George Clooney, Messenger of Peace.

I read recently, (here), that George Clooney has been appointed a United Nations Messenger of Peace.
There's an article on George and his astrology at Astrodatabank , with natal chart, followed by a string of comments. Interestingly, some of the comments relate to his chart from the sidereal perspective, as well as tropical. Copies of both charts are available. The sidereal version is in square format, but easy to follow. For a passing reader who has any interest in comparing the tropical and sidereal zodiacs in connection with the interpretation of natal charts, the comments are a useful read.

Tropical zodiac dictates that George Clooney has Sun and Mercury in Taurus, Pisces rising. Moon and Saturn in Capricorn, Jupiter in Aquarius. Venus in Aries, Mars at 0* Leo. Generationally Uranus Leo, Pluto Virgo, Neptune Scorpio.

Not even the most expert astrologer in the world, really knows for certain how the signs, planets and houses "work" or what their precise effect is. If one asserts adamantly that one or other zodiac is correct, evidence to support that theory is usually quite easily found. Clearing the mind completely of prejudice or preference isn't easy. I have to keep in mind that both zodiacs cannot be correct, I can't pick and choose a different one for each individual just because it fits them better. In the end, it's going to be a matter of which zodiac is more correct, in a majority of cases.

I naturally lean immediately towards tropical because that's what I've taught myself and read about over many years, and yet here, I find that I marginally prefer the sidereal positions for George Clooney. Sidereal gives him Aquarius rising, Sun in Aries. Aries seems to me to be a doer. George definitely walks the talk. His stunning good looks and acting ability, (not to mention that mischievous twinkle in his eye) mean that he could rest on his laurels - but he doesn't, he's driven to do more.

Taurus is a fixed and stubborn sign, pleasant, but not a big doer or initiator, Taurus Sun and Mercury seem like a bad fit for George. Tropical Pisces rising could describe his compassion for the underprivileged, but Aquarius, the humanitarian sign rising, describes him more clearly, and again Aquarius is another "doing" kind of sign, rather than the dreaming one - Pisces.




My usual difficulty arises when comparing the two charts. There are factors which can be seen as alternatives - Mars in tropical Leo indicates a fiery fighter, that factor transfers to his Sun and Mercury in sidereal Aries. Venus in tropical Aries becomes Venus in sidereal Pisces, so the softness and compassion seen in his tropical Pisces ascendant remains in the picture...these swap-overs really do muddy the water.

Overall, it's "swings and roundabouts" - a shortened version of an old fairground proverb "What you lose on the swings you gain on the roundabouts". Things balance out - if fairground operatives had a poor day financially on the swings, it was likely they'd have done well on the roundabouts.

Disentangling the threads to make a definite call on which zodiac gives more accurate results most of the time isn't a job for an amateur, but I'm going to keep trying, the prospect intrigues me.

Eras of Pluto, Tropical & Sidereal (Part 2)

Continuing Saturday's theme - a very brief survey of Pluto's eras using sidereal positions compared with tropical, as assessed by Adrian Ross Duncan HERE (extracts in italics, my contributions in blue.) Last week I reached tropical Virgo/sidereal Leo, and continue starting with tropical Libra and sidereal Virgo.

TROPICAL
"For those to whom marriage was sacred, Pluto had a very special surprise when in transited Libra from 1971 to 1983/4. Aesthetics and femininity were transformed, as bras were burned, and equal rights insisted on. Roles were reversed as men renounced masculinity, and women demonstrated that they could manage very well without the opposite sex. Men loved men, and women loved women – leaving the Pluto in Libra children to ponder about love and relationships... and to create the single culture of today. This was the era of MAD – mutually assured destruction – the nuclear balance of power between the Soviet Union and USA . "

