Sir Edmund Hillary & Hemispheres

A 20th century hero, mountaineer and explorer Sir Edmund Hillary died recently. Glancing at a 12 noon chart for the day of his birth, 20 July, 1919, Tuakau, North Island, New Zealand, my immediate reaction was "Huh?" Four planets (2 sets of conjuncts) in soft, sweet homeloving Cancer? This man was one of the first pair of climbers to reach the highest peak on this planet. Homebody?

There are, of course, three Leo planets in the mix too, and natal Moon would have been in Aries whatever his time of birth, so perhaps, taking a simplistic view, the Fire planets outweighed those in homely Watery Cancer.

Astrotheme has Sir Edmund's time of birth as 4pm, producing ascendant in Capricorn. (I think THAT IS a Capricorn face!) Cancer and Leo are his dominant signs, but Saturn and Jupiter are dominant planets. Saturn, ruler of Capricorn, Cardinal Earth, represented by the mountain goat or seagoat, fits his persona and history well - better than Cancer the homebody, for sure!

See chart, biography etc at Astrotheme, HERE.

Pondering this, and that fact that Sir Edmund was born in the southern hemisphere, my mind ventured down a path it took early in my blogging experience, when I tried to compare my own chart with that of Australian author and feminist Germaine Greer. The same conundrum arose: do the signs of the tropical zodiac have the exact same interpretation for people born in the southern hemisphere as those we use here in the north?

Astrologers have a variety of theories, but I haven't found anything definite or convincing, so far. Some say reverse the signs/interpretations, some say tweak them, others say everything should remain exactly the same for both hemispheres.

In the few articles I found via Google, astrologers mainly concentrated on examples using Sun signs when writing on this subject. I didn't find this helpful. If there is to be any difference in astrological interpretation for Earth's two hemispheres, then the difference would apply across the board, which complicates the issue even further.

People with "splash" natal charts, planets well-scattered across the whole circle have a good showing from 9 or more zodiac signs, and some of the character traits associated with them. It would be difficult to disentangle charts of that kind to discover whether hemisphere matters. A clearer idea of any differences might be pinpointed by studying people born on days such as those in Feb 1962, when many planets were grouped in Aquarius. Would people born in the southern hemisphere at that time display a very different side of Aquarius? I wonder if astrologers have investigated.

In the case of Sir Edmund Hillary, with Capricorn rising, it would be difficult to disentangle his Cancer Sun and personal planets from his Capricorn ascendant - Cancer and Capricorn are opposing cardinal signs - both initiators. Aries, home of Sir Edmund's natal Moon is yet another cardinal sign. Here, I think is the recipe for a mountaineering hero, Sun, Moon and ascendant in cardinal signs, with Saturn (strength through self-limitation, discipline and planning) his dominant planet.

A quote from the man himself, on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of climbing Everest:

"I like to think that I am a very ordinary New Zealander, not terribly bright perhaps but determined and practical in what I do" (How very Capricorn!)

R.I.P.

For Election Watchers

Confused US Presidential election watchers, in the States and elsewhere, who are not completely clear about the way the system works, might be interested to read an excellent explanation, written by an astrologer, at the Skyscript forum. Here is the relevant thread. As the astrologer points out, without a clear understanding of this convoluted system, predicting becomes even more of a crap-shoot. The rest of the thread adds useful information, including links to charts for all US states.

A Friend in the "Enemy Camp"

Yesterday evening I received a surprise follow-up comment to one of my posts from April 2007 : "Two on-line discussions on science and astrology"




"From Robert Tulip

I have continued presenting astrological ideas on the Bad Astronomy website.

A thread on Precessional Cosmology is at http://www.bautforum.com/against-mainstream/67587-precessional-cosmology.html and a planet calendar is at http://www.bautforum.com/astronomical-observing-equipment-accessories/68667-planets-2008-a.html

I hope you find these of some interest.

Best regards ."

The linked piece on precessional cosmology is interesting. I'd also recommend following the original link in my April post, Mr. Tulip showed such patience and forebearance with some skeptical colleagues on the forum at that time. I was impressed by the way he put his case so firmly and eloquently, in what could, sadly, be termed "the enemy camp".

One has to be a member of the Bad Astronomy forum to access the actual calendar mentioned in the second link, so I haven't highlighted it, but have taken the liberty of copying the brief accompanying post :

"The attached calendar is an easy guide to planetary positions over the next year. Some conjunctions are
• Mercury Neptune 21 Jan – 5 Feb
• Uranus Venus Mercury 31 March
• Neptune Lunar Node March-May
• Saturn Mars Moon 7 July
• Mercury Venus Mars Moon 2 September
• Jupiter Venus Moon 2 December
Good Friday is on the equinox 21 March, with a full moon on the Saturday making 23 March the earliest Easter in recent years. Sun Pluto Full Moon and Mars are near a Grand Square on 22 March, Neptune may (?) be occulted by an eclipsed full moon on 17 August, and Mars by the Moon on 8 June. Saturn Venus & Mercury are trine Jupiter & Moon 14 August."

