because we are all choosing which system/s we prefer and ultimately everything is diluted as a result. I do think though in Brubecks chart, his strength of personality provided by pluto on asc allowed him to express his chart in a way that would have been much harder otherwise. I think cancer rising with moon in scorpio is a very harsh deal, squaring mars could make someone impossible! But pluto so fundamentaly placed is one who can overcome and whether we can see that planet or not, to my mind is irrelevant, its is Personal (with capital p).

I believe outers come into their own though via transits (including those to midpoint). To me, this is undeniable and I am equally as interested in the movement of planets to the natal than the natal itself as a blueprint. That the outers cannot be observed in their slow retrogrades or transits and are therefore less for it is not an idea that I feel is justified but I understand the thought process behind it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Tom
Moderator


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 3127
Location: New Jersey, USA

Posted: Sun Mar 11, 2012 11:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The assertion that the ancients or early modern astrologers would have used the outer planets if they knew about them because "they are there" is by no means certain and in fact the more I think about it, the more I think they wouldn't have used them. We know about other planets or bodies in space and don't use them.

Deb said it best when she noted that


Quote:
that the special role that the 7 traditional planets play don't get underestimated by them becoming regarded as just '7 of the 10'.


Giving the three outer planets the same significance as the 7 visible planets brings the wrecking ball to the traditional system. Some people may think that's fine. I'm not one of them and this Forum was set up to use that system. But I'll repeat because I think it is worth repeating. Modern astrologers don't simply use the outer three planets, they go after them first and usually to the exclusion of almost everything else.

Noel Tyl teaches this. His method of reading a chart is mostly looking for aspects between the three outers (and Saturn) with the remaining classical planets. Venus - Mercury contacts that we discussed in depth don't merit a yawn. From what I've seen of Modern delineation, Mercury merits about as much attention from them as Chiron does from me.

I think if it was sprung on Morin that there were three planets outside the orbit of Saturn his head would have exploded. Rather than "Oh gee I guess I have to use them," he would have been more likely to rationalize them out of his existence, or he would have given up astrology altogether. OF course I can't possibly know this for a fact any more than anyone else can possibly know the opposite. The idea that these three planets would have been woven seamlessly into the old system displays a lack of understanding of that system and how it applied to the worldview. Astrology was part of a larger and coherent worldview. Modern astrology is a sideshow in today's worldview. That difference alone should send people scurrying from Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
jill elinore



Joined: 22 Aug 2010
Posts: 48
Location: Worthing, West Sussex

Posted: Sun Mar 11, 2012 12:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Im just on my way out and would like to respond more, Tom but for now will just say I think your reference to 'worldVIEW' is essential here. The worldview from the Greeks onwards should not imo send us scurrying from anything, why should its confines limit us to anything. The planets were there before any worldview or indeed the study of astrology. All unknowns should be a work in progress, shouldnt they?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Deb
Administrator


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 3866
Location: England

Posted: Sun Mar 11, 2012 12:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jill, I'm very glad you've joined us, but being new you may not have read this yet: http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1877

It explains why this forum is reserved for discussion of traditional techniques, so it isn't the right place to develop more discussion on the outer planets than we've already had in this thread. I'm not trying to prohibit you but most members here are aware of the issues and want a place to keep the focus on understanding and applying traditional principles. You are welcome to expand your views and generate a new discussion in the general nativities forum if you want to though.

Deb
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
james_m



Joined: 05 Dec 2011
Posts: 1515
Location: vancouver island

Posted: Sun Mar 11, 2012 5:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

deb

thanks for clarifying that for me.. i can see how mercury is more involved in brubecks chart as oriental planet rising ahead of sun, which doesn't happen in chart 2.. the planetary phase relationship which you have articulated previously i can see as well.. i considered the aspects to midheaven, but can see that was incomplete without this additional info..
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jill elinore



Joined: 22 Aug 2010
Posts: 48
Location: Worthing, West Sussex

Posted: Sun Mar 11, 2012 7:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Okay, apologies.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Atlantean



Joined: 14 Aug 2009
Posts: 369

Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2012 10:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello,

I didn't actually want to get involved in this part of this discussion, but since misleading comments were made, comments that go directly contrary to my experience, it's only natural that I feel motivated.

Re: "Modern astrologers don't simply use the outer three planets, they go after them first and usually to the exclusion of almost everything else."

Many moderns are approaching from a psychological point of view. The outer planets, being trans-personal are harder to integrate into normal life, because their themes bridge issues beyond the personal and often go straight to what benefits the collective. Many of these troubling issues stick out like a sore thumb in the personality/life of the client and in the (related) positions of Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto.

Re: "Noel Tyl teaches this. His method of reading a chart is mostly looking for aspects between the three outers (and Saturn) with the remaining classical planets."