SIDEREAL
Sidereally Pluto was in Virgo for much of the same period as above, actual sidereal period was nearer to 1969 - 1980. The overall feel of that era certainly included the beginnings of equality for women and gays in Europe and the USA. Britain had its first woman Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher. Virgo is represented traditionally by a female figure, so symbolically there is a correspondence here, in the slowly moving transformation relating to gender equality and perception. There was an energy crisis, too, requiring restrictions and rationing, and in Britain strikes cost millions of working days. In the USA Richard Nixon rose and fell ignominiously, perhaps causing a transformation in the way Americans were to view their leaders in future years - more critically, with less passivity. The aftermath of the Vietnam war left many injured, mentally and physically. These instances equate more to transformation in Virgo's realms of economy, critical reaction and health concerns than to Libran diplomacy, and emphasis on relationships, in my view. And the beginnings of environmental awareness arose in this era - in 1970 the first Earth Day was celebrated - in keeping with Virgo, an Earth sign.


TROPICAL
"After so much sexual experimentation, Pluto in Scorpio from 1983 to 1995 brought the spectre of AIDS. Now even the most natural act in the world could result in death. Back in its home sign, Pluto focussed paranoia on sex itself, and this led to a drastic change in sexual habits, not least in a new openness amongst governments regarding sexual health. Condoms were everywhere. Economically this was the time of the yuppie, of junk bonds and how to get rich by screwing others – happy times for Reaganites and Thatcherites. Banks crashed, then merged to create huge financial entities."

SIDEREAL
Roughly the same era (give or take a few years at each end) is covered by sidereal Libra.
Fall of the Berlin Wall, Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 in China, a gradual transition into the computer age, the Reagan era in the USA. These could all connect to Libra rather than Scorpio, in my view. Libra, an Air sign, symbolised by the scales, representing balance, a striving for justice, love of peace. Libra is an Air sign, with mental focus, aiding transition into an increasingly computerised era. Pluto in Libra could be seen to relate to all of these.


TROPICAL
"Pluto in Sagittarius from 1995 to 2008 has of course evoked the spectre of international terror and religious fundamentalism. As a mutable sign Sagittarius creates polarity, and today we have the idea of a war of civilizations. The root cause of terror is probably injustice, which Pluto in Sagittarius seeks to redress by its own methods, but the terror of Muslim extremists is also about fighting the Great Satan of America, and the sexual flagrancy and material indulgence of the West... a last-ditch attempt to save an outdated worldview."

SIDEREAL
Not exactly the same period - actually around 1993 to 2006, Pluto lay in sidereal Scorpio. The over-riding aspect of this period, from where we stand at present - not very far away - was terrorism, as mentioned in the tropical assessment, terrorism and the Iraq war/occupation. For me terrorism equates more to the passion and fixedness of Scorpio, ruled by Mars and Pluto, than the extremes and expansiveness of Sagittarius, ruled by benign Jupiter. Let's not forget that Pluto is very much at home in Scorpio. It's possible to view this from both perspectives, and actually, I think we are much too close at present to see the picture clearly.
...............................................

Making this exercise doubly interesting, we now watch the future unfold with tropical astrologers considering that Pluto is moving into Capricorn right around now. Sidereally Pluto moved into Sagittarius many months ago, at the end of 2006. The next ten years could provide an answer to this zodiac conundrum more clearly than any previous era has been able to do.

The 2 Zodiacs

Now and again I experience a "crisis of faith" with regard to the tropical zodiac. Writing about Aquarius recently spun me into one such mini-crisis. I see so much Capricorn in Aquarius.

Very briefly, the tropical zodiac is around 23 degrees adrift (ahead) of the ancient sidereal zodiac which is calculated in relation to the constellations. The tropical zodiac is calculated mathematically, in relation to the seasons, with vernal equinox point always at 0 Aries. Precession of the equinoxes has meant that the tropical zodiac no longer aligns with sidereal (calculated by the stars), as it would have done long ago, in the third century AD.

My interest is primarily natal charts, but I can't ignore the fact that if we used the sidereal zodiac, Pluto has not just moved into Capricorn, it moved into sidereal Sagittarius towards the end of 2006, after years of traversing sidereal Scorpio. Hmmmm - I wonder! And sidereally Saturn is in Leo, not Virgo. Uranus in sidereal Aquarius, and Neptune getting towards the end of sidereal Capricorn. We become so used to tropical values that it's hard to get the head around another perspective. But what if sidereal is the correct perspective? Are we squinting, tropically, our vision slightly blurred?

