Morin without Buying All Those Volumes

1
I was browsing online book stores the other day and found myself at Dave Roell's astroamerica.com. I came across the 2nd edition of this work: Planetary Powers; The Morin Method, by Patti Tobin Brittain. Dave wrote an enthusiastic review and since I like Morin and the book is inexpensive ($16.95 US), I ordered it.

If you want to study Morin's astrology or the basics of it without slugging through Astrologia Gallica this is the text for you. If you just want some solid "How To" when it comes to approaching a chart, this is for you, too.

The teaching method is simplicity in itself. She gives some basic background information, then takes Morin's aphorisms organizes them, breaks them down into easily digestible bites and gives an example with a chart. Not even the whole chart, but just a blank wheel with the planet or planets under consideration displayed. If anyone thinks it seems silly to show a graphic with only Mars in Libra in the 10th, think again. It stamps the mind in a way that words can never do. Plus there is space to write notes. I like that.

Using what is available in this book enables the astrologer to read even the most dense chart intelligently with no background on the native. With background the precision can be amazing.

Brittain promises no quick and easy learning guide. She reiterates the words of her teacher, "You must memorize, you must study, you must put in time." While we may all be sympathetic to this attitude, this is one of the few books that gives the reader organized material that can be memorized, and almost instantly applied with great effect.

One caveat: I agree with Roell, this is not a beginner's text. It assumes a certain level of astrological knowledge, say intermediate level. While it might be possible for an advanced beginner to use this book to good effect, it would be tough. No knowledge of Morin's astrology is necessary.

I hope to write a full review and have Deb post it, but for now, if anyone has the urge to learn how Morin approached a nativity, go grab a copy. You won't be sorry.

2
Thanks for the news Tom

I enjoy reading Morin but I find that it takes a lot of re-reading to get it. This looks like a good aid to understanding his methods

Matthew
Matthew Goulding

3
I enjoy reading Morin but I find that it takes a lot of re-reading to get it.
I agree Matthew and I've been reading him for years. Just so you'll know, this is the basics only. There is much much more to his methods than what is here. I like the book because there is plenty here. When I have some time I"ll give some examples of charts that are not in the book. Authors tend to use the clearest possible examples for obvious reasons, and other charts tend to be a bit more complex. I think I can find others that explain things really well.

5
hi tom,
i read this book about a month ago. i thought it was pretty good as well. it is not going to substitute for morin, but it is a good starting point that might motivate those who read it to want to read morin in more detail.. i think it is a good starting point and look forward to your review of it!

6
I'm finding this book useful in its paring down and highlighting key principles one by one, as Tom says: it helps keep the different steps clear and distinct.

I find the use of Uranus and Neptune rather confusing, as Brittain repeatedly reminds us that Morin did very well without them and that this should be respected, but then keeps including them - the list of "planets in triplicity" on p. 11 is rather puzzling, for example.

What surprised me most was her presentation of "acquired analogy by sign" (pp. 15-19). She says "Venus is in the sign of Virgo and therefore acquires analogy with the sixth house by sign", ditto for Saturn with the second house because it's in Taurus, etc. I thought this was precisely what Morin didn't say (I'm sure that's what Denis Labour?, my first teacher, insisted, and he's very familiar with Morin - but maybe this was his own view of traditional method rather than Morin's, and I misunderstood).

At any rate, I can't find any reference to this one-to-one sign/house analogy in Morin's Book 21, where the basis of the methodology that Brittain teaches is set out. Rather the opposite, in fact: "Neither are the secondary houses - that is, the parts of the caelum or the signs occupying the primary houses - significators of the accidental qualities and features attributed to the primary houses" (II.1, p.39 in Baldwin's translation).

Have I misunderstood something, or has she got it wrong? Or could it be in Book 17 (on houses), which I don't have?

Graham

8
@Graham I think there are a few things in the text that are not in Book 21 or to my knowledge elsewhere in Astrologia Gallica. One has to be careful since AG is so vast that making broad statements about what is not there is risky. I get the feeling that like Zoltan Mason, her teacher went beyond Morin here and there, but that shouldn't discourage anyone from buying the book.

Like you I was surprised at the "Acquired Analogy by Sign." I hadn't come across this and it has, as its basis, the sign = house mentality that most of us traditionalists avoid. But the bigger point is that analogy is a huge part of Morin's astrology where ever it is found. And understanding it's significance is very helpful when delineating a chart.

@Deb I've started a review several times and each time didn't like where it went. Then my computer crapped out. I'm up and running with a new one now and I'll try it again soon.

9
I just read Tony's review - spot on; but what is a well written, well thought out piece without a few quibbles? Yes there are a few errors. No one is perfect. I also agree that If one is going to study Morin one should use Regio houses at least until a certain level of mastery is achieved then switch if desired.

But my quibble is that Morin might not have had access to Placidus houses, and if not could not have studied the system. Placidus died in 1668; Morin in 1656. Placidus popularized the house system named after him, but was Morin even aware of it? However, I get the feeling that, aware of it or not, Morin still would have stuck with Regio.

And yes, as Tony says, the book cries for a live teacher and teacher-student exchange, which is why, in my first mention of it, I said I thought it would be a great text for a study group and I now add, at a variety of levels.

10
Tom wrote:But my quibble is that Morin might not have had access to Placidus houses, and if not could not have studied the system. Placidus died in 1668; Morin in 1656. Placidus popularized the house system named after him, but was Morin even aware of it? However, I get the feeling that, aware of it or not, Morin still would have stuck with Regio.
As far as I can see, Morin doesn't mention Placidus houses in Book 17, which deals with houses; but in Book 23 he rails against Placidus, so at least by the time he wrote that volume he must have read Placidus' work (though he still doesn't discuss his house system, unless I missed something).
https://astrology.martingansten.com/

11
Hi Tom,

Thanks for the hint, I immediately ordered the book.

Tom wrote:
Like you I was surprised at the "Acquired Analogy by Sign." I hadn't come across this and it has, as its basis, the sign = house mentality that most of us traditionalists avoid. But the bigger point is that analogy is a huge part of Morin's astrology where ever it is found. And understanding it's significance is very helpful when delineating a chart.
Do you mean this analogy is a huge part of Morin's astrology as received by other authors? Like...?

12
Thanks Tom for the confirmation about the traditional negative view of the "house=sign" analogy. But when you write:
the bigger point is that analogy is a huge part of Morin's astrology where ever it is found.
do you mean that she's probably extrapolating by adding her own idea of particular type of analogy, but that's fair enough as it's the principle of analogy of one sort or another that's important? If so, I don't think I agree, I think on this point it's a false analogy. If I can find it somewhere in Morin, I'll have to have rethink...
Graham