THE RIDE

Below, a favourite quote of mine from the late Bill Hicks (Born 16 December 1961, died 26 February 1994). I never tire of reading this, it's almost poetry.

An archived post on Bill's natal chart is at http://twilightstarsong.blogspot.com/2007/08/bill-hicks-anger-with-humour.html

"The world is like a ride in an amusement park, and when you choose to go on it you think it's real because that's how powerful our minds are. The ride goes up and down, around and around, it has thrills and chills, and it's very brightly colored, and it's very loud, and it's fun for a while. Many people have been on the ride a long time, and they begin to wonder, "Hey, is this real, or is this just a ride?" And other people have remembered, and they come back to us and say, "Hey, don't worry; don't be afraid, ever, because this is just a ride." And we … kill those people.

"Shut him up! I've got a lot invested in this ride, shut him up! Look at my furrows of worry, look at my big bank account, and my family. This has to be real."
It's just a ride. But we always kill the good guys who try and tell us that, you ever notice that? And let the demons run amok …

But it doesn't matter, because it's just a ride. And we can change it any time we want. It's only a choice. No effort, no work, no job, no savings of money. Just a simple choice, right now, between fear and love.

The eyes of fear want you to put bigger locks on your doors, buy guns, close yourself off. The eyes of love instead see all of us as one. Here's what we can do to change the world, right now, to a better ride. Take all that money we spend on weapons and defenses each year and instead spend it feeding and clothing and educating the poor of the world, which it would pay for many times over, not one human being excluded, and we could explore space, together, both inner and outer, forever, in peace."

Arty Farty Friday ~ Leonetto Cappiello, "Father of Advertising".

If we could go back in time, find the "father of advertising" and tie his hands behind his back so's he couldn't father advertising further, would we do it?

Advertising has a lot to answer for. We might blame "the big banks" for recent financial crises and woes, but without advertising, would so many people who couldn't sensibly afford to own property and sundry other luxuries have been convinced they needed to own them?

Setting that thought aside for a moment - here IS the artist some have called Father of Advertising - or at least father of the advertising poster: Leonetto Cappiello.

Back in the day advertising was far more leisurely and minimalist than in these days of manic TV commercials one following another, and massive billboards lining highways, magazines filled cover to cover with more adverts than essays. Back in the day an artist would paint a poster.

Leonetto Cappiello, Italian artist and caricaturist succeeded other famous painters of the genre such as Lautrec and Mucha and became the leading advertising poster designer in Paris in the early 20th century. He was not formally trained as an artist, but his natural talent led him into caricature, his work was published in the French journal Le Rire.

As Art Nouveau and the taste for it began its decline, Cappiello tickled the palates of the public with his dark, often black, backgrounds and a single bold image. This new approach kept attention on the product as well as creating a very recognisable style, or brand, for the artist himself. His early flair for, and experience in, caricature work would be helpful in developing an obvious insight into human nature and the power of communication. He put this insight to use in his advertising posters, realising that the attention-grabbing images he presented would rapidly become recognisably associated with a particular product.

Cappiello produced close to 1000 posters, became an inspirational figure to those who came after. His work nowadays is sought after by collectors and still commands high prices.

Leonetto Cappiello was born in Livorno, Italy on 9 April 1975. Chart below is set for 12 noon in the absence of time of birth. Rising sign and Moon's degree will not be accurate.



In a nutshell, Leonetto Cappiello had a well-integrated personality, with planets forming helpful aspects to each other, along with the few challenges having complimentary assistance inbuilt.

Starting with Sun at 19 Aries (Aries the initiator is a nice match for someone called "Father of Advertising"), there's an astrological chain covering half the zodiac circle. Moving via helpful semi-sextile to Mercury (communication) at 23 Pisces, then on to Saturn (business) at 23 Aquarius via another semi-sextile, and Mars (energy) at 26 Sagittarius, also sextile Saturn, then Jupiter (publication) at 27 Libra, sextile Mars and in opposition to Aries Sun.
a chain of links involving planets well-related to things necessary for success in Cappiello's chosen profession: initiation, communication, business, publication.