Blondie & Chic Young

Today would have been the birthday of Murat (Chic) Young creator of the long-running cartoon strip "Blondie". The storylines and content of "Blondie", which first saw the light in 1930, are based on everyday matters experienced by all of us at one time or another. There's no fantasy, not even much whimsy, just gentle humour rooted in real life.

Chic Young was born in Chicago, 9 January 1901


(12 noon chart, no time of birth available).


Sun Mercury and Saturn all in Capricorn seem to appropriately describe Mr Young's creation which has amused and entertained readers for several generations. Capricorn's ruler, Saturn, represents age, passage of time, tradition etc. Capricorn also represents a good businessman, which Chic Young had to be, for his was one of the most successfully syndicated cartoon strips of all. Three other planets (Jupiter, Venus, Uranus) lie right nextdoor in Sagittarius, ruled by Jupiter, planet of publishing(among other things), fit his career history nicely. Jupiter is in exact opposition to Neptune, planet of imagination. This indicates creativity, which, without those three planets in down-to-earth Capricorn, might have led towards a completely different, much less solid and rewarding professional direction.



Blondie's husband Dagwood, in common with all husbands, has some irritating but endearing habits. He's seen(right) with his famously huge sandwich. Their eldest child "Baby Dumpling" came along, as if by magic, to further entrance readers, and as years passed the family grew and progressed as all families do. It was and is a long-running soap opera in print, though each mini-episode can stand alone.

When Chic Young died in 1973, his son, Dean Young took over and has brought the cartoon strip into the 21st century.

Describing Our Astro-Vintage

Writing for wine bottle labels and wine connoisseur magazines has to be a fun job. It must first entail tasting the contents, then dreaming up seductive ways of describing the taste. Nowadays attempts to seduce buyers seems to have hit new heights (or depths). I'm not a wine drinker myself, Scotch is my one and only tipple, wine gives me stomach ache. HWK is the red wine enthusiast, Chez Twilight. The small collection in our wine rack usually offers up a few chuckles, as did an article by Natalie MacLean:

"Wine X magazine (or rather 'zine) aims to "provide a new voice for a new generation of wine consumers." Describing one California cabernet, it asks us to "imagine Naomi Campbell in latex." An Australian shiraz is a "Chippendales dancer in leather chaps—tight, full-bodied and ready for action." A New Zealand cabernet merlot is like "a Victoria's Secret fire sale: smoky charred wood, leather, spicy and very seductive."

James Thurber's classic cartoon is precious:



What has all this got to do with astrology, a passing reader may ask. What indeed.

People are like wines - all very different, and their " flavour" is somewhat dependent on year and location of production. Perhaps astrologers might, as an experiment, adopt the style of some of the more colourful wine writers.

I'll experiment with HWK (my husband). Born in Kansas, early Aries, Leo rising, Leo Moon. Mercury /Saturn in Pisces. Venus in Taurus.

From the lush wheat striped, cloud shadow dappled plains of northern USA comes this sunny, enthusiastic little number. There are hints of grandeur here, a glance which tells of royal pretense, yet beneath it all a lingering, arty, softness and sweetness. Think Laurence Olivier in pink tights, carrying a camera.

And I'd better attempt my own. Born in a port on the North East coast of England, Aquarius Sun, Aries Moon, Cancer rising. Mercury in Capricorn, Venus Sagittarius

The grey, storm-tossed North Sea coast of England has brought forth this somewhat obtuse and mentally energetic product. Travels well, but reacts instantly when upset. A hard working, capable little number when enthused. Think bright purple Mini-Cooper with wire wheels and political bumper stickers.

What if we were all born with an inscription such as this on our backsides, like a bottle of wine?

Are we starting to feel Saturn in Virgo?

When Saturn moved from Leo to Virgo last September many words were written by astrologers explaining the significance of Saturn's new position. I like this concise summary by Molly Hall. She said:

"Work, routine, habits, health -- all these are the province of busybody Virgo. The pressure of having the Taskmaster here may make us more neurotic, hypochondriacal, fearful, etc. Thinking optimistically, Saturn in Virgo inspires healthy living, right livelihood and moderation."

Saturn is well settled into its new home now. Are we seeing any evidence of what astrologers expected? I think so.

Last week Elsa posted an article about the mayor of Oklahoma City calling for citizens to adjust to a healthier lifestyle and lose weight. Bill Maher, appearing on The Late Show with David Letterman last Thursday night, revealed that he had spent a lot of time during his recent spell off-screen reading and learning about healthy food regimes. Then there was the article published on several internet venues, "Why Not Give a Vegetarian Diet a Try for the New Year?"by Bruce Friedrich.

Has it affected me personally? Well, I bought a treadmill, started well using it every day, but have slipped back into laziness since just before Christmas when a nasty, long-lasting virus hit us both. I'll get back to it soon.