The sidereal zodiac is that used by most Indian and other Eastern astrologers, but the complete system they use, Vedic or Jyotish, is quite different from the commonly used western system. However, there are a few western astrologers who use the sidereal zodiac while keeping largely to the western system. I don't see anything wrong with this, though some folk comment that "you can't mix the two".



A transcription of an interview with western sidereal astrologer Kenneth Bowser, reported by Colleen Mauro in The Mountain Astrologer around 3 years ago provides much food for thought, especially this paragraph:

"Q: Some people say sidereal astrology is best for the timing of events but that tropical astrology better describes trait characteristics. Do you agree?

No, I strongly disagree. My view, and I’m sure I speak for the western sidereal community on this, is that you can’t have it both ways. The matter is basic: if you have competing propositions, it’s possible for one to be right and the other wrong, or they can both be wrong but they can’t both be right. There is no question but that sidereal astrology is very effective for events because it disposes of the timing problems associated with precession. The problem is how to make somebody like Dick Cheney, our current vice president, into both a sidereal Capricorn, and a tropical Aquarian. Can he be seen as liberal, bohemian, egalitarian, humanitarian, counter-culture oriented or a rebel? I don’t see it. It’s like saying that someone could simultaneously be primarily liberal and primarily conservative or simultaneously primarily emotional and primarily intellectual. My experience is that you don’t get two diametrically opposite persons, in terms of character, in the same body.
A tropicalist and a siderealist with similar experience in the art, who both understand the intrinsic natures of the planets, will tend to say much the same thing about planet combinations. The parting of the ways comes when someone who has the sun in tropical Aquarius but sidereal Capricorn is evaluated according to what those positions mean to a tropicalist and a siderealist. The contrasts are pretty sharp.
Another glaring issue that bowls over former tropicalists who make the leap to the sidereal zodiac is how the dignities and debilities come alive in a sidereal context. Astrology is mostly a matter of reading character and I submit that to do that, the tropical and sidereal twain cannot meet. "

I have pondered on Dick Cheney's natal chart too, (HERE), comparing it with my own. Of course, using the sidereal zodiac we'd both have Sun in Capricorn. But, with sidereal as with tropical it's no use looking simply at the Sun's natal position. We have to consider the whole chart. In doing so, and comparing charts for the same person using the two zodiacs, it often turns out that a kind of planetary musical chairs takes place, the same signs being emphasised, but by different planets. This makes it very difficult to decide which zodiac works better.

I have often been puzzled by the charts of some people I've known well, and felt sure the Sun sign was "wrong". There can be a variety of reasons for this, the sidereal/tropical zodiac question is but one of many. There's the controversial matter of sign cusps - whether planets in the very early or last degrees of a sign take on some of the qualities of the previous or following sign. Or perhaps the reason could be connected with the strength of the rising sign, Moon sign, or a stellium in a different sign from the Sun.

In future I'll look at any chart I study with the sidereal zodiac in mind, as well as the topical, and shall note how often one fits better, equally well, or how many times sidereal just doesn't seem to fit at all.

Because sidereal positons are around 23 degrees behind tropical, any planet or point which lies beyond 23 degrees of a sign will remain in the same sign as tropical, but any planet earlier than 23 degrees will move into the previous sign. To avoid fiddly calculations, a natal chart calculated sidereally can be obtained, free, HERE.

In my own case, and that of my husband, sidereal versions of our charts are an equally good fit, perhaps even better, than the tropical versions, but we both have "splash" pattern charts, so most of the same signs remain emphasised. I've experimented with some of the charts I've saved, and have not yet found one where I'd say that sidereal feels totally wrong. The reason may be because of the still relatively small difference of 23 degrees between the two. Venus and/or Mercury are often found in the sidereal (tropically previous) sign, retaining some focus there. In centuries to come, when sidereal and tropical move much further apart (if man survives) it may be a different story.

Case still open, jury still out!