Not part of that linked and mutually helpful chain was Venus, planet of the arts at 7Pisces, but Venus forms a separate link via harmonious sextile with Neptune (creativity) at 0 Taurus.

Examples of Leonetto Cappiello posters ~

Butterfly Mind ~ Splash and other chart shapes

Mine is one of those natal charts with planets well-spread over the whole area of the circle. Astrologers call this a "splash" configuration, and it's said to bestow versatility, but lack of concentrated focus. The splash chart can bestow its owner with a "butterfly mind", a mind that skips around continually, never settling for long. Considering that my natal Mercury is in strict and structured Capricorn, and in a pretty strong position near an angle, I'm quite surprised to be reporting that I possess a "butterfly mind".

I'm fairly versatile and interested in just about anything - except sport. I enjoy variety, and have lived in big cities, small towns, country and coast. I turned my hand to many different occupations before settling down in a department of the UK's civil service for a long career, where my particular job often required the ability to control several things at the same time - my fluttery mind came in very handy there! Earlier in life I'd worked for an archivist, then I was a hotel receptionist in several locations, I did stints as barmaid in some fairly low dives, secretarial work in a computer accessories firm, accounts clerk at a 'bus company, assisted my parents in a variety of businesses, and for a time, during my first short-lived marriage, ran our own cafe with my ex-husband. I did the cooking !

Husband gazes disbelievingly over my shoulder as I type.

"You.....cooking?!"

"It's all down to my splashy chart, I've moved on now from that particular area."

"Yes - I'd noticed."

"But it's worked out well. In the last few years you've moved into the cooking area of your own splashy chart", I respond, with some satisfaction.

Whenever it's called for, I can focus on a specific subject as well as the rest of 'em. I don't, it appears, have the kind of focus required to drive me on to notable success and fame.

So many individuals who have been particularly successful in a chosen career or calling have natal charts where planets form a bundle or bowl configuration (planets all lying within half, or less, of the full circle). There are famous people with splashy natal charts, of course, but I've noticed the bowl and bundle come up more frequently among charts I've looked at during research for these blog posts.

Of the other chart patterns commonly considered by astrologers, the "funnel" or "bucket"(a bunch of planets with one rogue lying opposite the cluster) and the "see-saw" (two planet clusters opposite one another) seem to manifest most clearly.

Astrologer John Townley's article "Planetary Order III: Islands in the Sky" is one of the best and clearest articles I've seen on the topic of chart shapes or "Jones Patterns", as they are known. They are named for Mark Edmund Jones, an American astrologer who studied chart shapes, defined and introduced names for them.

I long ago accepted that I'm a scattered individual with a butterfly mind.

The butterfly, a cabbage-white,
(His honest idiocy of flight)
Will never now, it is too late,
Master the art of flying straight.

~Robert Graves, "Flying Crooked".

FIXED STAR ZOSMA ~ disgrace, egotism, melancholy....?

I'm inclined to ignore the fixed stars (as against wandering planets) in astrology, with the exception of Algol, traditionally thought to be "unfortunate". Algol has been known to live up to its reputation, and is worth noting if close to a personal planet or sensitive point in natal charts. There's one other fixed star that occasionally catches my eye in natal charts: Zosma. I have no clue as to why this one attracts my attention. It isn't close to anything in my own natal chart, but for some reason my eye is often drawn to its position.

The fixed star commonly known as Zosma (translates as "girdle" "loincloth" or "enzonement") is also known as Delta Leonis or Duhr. It is located in the constellation Leo, on the lion's rump, and lies about 58 light-years from Earth.

For our astrological purposes the position of Zosma is currently around 11.19 Virgo. In 1900 it was around 9 degrees of Virgo. Those positions fall roughly where I've managed to deposit red dot on the chart, see right.