I'm not vegetarian in the true sense of the word, but I don't like meat. I'll eat it in meat sauce with pasta, and very occasionally to avoid discourtesy to a host or hostess. I couldn't live without cheese, eggs and dairy food though, so that excludes me from ever becoming vegan. Fortunately for me, HWK and I feel much the same about meat. He also needs to follow a strict low glycaemic diet, for health reasons. Our diet is reasonably healthy, I think we are already being Saturn-in-Virgo-d enough, either from taste or necessity. So, Mr. Saturn, you can move along, thank you very much!

As I typed, I kept thinking of this "vegetarian" painting, it's called "Vertumnus" (the ancient Roman god of vegetation and transformation). The portrait, made up entirely of plants and vegetables, was painted by Giuseppe Arcimboldo in 1590/1. The link is to my post about Arcimboldo, from early blogging days. The artist aimed to depict, in guise of Vertumnus, Emperor Rudolph II, who ruled, from Prague, over what is now the Czech Republic.

Richard Dawkins' skewed view of astrology

I tripped over this video of a BBC TV programme in which Richard Dawkins derides and tries to discredit astrology, psychics and belief in the paranormal. I forced myself to watch it to the end, even though it made me angry.

Richard Dawkins claims to be scientifically minded, and a seeker of "the truth", but in investigating astrology he insisted on discussing only the Sun sign variety. If he has done even minimal research, he will know that this isn't the fair and reasonable way to investigate astrology.

Astrologer Neil Spencer was very patient, as shown in the programme, but in my opinion he was far too nice. He reminded me of many American Democrats - no fighting spirit, too passive. But perhaps this programme was edited to exclude anything which could put astrology in a more positive light.

Richard Dawkins is making money from his books and TV shows. In my opinion he's doing so just as fraudulently as some less genuine psychics conduct their businesses. He is not giving viewers the full picture, not presenting sufficient information for them to decide for themselves. He cherry picks those parts which are negative, to support his own skewed opinions.

Why hasn't some brave astrologer stood up and told him that he doesn't know everything about the universe and its workings? Astrologers don't know either, of course. They don't know now, and they didn't know in past centuries. What astrologers could, and can, see is that something is going on. Something, using astrology's main principles, works. Something relies on movements as recorded in an ephemeris.

"Because something is happening here
But you don't know what it is
Do you, Mister Jones?" (Bob Dylan)

A set of astrological tools has been developed over many centuries, these tools are all there is with which to make any semblance of sense about that elusive something.

I believe the future will reveal the source of that elusive something. Some tools astrologers have used will become redundant, new and more efficient ones will replace them. This is my prediction, and I'm sticking to it. What we now call astrology will, one day, be found to be a small part of the way the universe works. Richard Dawkins and I will not be around by then though. I shall never have the satisfaction of seeing him eat his words.

Caucuses, Edwards, Rousseau, Gemini & Cancer

We watched TV coverage of the Iowa caucuses on Thursday evening, I wanted to understand more about this peculiar tradition. It was interesting. But what moved me, and really moved me (to tears), was John Edwards' speech after the results were announced. After hearing him speak, speeches of the other candidates seemed lacklustre, stilted and boring. He won me over. Kucinich wasn't even in the race, and Biden, my other favourite, has now bowed out. What is becoming annoying is that mainstream media is now practically ignoring Edwards - in the way they ignored Kucinich, Biden and the others before Iowa. I find this shocking - Edwards came second, he deserves equal coverage with Clinton and Obama! Bill Moyers on PBC yesterday evening, while analysing Iowa results with an expert, didn't mention Edwards once! John Edwards now seems to me to be America's best hope for real change, but if MSM have their way he'll sink without trace like the rest.

Other astrologers have interpreted Edwards chart in the past, so I'm not going to attempt that. I'd recommend the article about Edwards by Lynn Hayes in her blog about around a year ago.

On Thursday, before watching TV, I'd been working on a post about an artist from 19th century France, Henri Rousseau. When I looked at John Edwards' chart the next day, I remembered Rousseau's. They both have a mixture of Gemini and Cancer in their makeup. Edwards has Uranus close to the ascendant, Rousseau had Neptune. (Click on charts to enlarge. Edwards' is on the left)



I have been wondering whether that combination of Gemini and Cancer is one which has a distinct ability to reach out to people, via a chosen channel or medium. The Moon (ruler of Cancer) is said to represent "the public", Gemini, ruled by Mercury, is the sign of communication of all kinds. Edwards certainly reached out to me on Thursday evening.

So... on to artist Henri Rousseau, born 21 May 1844 in Laval, France. According to Astrotheme he was born at 1am. If this is near accurate it puts Neptune very close to his ascendant. There could hardly be a better placement in the natal chart of this French artist.

His nickname was "Le douanier", the customs officer. He was actually a toll collector at one of Paris's gates, but like everything else about him and his art, a touch of imagination and romaticism edges in. Many of his best known paintings depict exotic jungle scenes. He spread the word that his inspiration came from travels in Mexico, but in truth he had never left France. His inspiration came from museums, botanic gardens and the like. None of this detracts at all from his unique painting style, which comes under the label "naive" or "primitive" - meaning an artist without formal training. Grandma Moses and Beryl Cook are two others from this genre about whom I've written. Although their paintings often lack proportion, perspective and depth, there is something special about them - they seem to live. Could the secret of this be that the artists were so filled with enthusiasm for their subjects, that they acquired a magical ability to convey it to others?