Noel's method starts with:

A. Hemisphere groupings and stellia

B. Saturn

C. The Nodal Axis

D. The Sun-Moon blend

E. Dominant Aspects

As someone that has studied under Noel and has interacted with him directly and indirectly on his forum over the last 7 years, I find your statement to be obfuscating. Yes, the outers are important in Noel's teachings (they ARE planets and are there for the same reason as the others), but to reduce his teachings to basically the interaction of outer planets to the traditional seven is to leave out more of Noel's methodology than you have included.

In fact, Noel's main thrust through ALL of his teaching is on synthesis, the blending and correct understanding of the interaction of all factors, and this begins with the Sun-Moon blend (and other things mentioned above) which special, specific placements are then modifications/qualifications to what was initially understood.

What you have (falsely, imo) said about Noel, can be said about Adrian Ross Duncan, in that his approach mainly looks at Pluto, Neptune, Uranus, Saturn, and Jupiter contacting Mars, Venus, Mercury, Moon, and Sun.

Re: "Venus - Mercury contacts that we discussed in depth don't merit a yawn."

Again, quite the contrary, Venus-Mercury contacts are specifically discussed in Noel's teaching and even have a whole section dedicated to them. (relating to aesthetics and doing things to please, but also in terms of "idealism") The Mercury-Venus section is towards the very beginning of his Synthesis and Counseling book, where he is outlining his approach.

To say that, in his presentation, they "don't merit a yawn" is patently false and quickly disprovable...

Feel free to slam Noel or his methods as much as you are inclined to do... I only ask that when you are looking to find fault with his astrology that you do it through things that he actually does rather than your perception of what he does. Seems fair.

Note: I have had (over the years) my own criticisms of several issues with Noel and have publicly spoken about them. I could not criticize him for what you are stating, Tom, because I just don't see it.

Peace

James
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jill elinore



Joined: 22 Aug 2010
Posts: 48
Location: Worthing, West Sussex

Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2012 11:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Agreed.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Levente Laszlo



Joined: 03 Nov 2006
Posts: 142
Location: Budapest, Hungary

Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2012 1:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wouldn't it be a good idea to move this whole thread together with the more recent test to the natal astrology section? It would help everyone who use any techniques that could be labelled as non-traditional to participate without philosophical and exegetical issues and limitations. As far as I remember, that forum also gave place to similar discussions in the past.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Deb
Administrator


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 3866
Location: England

Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2012 1:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't think so Levente. This thread was initiated by Tom in this traditional forum, as an invitation for those who want to use traditional methods to enage in the exercise he designed. The policies of this forum have been made clear enough - I've given the link above as a reminder and it has been said several times that if others want to present something similar in other forums they are perfectly welcome to do that. I'm more of the view that comments that have prolonged discussion of issues outside the focus of this forum should be removed as out of place, but I'll leave that for Tom to decide.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Paul
Moderator


Joined: 23 Nov 2009
Posts: 998

Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2012 1:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think it would be a real shame if a great and really interesting thread dissolved into petty squabbling regarding traditional versus modern approaches.

It should be noted that nobody has witten any decree that somebody cannot start a similar thread on the Natal forum where the modern astrologers can use whatever methods they want. I don't recall anyone stipulating that this isn't allowed and that mystery charts are reserved for the traditional forum.

With that in mind, it seems odd to me that anyone would complain about the clear focus on traditional readings in a traditional forum. If you want modern readings use the modern forum.

It should be pretty straightforward right? In fact Deb has actually, as I understood it, gone further and even said that the odd modern observation is ok here, which, when you think of it, is actually quite generous.

But as for this thread, this is a traditional thread set up by a traditional astrologer in a traditional forum. It doesn't take much leap of imagination to understand that the goals of this thread in keeping with the goals of this forum is to maintain a focus on traditional usages of astrology.

But I don't think this is the thread to discuss everyone's disagreements with either traditional nor modern astrology. This has been a great thread, let's keep it that way and just quietly agree to disagree with one another where necessary.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pankajdubey



Joined: 17 Nov 2006
Posts: 875
Location: Delhi

Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think it would be good to close this thread.
There is another quiz going on.