Astrologically Zosma is said to be "of the nature of Saturn and Venus". Interpretations indicate a generally negative "vibe" - they range from: benefit by disgrace, selfishness, egotism, immorality, meanness, melancholy, fear of poison, a shameless and egotistical nature, to keen intellect, loss in childhood, and prophetic ability (the latter links also to another nearby star Coxa). Other interpretations indicate the concept of victim or saviour, stemming from the fact that Zosma lies on the lion's back - that part broken by Hercules in Greek mythology.





Ignoring all interpretation for the time being, I'll look at a few well-known people with Zosma linked closely to personal planets in their natal charts (not much more than a degree from exact conjunction).

During Pluto's transit through Virgo Zosma conjoined it at some points, in 1963 and 1964. There's whole age group born around that time with Pluto conjunct Zosma. I doubt it would have much astrological significance though, unless a personal planet or point links in by conjunction or close aspect in an individual natal chart.

In past investigations I've come across Zosma, conjoined with Pluto and Mars, in the chart of George Michael; and Zosma conjunct Pluto trine Mercury in the chart of Ralph Fiennes. (See HERE and HERE). A common factor of these two is their disgrace or embarrassment due to excessive indulgence of one sort or another. Interestingly Charlie Sheen, also known for his indulgences, has Sun conjunct Zosma (Sun @11.22 Virgo).






Piers Morgan, who has recently taken over a US TV chat show, has Mars and Uranus conjunct Zosma (see chart HERE.) I seem to remember there were hints of disgrace/embarrassment hanging around Mr. Morgan during his newspaper career in the UK (see Wikipedia). He was eventually fired from UK's Daily Mirror for publishing some faked photographs.


Well....so far it looks as though Zosma, linked into a natal chart, indicates a person to whom I'd personally like to give a dope slap up the side of the head for managing to blot their copybooks....especially George Michael who could have been one of the truly greats.

Jared Loughner, the man who ran amok with a firearm in Tuscon a few weeks ago, killing six and injuring many including Congresswoman Gabby Gifford could possibly have natal Moon conjunct Zosma. This isn't certain until his birth time is known, however. In a sunrise chart for his birth date (HERE) Moon was at 10.58 Virgo.

A rapid skim through data available at Astrotheme threw up a handful of others, well-known in the UK and USA who have Zosma attached to an important personal planet. There's no obvious commonality (from what we know of them), other than that they are or have been famous, and would therefore have had a goodly share of egotism - but that applies to just about anyone we could name who has become famous, Zosma or no Zosma. Shrinking violets seldom seek or achieve fame!

John Travolta (Moon 11.11 Virgo)
Madonna (Moon 11.33 Virgo)
Cass Elliot (Moon 11.56 Virgo)
Freddy Mercury Sun 11/55 Virgo
Astrologer Liz Greene Sun 11.33 Virgo (maybe here the "ability to prophesy" part of traditional interpretation kicks in ?)

I suspect that finding Zosma conjunct or closely aspecting a personal planet will not, alone, be a sufficient indicator for any of the traditional interpretations to "kick-in". There would need to be other supporting evidence in the chart. I'd guess that Zosma, properly positioned, might add weight to an otherwise uncertain potentiality. Planets at or close to 11 Virgo are worth noting!

President Obama ~ Victim or Willing Puppet?

An article at Common Dreams this weekend:
The Stasis of the Union -- One Last Take by novelist Philip Kraske, along with some intereting commentary on the piece, highlighted something that's been bugging me for a while. It set me on a mission to find astrological support.


Mr. Kraske's essay focuses on the President's State of the Union speech on 25 January. In the final paragraphs he writes:

Hope blazes like crazy: more economic growth, lower corporate taxes, more technology and Internet access will save the day. Congress applauds, the public swoons from the poetry, and the kindest thing you can say about Obama is that he is simply yet another weak president unable to tame the Pentagon, the corporations, and the financial barons.

You have to wonder how much of this he knew before winning election -- and how much he was quietly told in the Oval Office.

