Astrology In The Blender

The following is adapted from a 5-year old post from the early days of Learning Curve. I was still wet behind the astrological ears then, but my views remain much the same. ~~~

Although I love astrology dearly, I often struggle to agree with some of the stuff professional astrologers write, or imply, in textbooks:

We all have the same planets and luminaries in our natal charts. What makes us different from each other is the way in which they were configured at the time of our birth, the varying proportions of emphasis on signs, elements and modalities. We understand that a planet is the symbolic "energy", a zodiac sign defines the "flavour" of that "energy", and the house shows us where that "energy" will be most used or felt.

This is where I start to wonder.....mainly about the astrological "houses". The first problem is, that to correctly calculate house positions, an accurate exact time of birth is needed. The second problem is that there are several different methods of calculating astrological houses. Does it matter much though?

It seems reasonable to me that when a person has a particular personality trait (as indicated by planet in sign) it is going to influence the whole of that person's personality generally, not only in the area dictated by rules of astrology and astrological houses. A Venus in Sagittarius in 10th house for example is likely to influence many areas other than career and public standing. Some level of Sagittarian "flavour" will be apt to permeate the personality in general.

The cosmic trio of Sun, Moon and Ascendant are said to be a quick and easy way of summing up a personality. That's true, I think, but only if they are allowed to blend into each other's astrological territories. It's not logical to say that the Moon influences ONLY prescribed areas of the personality, or the ascendant is ONLY the way we present ourselves to the world. I've found that these three factors (and others) blend and influence each other strongly. It's not sensible to separate them and differentiate their influence. How the "flavours" blend is described, in part, by aspects the planets in a chart make to each other, but the conflicts or harmonies thus indicated are not, as I see it, likely to be confined to any specific areas.

Divisions of all kinds irk me. They are not natural.

Take Mercury's energy, for example. Our mode of thinking and expressing ourselves, the way our minds work and how we communicate intertwines with, and influences, every other part of our existence. Mercury ought to be added to the cosmic trio - it should be a cosmic quartet. Venus too....quintet!

An analogy to illustrate the point I'm trying to make: Pixels? Jigsaw? No. Cooking? Nearer. Ingredients blend into one another. When we add sugar, salt, butter in varying proportion, the effect spreads throughout the finished product. A measure of sugar sweetens all, butter adds pervading richness, etc. It's possible to identify the flavours, but not to separate them into compartments within the whole - those ingredients have now amalgamated to become something else. Environment has to form a part of the recipe too - hot oven or cool oven, for instance will make a world of difference to the finished product.

For an astrologer to be 100% accurate in describing or predicting a blended product, they'd need exceptional (almost inhuman) skills, because there is no precedent. A very near miss is what can be produced by an expert, using astrology. Each personality as described by a natal chart is unique in itself, not to mention the myriad factors outside of the chart which affect the way potentialities of personality develop, factors which often remain unknown to the astrologer.