Henri Rousseau's natal Sun, Mercury and Mars all lay in Gemini. Venus and Moon in Cancer. Saturn in the sign of its traditional rulership, Aquarius, along with Neptune which lay in a strong position, just 4 degrees from the Aquarius ascendant (if birth time is correct). Jupiter is in the sign of its traditional ruler, Pisces. A bowl shaped configuration with all planets in one half of the chart, signifies a person with specific and determined focus.

Here are four personal planets in the signs of their modern or traditional rulerships - Mercury/Gemini, Moon/Cancer, Jupiter/Pisces and Saturn/Aquarius.
As I understand it these placements do not actually make the planets' energy stronger, but more pure and true to their inherent nature - unadulterated by other factors. Strength, I believe, comes from a planet being on or close to one of the angles, and here we have Neptune, planet of imagination and dreams on the ascendant -possibly the strongest angle in the chart, personality-wise.

Some of Rousseau's paitings are realistic, but the majority of his best work relies heavily on imagination and inventive ideas.

In spite of some ridicule by contemporaries about his work, Rousseau didn't ever lose faith in himself or his ability as an artist. Nor did he ever try to copy the more sophisticated styles practiced by his peers. He remained supremely confident in his own unique style. Was he deluding (Neptune) himself, or were his bloody-minded Aquarian traits overcoming Gemini mutability? Perhaps this kind of confidence could be one result of having several planets in the signs of their rulerships.

Rousseau died in poverty, but like so many of his fellow-artists, the future brought acclaim. Young artists took inspiration from the work which had been derided during his lifetime. The outstanding factor in Rousseau's chart has to be dreamy imaginative Neptune on the ascendant. One of Rousseau's best known paintings is actually called "The Dream", see below.

.
More of this artist's work can be explored via Google Image

Planets and Physical Appearance

Yesterday Elsa posted a link to a photo gallery: "Rising Signs of Celebrities". It was interesting to look for facial similarities. I had, stashed away among my drafts, a posting related to physical appearance and astrology. Normally wary of theories about zodiac signs and planets having any influence on physical appearance, I'd had second thoughts about posting this, once prepared. I've retrieved it today.

Heredity is such a huge factor in physical appearance, but then there does seem to be inherited astrological linkage in families too. I have noticed that there's a recognisable "look" among some Sun Capricorns and Sun Geminis (males mainly, because females tend to want to adjust their looks!) Whether the look I notice is due to Sun sign, rising sign or a dominant planet (Saturn, Mercury)isn't clear to me.

Logically, any recognisable traits in appearance, between natives of signs/planets, is likely to occur only when either the zodiac sign or a planet is heavily emphasised in the natal chart, sufficiently so to modify or cancel out most other differing, inherited, traits.

Manly P. Hall, in his book "Astrological Keywords", lists descriptions by "Planetary Type". It's interesting to check these against one's dominant planet.This can be ascertained at Astrodienst (astro.com), after inputting birth data, and checking the Walter Pullen section (brief chart delineation) in the Extended Chart department. There's a huge amount of information there, it's necessary to scroll down quite a long way to find the percentage strengths allocated to each planet in the chart.

(Mr. Hall included hair colour and complexion type, which I suspect are not at all reliable indicators - those, when natural, are likely to be purely hereditary)

Physical Appearance of the Nine Planetary Types (page 102)

Planetary types are always modified by the signs in which the planets are placed and pure types are seldom met with. When the ruler of a horoscope is placed in a sign of similar appearance, the types are accentuated, but when placed in signs of opposing elements, the contradictions which arise manifest as compound and often incongruous physical appearances.

MOON
Body of middle structure inclined to heaviness; face round, complexion pale; eyes large and soft; hands and feet short but thick; usually small boned.

MERCURY
Body and face slender' forehead full, nose long, lips thin; fingers slender and handsvery expressive; hair dark, beard thin, complexion poor, eyes penetrating.

VENUS
Body short but graceful, inclined to stoutness in advancing years; face round, hair dark, eyes large and wandering; voice soft and manner vivacious.

SUN
Body powerful and well formed, but rather bony; face and forehead large, hair and complexion usually light, inclined to baldness; eyes commanding and complexion clear.

MARS
Body strong and socky but not overly tall, deportment military; hair red or black, often curly or wiry; eyes quick and sharp; complexion often very ruddy, face livid when angry.

JUPITER
Body large and well formed, inclined to become portly in advancing years; chest wide; forehead high; eyes widely spaced and kindly; hair dark and wavy; attitude paternal.

SATURN
Body slender and angular with large bones - back bends with incresing years; features stern, eyes small and beady; hair dark and curly, complexion indifferent.

URANUS
Body slender, but of pleasing appearance, features irregular but prepossessing; eyes large, brilliant and keen, usually light; some types very ascetic in appearance; this type often gives the impression of being effeminate.