That, more or less, is what has been bugging me for some time, with related question: was Barack Obama groomed for this deliberately? Was it another shrewd move by those in the shadows, those holding the reins whatever party and whichever personality play the parts of king and courtiers for a given span of time? Was President Obama well aware that the picture he was presenting to his adoring crowds of supporters in 2008 was nothing but a pipe dream - theirs, not his?

The President's natal chart using details from Astrodatabank:



Astrology could/should offer some evidence.

In previous posts I've put emphasis, in Obama-related matters, on planet Neptune, elevated in his natal chart and casting a cloak of illusion/delusion over all. After wading through several interpretations of the President's natal chart, most dating from 2008, I eventually landed on one by astrologer Elbert Wade - one I hadn't seen before. I reckon Mr. Wade is to be heartily congratulated on this. Other astrologers may have made these points too, but I haven't come across any similar examples.

I'll provide a link to the page rather than copying any part of it, as from the copyright notice on his website it is clear he would not appreciate any copy & paste efforts.

President Barack Obama Natal Horoscope -- with Astrologically-Based Comments


The article was written in July 2008, 4 months before the General Election.

To give a passing reader some idea of what is said in the parts particularly relevant to my point, I'll simply provide a summary of those parts:

Mr Wade points out that a strong right-side to the natal chart indicates a follower rather than a leader... he actually uses the words "puppet rather than pupeteer"!

Jupiter & Saturn in 12th house of seclusion could indicate secret or concealed funds or deals, or support, and two trines to these planets in 12th (from Moon and Mars) add to the feeling of un-disclosed deals or secrets.

I'm "playing a lone hand" at home on this tack. My husband isn't convinced that Obama is anything but a good guy hamstrung by the wicked Republicans, and corporations. I believe he's not hamstrung, but simply doing his masters' business, as will any future president. Any future president will have to meet with the approval of the true Powers That Be. Any upstart who looks like being a thorn in their side will be immediately sidelined and discredited by media (owned lock stock and pimply reporter by the Powers That Be) and eventually be somehow crushed.

The president isn't hamstrung, we the people are.

Music Monday ~ MARS & MUSIC

The qualities and characteristics symbolised by astrological Mars have positive and negative places in the human personality. Ingrid Lind in her book Astrology & Commonsense describes the role of Mars thus:

Mars governs the prime of physical life. Rules or has affinity with the signs Aries and Scorpio. Keywords: energy, heat, activation.

Martian qualities give the fighting spirit which surmounts the difficulties and crises life so abundantly produces. The power to translate courage into action is the Mars in a man working at its highest level, with brutal aggressiveness and uncontrolled passion at the low end of the scale. The amount of 'libido' or vitality in its various manifestations is indicated by the strength of Mars in the chart. In moments of emergency where quick action is needed it is easy to distinguish those who make good use of their Martian qualities. In the same way those with this planet weak by both Sign and aspect tend to crumple. Literally they have no fight in them.

The sex life and attitude to sexual relations as opposed to merely affectionate relationships is largely conditioned by Mars in the chart. Harmonious aspects between Mars and Venus indicate a happy blending of passion and love: inharmonious aspects suggest that the individual has something to learn in the handling of these two.

Mars in mythology is god of war. War has to be the cumulative result of goup negative Mars manifestation, though a single strong Martian personality could incite war, it takes the group/mass to be willing to undertake the waging of it.

In music, a composition immediately springing to mind whenever Mars is mentioned has to be Mars the Bringer of War from Gustav Holst's The Planets.

What, we wonder, was a classical composer doing writing music depicting the "flavours" of the planets?

It appears that Holst, in 1913, travelled to Spain with one Clifford Bax, an astrologer, who introduced the composer to the concepts of astrology, no doubt providing the vision and inspiration for Holst's Planet Suite. Alan Leo, astrologer and theosophist might also take credit for such inspiration. Holst had an interest in theosophy via Alan Leo's book The Art of Synthesis. The book has chapters based on each planet, and describes the astrological characteristics of them.

