We now prepare to perform a pleasant polka through Pisces, heading jauntily for a welcome Spring in the northern hemisphere and, after the disasters in Australia recently, an equally welcome Autumn in the southern half of our planet. I'm searching for facets of this, the 12th and last sign of the zodiacal cycle, upon which to concentrate for my post on Pisces.
The more posts I write, and the more natal charts I inspect, the less I feel able to put a clear label on any single zodiac sign. There are clearly defined labels, of course - available in any astrology text book. These are labels, keywords handed down through the centuries, modified to take account of lifestyle changes and new developments. Still though, I realise more and more that the characteristics of any given sign are always modified by planet(s) inhabiting the sign, as well as by chart emphasis on other signs by planet or position. Other than the reasonably small proportion of people who have all personal planets and ascendant in one zodiac sign, the text book description for any sign is going to seem to be anywhere from a touch off course to miles adrift in a sea of confusion.
A touch more confusion arises too, because Pisces, like Aquarius has two potential rulers: the traditional ruler is Jupiter, but modern astrologers hold that Neptune rules Pisces. I haven't known many people with Sun and several planets in Pisces, so can't judge whether Jupiter or Neptune fits better. I do think though that definite Neptunian traits can be reflected in any sign or in tandem with any other planet if strongly placed, as can traits of Uranus, modern ruler of Aquarius. I hope that I'd hesitate to apply Neptunian traits (e.g. love of the sea, potentially addictive personality, highly creative, dreamy, foggy, links to film/photography etc.) automatically to any one born with a strong showing of Pisces on their chart. That's just a personal view, arrived at through association with many Aquarians who do not display Uranian traits.
Due to its element, Water, and its place in the zodiac - the 12th sign, Pisces is thought to represent gentleness, sensitivity, an emotional nature, empathy, possible psychic ability, prone to shyness etc. These are fine descriptions for the essence of the sign, but once it's thrown into the natal mix it becomes part and parcel of something else -the natal chart: more than "the sum of its parts". The chart's configuration modifies each of those parts in subtle or not so subtle ways as they are tossed together.
Let's use the metaphor of a natal chart as .....a salad. Lettuce (or any leafy vegetable), the base of many salads, remains lettuce or leafy vegetable whatever else is tossed into the bowl - but its flavor blends differently when taken as a mouthful of lettuce and walnut, or lettuce and olive , or lettuce and strawberry, with a delicate vinaigrette ...or.....well, you get the idea. Lettuce is still lettuce, but it takes on a different characteristic depending on accompaniments. Unless you ate a bowl of lettuce, unadorned by dressing, you'd never experience the true flavor and texture of lettuce.
Likewise, unless a natal chart is composed purely of personal planets and ascendant in a single sign, you'll never see unadulterated Pisces (or any other sign) in a personality. So what's the value in writing still more words about that essence, which hardly ever exists in pure form in real life?
I'd like to write about a purely Pisces person, but I don't know one. I know one with Sun at 1 Aries, Mercury at 29 Pisces, and Saturn at 26 Pisces: Himself - the husband! He's very "cuspy" - but proper astrologers don't often give "cuspiness" much credence. I can "feel" his Pisces parts (he doesn't allow just anyone to do this!) They are, however, always being frog-marched into hiding by Aries, not to mention being accasionally outshone by Moon and ascendant in Leo.
So here we have Pisces manifesting as someone with artistic talent, love of photography; with a rather quieter nature than is often found in Aries Sun with Leo Moon and rising - yet with a background in management; impulsive and sponatneous, but can't remember what day it is or what he had for breakfast, or even if he did in fact have breakfast. It's all rolled up into one....Aries modifies Pisces, Pisces modifies Aries, and Leo modifies both and is, at the same time, itself modified. As it happens, in the husband's chart Neptune trines Jupiter - so the two rulers of Pisces are in harmony with each other, and Neptune semi-sextiles Moon, so Neptune's link to photography is relevant here.
What I'm trying to say in convoluted fashion is that although every sign has it's intrinsic meaning, it's unwise to assume that the sign's text book meaning will always show up clearly, in pure form, in the flesh and blood human being.