NEPTUNE
Body slender and very finely organized; head long, features sharp, expression often cruel, always mysterious; hair retreats from temples; eyes hypnotic.


I tried these, using my own chart and that of HeWhoKnows: I am a blend of Moon and Uranus (those are fairly closely tied for dominance, but are not way out ahead of the other planets). I was Moony as a child, but in maturity less so, maybe moving towards the Uranus type. As my father had Aquarius Sun, like me, and we did look alike, I guess that's inherited.







Himself is a blend of Sun and Mars, again closely tied, (with Venus a close 3rd.) Bony - yes. Inclined to baldness, yes, not overly tall, ok. Face red when angry - yes (not often). From Venus: soft voice, eyes large and wandering.(Hmmm........)

Extremely extreme.

During 2007 Oklahoma experienced some of the most extreme weather in the state's history. Oklahoma has a reputation for experiencing extreme weather, lying in Tornado Alley, as it does, centre of the nation, high pressure and low pressure colliding from mountains, plains, desert, Gulf coast - a fine mixing pot! 2007, though, brought extremely extreme weather to the state. According to a report in our local newspaper, on no less than eight occasions during the year federal disaster aid was made available through presidential declaration. No other state has ever had as many presidential disaster declarations in one year.

Oklahoma achieved statehood on 17 Nov 1907. Astrologically the state could be said to have been "born" under the zodiac sign of Scorpio. I'm doubtful about states, countries, governments and other inanimate entities having "signs" and charts, but I'm open to persuasion. Here's a thought which does kind of fit, if states were eligible for charts and Sun signs. Scorpio's ruler is Pluto, and during 2007 Pluto has been in a particularly significant area of Sagittarius - close to the Galactic Center. Sagittarius is known to relate to extremes of all kinds. The Galactic Center is thought to be something of a dynamo, which could, arguably, intensify that which is already extreme.







Oklahoma started 2007 with an ice storm which caused the biggest power blackout in state history. Spring and summer 2007 brought heavy rainfall, ending the drought but causing floods which devastated homes, floated vehicles, necessitated dramatic rescues, and shattered records. The year ended, almost as it had begun, with an ice storm, this time leaving 600,000 homes and businesses without power, and causing 29 deaths. We in the south-western section of the state were fortunate, and fared much better than those further north and east, experiencing only minimal disruption.

Was this extreme weather, occurring while Pluto transited Sagittarius and the Galactic Center, a coincidence? There's climate change to add to the query too. I don't know the answer - coincidence, the thin end of climate change, or astrology? A mix of all three perhaps.

Political Fantasy

Some astrologers have said that astrological portents indicate women will soon be taking an increasingly powerful role in the world. I think this had connection to some of the more recently discovered celestial bodies, such as Sedna and Eris. It was bound to happen though - eventually, celestial bodies or not. The die was cast many Moons ago, in the west, when women fought and won the right to vote.

"The Amazing Mrs. Pritchard" (TV and DVD) fits the theme of female power very well, albeit a tale of pure fantasy. Some fantasies take us right out of our own world and into another, even stranger, one. "Mrs Pritchard" leaves us in a reality we recognise, while creating a fantastic, unrealistic but wish-fulfilling plotline. There have been a couple of movies along vaguely similar lines, but still in male-dominant mode - "Dave" with Kevin Kline and "Man of the Year" with Robin Williams both played with the idea of an unlikely person becoming President of the USA.

British author, Sally Wainwright, explained her motivation for writing the series:
"During the last election (UK) I found that I didn't really want to vote for anybody because they all seemed as bad as each other. I thought it would be great fun to write an epic story with a central character who was prepared to stand up and point this out. Mrs Pritchard is bold enough, or some may say daft enough, to stand for parliament on the assumption that she can do just as badly as any of them but at least she will be honest". The mini-series has been screened on TV in both the UK and USA, perhaps elsewhere too. It's now available on DVD.

Jane Horrocks plays the lead, Mrs. Ros Pritchard, an ultra-capable and outspoken supermarket manager in a northern English town who (and here's the fantasy) becomes Prime Minister of Britain. She's fed up with the state of politics. Her view that "the people" need to get closer to politics, be part of the scene, resonates with other women and the British public in general to such an extent that the supermarket magnate (her boss) donates 10 million pounds to the cause, and Ros Pritchard runs as leader of The Purple Alliance. Many other women, all over Britain join the Alliance to run "on her platform". She acquires, through good luck, good diplomacy, or reasons to be revealed later in the series, the services of some politically experienced women, defectors from both sides of the political divide. This brings a necessary feel of feasibility to the story's fantasmagorical premise.

Performances from every member of the cast are outstanding, dialogue and characterisation, believable. Appearing with Jane Horrocks as her able assistants and cabinet members, and sharing the applause are Janet McTeer, Geraldine James and Jodhi May.