Gustav Holst seemed to consider The Planets a progression of life. Mars, coming first, presents a rocky and tormenting beginning. In fact, some have called this movement the most devastaing piece of music ever written.
(See here)

Above version of Mars, Bringer of War is from this album:





Where else can the attributes of Mars be found in music?

The positive, energetic side of Mars is to be found in all rock music, I guess. Its negative side surfaces in violent lyrics.

A study of US college students suggests that songs with violent lyrics increase aggressive thoughts and emotions. The study contradicts a popular suggestion that music loaded with violent imagery, such as some rap and heavy metal, are cathartic in venting aggression.

Craig Anderson at Iowa State University and colleagues found that students who listened to songs with violent lyrics were more likely to make aggressive associations in subsequent psychological tests.

Although, the effects were measured over a short time only, the team believes listening to violent lyrics could have a long-term effect - contributing to the development of a more aggressive and confrontational personality.
"Aggressive thoughts can influence perceptions of ongoing social interactions, colouring them with an aggressive tint," said Anderson. "Listening to angry, violent music does not appear to provide the kind of cathartic release that the general public and some professional and pop psychologists believe."

(See here)



Can't finish without a mention of David Bowie's Is There Life on Mars? There's nothing about Mars itself in the song, whose title was probably inspired by a Brtitsh TV series called Life on Mars. Bowie's lyrics lend themselves to a variety of interpretations - like an abstract painting. Wikipedia explains it all.
(EDIT ~~~ Song inspired title of TV series, not t'other way around!)

WHAT-IFs

Is there a place for "what-ifs" in astrology?

If the suspicions of some scientists/physicists proved to be correct, and "somewhere" there exist other dimensions, would they exist under the same astrological regime as our dimension? Not likely. Their history, though parallel to ours, would have led down (or up) subtly different paths. Perhaps their astrological doctrine, if they had one, would be a mirror image of ours - or a backwardly moving one as compared to our own, if we were to apply ours as a yardstick.

Even without another dimension existing, our fate and destiny rest upon such delicate threads. Butterflies and hurricanes. One tiny, meaningless, almost imperceptible variation in the scheme of things could change history.

Anyway, a couple or three curious "what ifs" struck me resulting from movies watched recently.

So: (via The King's Speech) What if, in another dimension, or in this one, Edward VIII (referred to as "David" in the movie) had never met Mrs. Simpson and had been Britain's King in place of George VI? Would he have married some fresh-faced gal, had a clutch of kids, the eldest of whom would now be on the throne?

There would have been no Prince Charles and Diana - nor the tragedy that followed.

Would Britain still have declared war on Germany in 1939 with Edward VIII on the throne? Some sources (Christopher Hitchens for one) believe that Edward VIII was far more friendly to the Hitler regime than has been reported. The British royals are closely related to German aristocracy. Would Britain have supported what was happening - could it possibly have done so? I doubt it. Winston Churchill was around - or was he, in this scenario? Could Britain have become an arm of the Third Reich, aiding attack on the rest of Europe and Russia?

What part would the USA have played in this other dimension?

Then, loosely related to The King's Speech, 1930s theme, we watched the movie Max on TV this week. Its plot centered on Germany in the 1930s, with Adolf Hitler as a nervous, paranoid young would-be artist associated with a Jewish gallery owner - a fellow-survivor of world War 1. In the (fictional) plot Hitler tries to get his work exhibited, without much success at first, and is egged on by an aggressive colleague to try political speechifying instead. He proves to be good at this, so good in fact that he incites a crowd to violence, resulting in the gallery owner being kicked to death at the very point he was to meet Hitler to arrange an exhibition of his latest, much improved, work.

What if, in an alternative dimension, the exhibition had happened before that fatal speech? What if Hitler had become a world-famous German artist? Would an alternative, equally manic dictator have arisen to take his place? Would the holocaust have happened? There would doubtless have been some minor wars and perhaps a less stringent attempt to expel Germany's population of Jewish people. But would Japan have bombed Pearl Harbor?

By that other scenario's 21st century, would Britain and most European countries have become the 51st to 65th states of the USA, after defeat at the hands of that country's mighty armies?