The more posts I write, and the more natal charts I inspect, the less I feel able to put a clear label on any single zodiac sign. There are clearly defined labels, of course - available in any astrology text book. These are labels, keywords handed down through the centuries, modified to take account of lifestyle changes and new developments. Still though, I realise more and more that the characteristics of any given sign are always modified by planet(s) inhabiting the sign, as well as by chart emphasis on other signs by planet or position. Other than the reasonably small proportion of people who have all personal planets and ascendant in one zodiac sign, the text book description for any sign is going to seem to be anywhere from a touch off course to miles adrift in a sea of confusion.
A touch more confusion arises too, because Pisces, like Aquarius has two potential rulers: the traditional ruler is Jupiter, but modern astrologers hold that Neptune rules Pisces. I haven't known many people with Sun and several planets in Pisces, so can't judge whether Jupiter or Neptune fits better. I do think though that definite Neptunian traits can be reflected in any sign or in tandem with any other planet if strongly placed, as can traits of Uranus, modern ruler of Aquarius. I hope that I'd hesitate to apply Neptunian traits (e.g. love of the sea, potentially addictive personality, highly creative, dreamy, foggy, links to film/photography etc.) automatically to any one born with a strong showing of Pisces on their chart. That's just a personal view, arrived at through association with many Aquarians who do not display Uranian traits.
Due to its element, Water, and its place in the zodiac - the 12th sign, Pisces is thought to represent gentleness, sensitivity, an emotional nature, empathy, possible psychic ability, prone to shyness etc. These are fine descriptions for the essence of the sign, but once it's thrown into the natal mix it becomes part and parcel of something else -the natal chart: more than "the sum of its parts". The chart's configuration modifies each of those parts in subtle or not so subtle ways as they are tossed together. Let's use the metaphor of a natal chart as .....a salad. Lettuce (or any leafy vegetable), the base of many salads, remains lettuce or leafy vegetable whatever else is tossed into the bowl - but its flavor blends differently when taken as a mouthful of lettuce and walnut, or lettuce and olive , or lettuce and strawberry, with a delicate vinaigrette ...or.....well, you get the idea. Lettuce is still lettuce, but it takes on a different characteristic depending on accompaniments. Unless you ate a bowl of lettuce, unadorned by dressing, you'd never experience the true flavor and texture of lettuce.
Likewise, unless a natal chart is composed purely of personal planets and ascendant in a single sign, you'll never see unadulterated Pisces (or any other sign) in a personality. So what's the value in writing still more words about that essence, which hardly ever exists in pure form in real life?
I'd like to write about a purely Pisces person, but I don't know one. I know one with Sun at 1 Aries, Mercury at 29 Pisces, and Saturn at 26 Pisces: Himself - the husband! He's very "cuspy" - but proper astrologers don't often give "cuspiness" much credence. I can "feel" his Pisces parts (he doesn't allow just anyone to do this!) They are, however, always being frog-marched into hiding by Aries, not to mention being accasionally outshone by Moon and ascendant in Leo. So here we have Pisces manifesting as someone with artistic talent, love of photography; with a rather quieter nature than is often found in Aries Sun with Leo Moon and rising - yet with a background in management; impulsive and sponatneous, but can't remember what day it is or what he had for breakfast, or even if he did in fact have breakfast. It's all rolled up into one....Aries modifies Pisces, Pisces modifies Aries, and Leo modifies both and is, at the same time, itself modified. As it happens, in the husband's chart Neptune trines Jupiter - so the two rulers of Pisces are in harmony with each other, and Neptune semi-sextiles Moon, so Neptune's link to photography is relevant here.
What I'm trying to say in convoluted fashion is that although every sign has it's intrinsic meaning, it's unwise to assume that the sign's text book meaning will always show up clearly, in pure form, in the flesh and blood human being.
2 comments:
Oh this is what makes us all so interesting, T. Himself sounds very much the absent minded professor or as I prefer to think of it one who lives utterly in the moment, the rest a trail of important personal history.
You sound more grounded, the detail woman.
A perfect match.
XO
WWW
WWW ~~~ Hmmmm - well yes, but he can be very aware of detail at times - when watching a movie for instance, or reading a newspaper - he'll spot errors in plot or text, while I'd happily read or view through 'em without noticing. I put this down to Saturn conjunct Mercury - a certain strictness in matters of communication, rather like Virgo in this respect. I'll analyse and want to know why or how - which doesn't bother him as much.
A good match, yes. :-)
Post a Comment