Jane Horrocks (born 18 January 1964, Rawtenstall, UK) plays Ros Pritchard. Actress Jane Horrocks is one of those Saturn hybrids I wrote about on Saturday. Sun in Capricorn, with Mars and Saturn in Aquarius. The reason these four women blend so naturally into the storyline, perhaps owes something to their astrology as well as their undoubted acting ability. Horrocks' character, Mrs. Pritchard, is the driving force of the plot, and Jane has the astrological makeup to be able to live that story - the combination of Cap/Aqua common sense humanitarianism.




Janet McTeer (8 May 1961, Newcastle on Tyne, UK )plays Catherine Walker - Chancellor of the Exchequer &Deputy Prime Minister. She's a defector from the Tory (Conservative, right wing) party and her tradition and establishment loving Taurus Sun fits the role well.



Geraldine James (6 July 1950, London) = Hilary Rees-Benson, Home Secretary.
Geraldine James, a sensitive, empathetic Cancer Sun defects from "the other side", the more left-leaning Liberal Democrats.






Jodhi May (May 1975).- Miranda Lennox =Press Secretary. I was unable to find Jodhi May's full date of birth, but a brief article about her states that she is a very private person, she has no TV at home, and does not do the celebrity social circuit - which leads me to suspect her May Sun would be in Taurus rather than Gemini.

The four women's natal Suns blend together quite well, in real life, being all in Earth or Water signs.

Here's author Sally Wainwright, I could find no birth data at all for her. Full marks to the author, and of course, the casting crew for a very entertaining show, in line with current events both earthly and celestial!

The series left more than one loose end, perhaps a sequel will follow.

Which one's the conservative?

Politics is likely to be the number one news item throughout 2008. The outcome of November's presidential election will affect more than the United States, it has potential to affect the whole planet in one way or another. I'm going to start the year by looking at natal charts of two men, one from each side of the USA's political spectrum. Which chart belongs to the conservative? I've been unable to find a way to completely hide the chart-owners' names, so that's a silly question for anyone familiar with American TV. (Click on image to enlarge)



Even with names erased, it wouldn't be a difficult choice. The chart (left) with Saturn in its own domain, Capricorn, the most conservative sign of the zodiac, along with Sun, Venus, Mars and Mercury, is almost certain to belong to a person who leans sharply rightward politically, its owner is Sean Hannity, who co-hosts a TV talk show with the owner of the other natal chart, Alan Colmes.

The second chart (on the right) wouldn't, I think, necessarily belong to a politically left-leaning individial, but I'd be surprised if it belonged to someone as dogmatic as Hannity, who was born in New York City, 30 December 1961. (Both charts are calculated for 12 noon as birth times are unknown)

Alan Colmes' natal Sun is in very early Libra, with Venus, Mercury and Saturn in Virgo. A diplomatic, charming and mentally-driven Sun, together with three personal planets in mutable (non-dogmatic), and critically minded Virgo might equally describe someone moderately conservative or moderately liberal politically. If Colmes had Uranus close to his natal ascendant, or Aquarius rising, I'd be reasonably sure he would lean politically left. With another mutable sign rising he'd likely be more of a centrist. He is the left-leaning liberal of the pair, though often not leaning as far left as I'd like to see.
Alan Colmes was born New York City, 24 September 1950.

Both these guys have Jupiter in Aquarius, in Hannity's case it opposes Pluto, in Colmes' chart it lies inconjunct Pluto. Here's a fitting line from Robert Pelletier's interpretation of Jupiter opposition Pluto, from "Planets in Aspect".

"You are disposed to question every ideology and to challenge dogma by asserting your own..............." In Hannity's chart the planets are in Fixed signs Aquarius/Leo which emphasises a dogmatic attitude.

On Jupiter inconjunct Pluto,(Colmes), Robert Pelletier says:

"You need to become fully informed about your surroundings to protect yourself from intimidation (by Hannity and his pals?) When you accept an opportunity, it is your spiritual responsibility to distinguish right from wrong "What's in it for me?" isn't sufficient justification for everything you do."

Of the two, I'd say that Colmes is the more incisive interviewer - his Virgo planets proclaim it. Hannity is more likely to become belligerent (natal Mars conjunct Sun). Unruly Uranus in Virgo trines Hannity's Sun/Mars/Venus in Capricorn - trines are harmonious aspects, yet revolutionary Uranus trining traditional Saturn's domain sounds less than serene.

So much in natal astrology depends on ascendant and house positions, that information is missing without birth times. But even with only planetary positions as guide, it's still easy to see which of these two men is the more conservative.

After drafting this post yesterday, I visited to Alan Colmes' new blog, LiberalLand, and followed a link there to Newshound where there is mention of an astrologer's predictions for the two men. I'm going to add my two cents worth and say that I'd rather be in Alan's shoes than Sean's in the coming two years. I've had a Pluto transit to Venus (coming up for Sean), and....well, it was a very difficult (and life-changing) time to get through. I've had a second Saturn Return, too, and Alan has one due round the time of the November election - I'd be surprised if something that happens around that time doesn't change his career in some way, and mark the start of a new life chapter.

The caption on Alan Colmes' photograph, below, is just right for a Sun Libran!