Enough already!

Our world situation these days often seems precarious. One tiny variation of events, in decades past, could have brought about something quite different - even more precarious ? Or equally so but in a different way?

Arty Farty Friday ~ Edith Head, Iconic Hollywood Costume Designer

Edith Head - a name fast receding into the mists of time. She was Hollywood's icon of costume design for 50 years, fom the 1920s through the movie capital's sparkling heyday into the 1980s. She designed wardrobes for some of the biggest names in American movies: Audrey Hepburn, Elizabeth Taylor, Mae West, Grace Kelly, Bette Davis etc etc. She earned 8 Oscars (more than any other woman), as well as an amazing 30 nominations.

And yet - and yet, she had received no formal training other than some evening classes in drawing, during which she discovered her aptitude for shapes, the human figure, costume, and fashion.

She created her own signature "look": a severe flat, black straight hairstyle, oversized dark glasses, and an unsmiling visage for the camera.

Professionally her design style was for the most part restrained, tending towards the classic - not necessarily from choice, but from a desire of film studios that their wares should not appear dated too rapidly. Her working methods were questioned by some, there are accusations that she "borrowed" the designs of others on occasion, putting her own signature to them. She was reportedly anti-union (not my kind of gal then!) However she did became popular with the stars, for unlike some male contemporaries she tended to consult closely with the women for whom she designed.




Edith Head wrote two books on style and fashion, dished out advice to women everywhere via news columns, magazines, radio and TV shows. Her influence on fashion spread, eventually, world wide.

She died two weeks after finishing her last film, Dead Men Don't Wear Plaid, and left her estate to charity.

Some of her advice:

You can have anything you want in life if you dress for it.

The cardinal sin is not being badly dressed, but wearing the right thing in the wrong place.

Your dresses should be tight enough to show you're a woman and loose enough to prove you're a lady.

I say sacrifice style any day for becomingness.

Edith Head was born on 28 October 1897 in, according to Wikipedia, Searchlight, Nevada. Some sources, including a published biography state her birth place as San Bernadino, California. The 12 noon chart, and planets in signs will be the same whichever is correct. A cluster of all her personal planets lay in the sector of the zodiac covering Libra/Scorpio/Sagittarius. Only two slow-moving generational planets Neptune and Pluto lie outside of this area, and in Gemini.

Without a time of birth Ms Head's rising sign isn't known, her natal Moon, though, would have been in Sagittarius whatever time she was born - between 8 and 23 Sagittarius.

Her feeling for art, design, style and fashion undoubtedly came from the Libra input. Libra, ruled by Venus, planet of the arts - Venus itself is at home there in Ms Head's chart, along with Mercury, planet of communication and Jupiter, planet of publication (sending it out to the masses).

Her natal Scorpio Sun and Mars present a forceful duo. Mars is right at home in Scorpio, its sign of rulership, and conjunct Sun, as here, can present as an indomitable character, confident, determined and competitive. Edith Head must surely have had all of these attributes to have succeeded so amazingly with such little training or background in her chosen profession.

Ms Head's choice of personal trademarks - dark glasses and glossy black hair reflect Scorpio's dark, secretive reputation.

The other planet in Scorpio, Uranus at 27.53 degrees lay conjunct Saturn at 0 degree Sagittarius. A curious combination this - in this context. The traditional and the avant garde conjoined in two signs, one with fixed, dark, secretive connotation, the other mutable, bright, expansive. I'm not quite sure how this manifested for Edith Head. Perhaps her reputed "borrowing" of the designs of others for the continued expansion or her own reputation? Or perhaps in the restrained style forced upon her by her clients, the studio bosses, when she would often have preferred to design something more flamboyant?

I suspect her Sagittarius Moon was in opposition to Neptune - planet of creativity and illusion. What are movies but illusion at its best?