PD
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
james_m



Joined: 05 Dec 2011
Posts: 1515
Location: vancouver island

Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2012 6:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

hi,
i am with deb in her views on the nature of this. although i challenged the idea of leaving the outers out early in the thread while trying to poke fun at the nodes and pof being like dumb notes, the fact is i think it is an excellent exercise to try to get down to business with the basics which is really what many folks are trying to do here.. if someone wants to rattle on about these charts from a modern pov they can always do that in the general forum.. i like the way this whole process is at present in spite of my challenging comments at the beginning of the thread..
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nixx



Joined: 10 Dec 2011
Posts: 295

Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2012 7:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2012 1:04 pm Post subject:
Quote:
Quote:
james_m wrote:
nixx - i think classical and strings more with neptune, and like you say more uranus with the jazz.. how would you define this with just the planets out to saturn? i would go with saturn/venus, but perhaps the heavy emphasis on rhythm could go to the moon which is a strong part to jazz music.. i play drums and i might be mistaken, but i note an usually high degree of drummers with cancer, capricorn more pronounced.. perhaps moon and saturn play an important role for rhythm, and one would think mars might enter the picture too..

an interesting chart to consider would be roy haynes who is still alive and kind of like the godfather of jazz drumming having played with parker on up to the present, remaining very youthful at 87 years of age this march 13 1925.. he is born in boston, but i don't have a time of day for his birth unfortunately.



Roy Haynes once shouted at me for Smoking. So if we can find the chart of a confrontational anti smoker , or someone prone to sore throats, or someone whose ma and pa died of lung cancer, ,,,,,,we may be on the money

Usually when music gets mentioned in astrological circles Holst's the planets appears and Iím sure we can all listen to this and think of all sorts of musical pieces that sound like his planetary conceptions.

I wouldn't associate different genres with just one planet, just some more than others. I may be more tempted to think about them in relation to elements. Jazz I would link to Air but not all Jazz. I already mentioned Garbarek, and perhaps a lot of the ECM catalogue? as having a Piscean or Neptunian quality. Sacred music tends to get linked in here. Also the minimalistís repetitive sounds would fit in as we get into trance or mania type states or some of Bach. I think some older astrologers may have linked these feelings, or sounds, to the Moon? as would Psychological Astrologers but not just the Moon. I can think of a lot of classical music that isnít particularly Piscean/Neptunian to my mind. For example, Stockhausen. . There are lots of fine, if not invisible lines, between which planets encapsulate which piece of Music, probably often a number of them in the one piece. Rhythm starting of with the human heart beat has a lunar comforting association I suppose.

Yes, here we are pondering what would have been considered prior to the discovery of Uranus with all these newish sounds. However I find it preferable to, at least initially, think about the music available to various astrologersí ears in their eras for clues not what arrived in the 20th century. We can take Jazz way back to Africa who knows when but I doubt many, if any, western astrologers bumped into this call and response groove, let alone wrote about it, until the 20th century? Anyway if we want to get deep into music and astrology we ought to start a thread on it.


Tom wrote: Quote:
Quote:

[color=darkblue]Giving the three outer planets the same significance as the 7 visible planets brings the wrecking ball to the traditional system. Some people may think that's fine. I'm not one of them and this Forum was set up to use that system. But I'll repeat because I think it is worth repeating. Modern astrologers don't simply use the outer three planets, they go after them first and usually to the exclusion of almost everything else.




Psychological Astrologers donít go after the outers, far from it. When I construct a chart I just put the Sun, Moon and Ascendant on it and only once I feel/think I have certain clarity as to the 'essential dynamics' will I add Mercury, then Venus..... (Von Schlieffen is a good example of this approach. Deb might be another, albeit coming at this Ďíluminary elevationíí from some other sources?). Quite a lot of the time I donít get as far as Mercury!

The Pianist and Sportsman are coincidental examples of this schema as both had the luminaries in the subjective, egocentric, 'me ' focused, pleasure, anti ''growing up'', and what am I good at zone of the 2nd quadrant (not sure how 'explicitly' traditional this view of houses 4-6 are, maybe some resonates with folks here and some doesn't ?). Thus these 3 charts with just the Sun, Moon and Asc on would have led to the same guesses and probably a lot quicker, for me, than having to first encounter the distractions of the more incidental or peripheral Mer-Sat bodies.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
james_m



Joined: 05 Dec 2011
Posts: 1515
Location: vancouver island

Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2012 7:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

really interesting comments nixx! i agree, a thread discussing this would be ideal. the ecm catalogue was really what i grew up on and first started with in the jazz spectrum.. keith jarrett and on. i agree that no planet is going to cover all of any style of music, and i am especially curious on your thoughts towards the later part of your post saying one may not need to go beyond the sun, moon and asc for much of the info.. your interpretation of the 2nd quadrant i think is a good one.. as someone who has sun in aries in this quadrant, i can really relate to it. perhaps you can take this approach to the new quiz up on the other thread.. thanks for your comments.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Traditional (& Ancient) Techniques All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 10, 11, 12  Next
Page 11 of 12

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
. Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

       
Contact Deborah Houlding  | terms and conditions  
All rights on all text and images reserved. Reproduction by any means is not permitted without the express
agreement of Deborah Houlding or in the case of articles by guest astrologers, the copyright owner indictated