New Year's Eve with T.S. Eliot

This magazine cover welcomed in 1936. I couldn't resist that cute little astrologer! There's a bigger version below.

Waiting to welcome in 2008, I'm in the mood for some T.S. Eliot. His poetry isn't to be greedily swallowed whole. I find that it's indigestible that way. Picked at like an elegant plate of Cordon Bleu cuisine (not that I've ever tasted any) it's quite beautiful.

"For last year's words belong to last year's language
And next year's words await another voice.
And to make an end is to make a beginning."
~T.S. Eliot, "Little Gidding"

He was born in St Louis, Missouri on 26 September 1888.
Top Synergy.com gives his time of birth as 7.45am - Libra rising. I'm not sure how reliable that is. It does add more emphasis to already well-emphasised Libra.



Sun, Uranus Venus and Mercury all in the sign of the scales, ruled by Venus, planet of the arts, with Venus and Mercury straddling the ascendant (if that birth time is to be trusted.)

Three planets in Gemini with Moon/Pluto trining Sun, Moon trines Uranus - communication and the Arts very well integrated. As an embarrassment of riches Jupiter (the publishing planet) in Sagittarius (sign of its rulership) sextiles Eliot's Sun, whilst opposing Pluto/Neptune. Mars in Sagittarius opposes Gemini Moon. Saturn in Leo sextiles both Uranus and Moon.

My first thought was that this is an extremely well integrated chart. There is a predominance of Air, indicating a person who "lives in their mind", some Fire but no planets in Water or Earth. Positive polarity predominates - goes off the grid in fact!

Biographical detail is thin on the ground, but the small amount which follows ties in nicely with his natal chart.

"I am an Anglo-Catholic in religion, a classicist in literature, and a royalist in politics." T.S. Eliot so defined, and even exaggerated, his own conservatism. The ideas of this stimulating writer were perhaps traditional, but the way in which he expressed them was extremely modern Eliot was one of the first to reject conventional verse forms and language. His experiments with free expression contributed to his reputation as one of the most influential writers of his time."(Tradition-loving Saturn sextile inventive, futuristic Uranus)

"Eliot held many different kinds of jobs throughout his lifetime, as writing poetry was not and still is not the most lucrative of occupations when one is not well-known. His occupations varied from schoolmaster, bank clerk, free-lance writer, assistant editor, editor, publisher, and even professor of poetry at Harvard. (Versatile Gemini Moon with Pluto/Neptune well integrated with other Air planets)
Being an introspective kind of person,(Sun in 12th house) as most poets are, Eliot underwent a profound religious calling. After much soul-searching and inner turmoil, Eliot was confirmed as a member of the Anglican church in 1927. This brought him a much more positive attitude towards life that can be seen in his writings after this date." (Jupiter and Mars in Sagittarius may be connected with his religious/philosophical traits).

It is rather difficult to find much information on T. S. Eliot, which is quite hard to understand, considering the profound impact he had on American and English literature. However, it can be explained that since Eliot was a very private man and also forbade in his will an official biography, the dearth of information on Eliot is justifiable. (Libra planets all in privacy-loving 12th house, except Mercury, which lies on ascendant at this birth time. I suspect that Mercury may actually have been in 12th house, also.)

T.S. Eliot died on January 4, 1965.

Another sample of his work - a favourite piece of my own. It comes at the end of "The Four Quartets".

"We shall not cease from exploration
And the end of all our exploring
Will be to arrive where we started
And know the place for the first time.
Through the unknown, unremembered gate
When the last of earth left to discover
Is that which was the beginning;
At the source of the longest river
The voice of the hidden waterfall
And the children in the apple-tree
Not known, because not looked for
But heard, half-heard, in the stillness
Between two waves of the sea.
Quick now, here, now, always—
A condition of complete simplicity
(Costing not less than everything)
And all shall be well and
All manner of thing shall be well
When the tongues of flames are in-folded
Into the crowned knot of fire
And the fire and the rose are one."

(Sources : brief biographies HERE and HERE
Magazine cover illustration (top & below) is by J.C. Leyendecker.)

2007, My Year of the Blog

2007, my third full year in the United States of America is coming to an end. I'm out of the "another-fine-mess-I-got-me-into" stage, and into the "this- could-be-so-good-if-only-more-people-woke-up-and-voted-differently" stage. And, it was my first full year of blogging (I still find that word ugly).

Transiting Uranus conjunct my natal Jupiter, at 6* Pisces and close to natal midheaven could be credited with irritating my blogging-itch, in late-2005. Whether that itch will ease and disappear as Uranus(ruler of my Aquarius Sun)moves ever further away from natal Jupiter, the publishing planet, I don't yet know.

At the start of each week I've felt doubtful that inspiration would stretch to fill a week's blogs, but most times, as if by magic, it has done so. Perhaps I should credit this to the fact that transiting Neptune (imagination) has been hovering very close to my re-located ascendant at 22 Aquarius.

I'm doing something now that I couldn't have visualised, or even considered that I could do, 5 years ago. Blogging is the result, for me, of a slow development. My first home computer, in 2001, was the springboard. Neptune was then conjunct my natal Aquarius Sun. How about that! Uranus and Neptune have been taking it in turns to tease me.