Some of her designs:



For Dorothy Lamour in On the Road to Bali

A Lapsed Astrologer ~ Rudolf Smit

I recently happened upon an article by a former astrologer from the Netherlands, Rudolf Smit. He lost his belief in astrology. The slippery slide began when he used the wrong natal chart for a client consultation. His full article: Astrology my passion - My life, my personal disaster can be read at Astrology and Science.com

Abstract -- Rudolf Smit, founder of this website (astrology and science.com), describes how, as a teenager, he was an ardent amateur astronomer with many technical books on astronomy in his library. Nearly all of them stressed that astrology had no scientific validity, which led him to believe that astrology was nonsense. Later, in his first job, he argued with his boss about astrology, and was told that he should first study astrology before opening his mouth.

So he read about his sun sign and was astonished to find how accurate it was. He then had his birth chart read, not once but twice, and in each case was astonished to find how well it fitted his character and circumstances. From then on astrology became his passion.

He taught himself how to read charts for his friends (everything fitted perfectly), formed the first society of professional astrologers in the Netherlands (this was in 1977), and set up as a part-time professional astrologer (he soon had many clients and the future looked rosy). But one day he accidentally used the wrong chart for a client, who was nevertheless happy with the reading. Two years later it happened again. Very puzzling -- weren't horoscopes supposed to be unique?

Later, with a computer, he spent several years testing the statements made in astrology books, especially statements about events, and found to his horror that almost all could not be confirmed. But he had many happy clients so why worry? Then in 1984 came the crunch. He became aware of the many ways in which clients could be convinced that astrology was true even if it wasn't. And all of them were used by him. Just being warm and caring would do the trick. Worse, any chart would do, hence also the wrong chart.

So his happy world of astrology collapsed. He closed his practice and fell into a clinical depression that lasted three years. Without astrology his life had lost its meaning. Afterwards he regained his interest and became editor of the research journal Correlation for six years, trying to find out which statements of astrology were true.


(Above:Mr Smit testing birth charts with his PET computer in Australia in the 1980s)

Then in 2000 he set up this website for those who wish to know more about scientific findings in astrology, but always remaining sympathetic to its beauty and appeal. This is a true story that anyone interested in astrology should read.

I can understand someone "losing faith" in almost anything (except the power of love). For someone as invested in astrology as Mr. Smit apparently was, his lapse is rather surprising. I have niggling doubts about some parts of astrological doctrine myself, but I find the trick is to stand well back. The closer and into ever more detail one delves, the more avenues for doubt open up. I am absolutely certain that there is a core of truth in astrology, but only a core. From that position I shall never lapse. Even so that core is well worth pursuing, and may contain the seed of something quite unexpected - in fact, something that will seem magical.


I'm interested to see Mr Smit's own natal chart: born on 5 January 1942 in Amsterdam, Netherlands at 9:53 PM (Astrodatabank).



Elementally he has a predominance of planets/points in Earth, none in Water. There's a starting point for his need of absolute proof, lack of intuitive feel which comes usually via Water signs.

Mr Smit's Earthy Capricorn Sun and Mercury alone wouldn't account for his lapse into skepticism, but allied with Grand Trines linking key planets all in Earth signs, well - I see a potential skeptic here, especially as critical Virgo was rising as he came into the world.

I can relate a little bit to Mr Smit. I too have a Grand Trine in Earth - similar to the one on the left (below) linking Neptune, Uranus and Mercury. Perhaps my own Aquarius Sun, Jupiter in Pisces and Cancer rising provide balance sufficient to ride out any doubts about core astrological principles.

Mr Smit's natal Uranus conjunct Saturn is a bit of a bummer for astrology too. Saturn has a restrictive influence upon Uranus's urge towards astrology. In my own chart Saturn is semi-sextile Uranus, which may indicate less of an impediment.



So, my conclusion: In Mr Smit's case the anti-astrological culprit = too much Earthy input which is too closely linked within his natal blueprint. No emphasis on the Watery element to provide balance. Mr Smit might easily have gravitated into the accountancy or architecture - or writing about same. Or perhaps simply staying with astronomy would have offered him a more comfortable ride along life's tangled highways.