Yesterday, a late commentor to one of my posts from a few weeks ago said that I should "move on", spend time on something with "solid results", why spend my time on "this"? My reply was "because I enjoy doing it, and to me each posting is a solid result that pleases me." If passing readers find anything of interest or amusement, it's a surprise bonus.

It was brought home to me, as I read Christmas letters from old friends in the UK, that not everyone of my generation has embraced the computer. Two friends expressed extreme distaste and unwillingness to even try using one. "I don't even know what a blog is", said another." I'd taken for granted that everyone would be as besotted with the opportunities offered by the internet as I am. HeWhoKnows and I are a matched pair though, he's been "at it" (in various ways), for much longer than I have. I guess it takes one to know one.

Saturn Hybrids

Saturn was traditional ruler of both Capricorn and Aquarius - adjacent signs, and the only adjacent pair with the same ruler. Modern astrology has Uranus as ruler of Aquarius. In spite of all three modern rulerships (Neptune/Pisces, Pluto/Scorpio being the other two), an underlying similarity - no, commonality is a better word - between traditional pairs of planets can be seen.

Carl Payne Tobey in his book "Astrology Primer for the Millions" wrote of similarities and differences between these pairs of zodiac signs. In past months I've featured his views about the people of Mercury(Gemini/Virgo),Venus(Taurus/Libra), Mars(Aries/Scorpio) and Jupiter (Pisces/Sagittarius). Links at foot of post.

In the case of Capricorn and Aquarius, Saturn's traditional rulerships, Mr. Tobey illuminates for us that the two signs have similar interests and drives, but approach them from opposite viewpoints. Capricorn is conservative by nature, Aquarius has distinctly progressive inclinations, one would wish to uphold the law, the other to change it.

I have the idea that these two, very different but adjacent signs with a common traditional ruler, can bring about a curious type of hybrid personality. Individuals with Sun in either Capricorn or Aquarius frequently have planet(s) in the other sign. (I have Sun in Aquarius, Mercury in Capricorn). Whilst I would never describe myself as in any way conservative, I do appreciate tradition as well as visions of a fairer future for all. Even so, I'm not a true Saturn hybrid because several other signs carry almost equal weight in my natal chart.

Distinct hybrid Aqua/Cap and Cap/Aqua personalities could partly account for the reason Sun Aquarius has a mixed reputation. I've heard people comment that "there are two kinds of Aquarians". I'd agree, and previously had put this down to generational traits. We're all astro-hybrids of one sort or another, but due to the juxtaposition of Capricorn & Aquarius, Saturn hybrids are of particular interest in view of their common ruler.

I've found it a little odd that some Sun Aquarians who particularly appeal to me fit, to my mind, a common pattern, but not that of textbook Aquarius. Three favourites - Paul Newman, Neil Diamond, Tom Selleck - are all Sun Aquarians with more Capricorn than Aquarius in their astrological makeup. Saturn hybrids!


Astrotheme tells me:
Newman has (rounded up/down) 43% Cap, 6% Aqua, 16%Scorpio.

Diamond 30%Cap, 10%Aqua, & 22% Taurus.

Selleck 30% Cap. 13% Aqua & 19% Leo.

Capricorn content outweighs Aquarius in all three cases. There are lots of other, similar examples, Aqua/Cap and Cap/Aqua, but this post would become tiresomely long if I quoted them all. Dick Cheney, Aquarius Sun, is not a Saturn hybrid. He = 30% Taurus, 22%Aquarius. His dominant planet is unruly Uranus, however.

The late Maya del Mar, astrologer, and Sun Aquarian was a Saturn hybrid, 23% Capricorn, 17% Aquarius. C.E.O.Carter, astrologer and Sun Aquarian was not a Saturn hybrid - 31% Aquarius but no Capricorn at all, Saturn comes in 4th in dominance among his planets. Astrologer Evangeline Adams wasn't a Saturn hybrid either. She had Sun in Aquarius, but her dominant sign by a wide margin was Pisces @ 46%, with Aquarius 17%.

Finally...attributes of Saturn's two zodiac signs are well known, but just a mention here of one or two points from Carl Payne Tobey's assessment:

Capricorn will tolerate frustrations, is very practical in outlook, insecure about material things, will not take unnecessary chances and will put up with a great deal for the sake of material security. Doesn't like change - makes them feel insecure. A true Capricorn wouldn't be likely to go into politics except perhaps locally, usually those who do enter this arena are mixed Capricorn/Aquarian types.

Aquarius sees into the future because the future and not the past is of interest. Divorce is more common in Aquarians than Capricorns - Capricorn is more likely "stick it out", for economic or other reasons. Aquarius has great curiosity, and inventive ability. Likes change and progress, doesn't fear the future in the way Capricorn does. Assumes and hopes that the future will be a surprise and when it is, Aquarius reacts automatically and knows what to do about it, while Capricorn must first get over the shock. Aquarius is open minded and something of a hobo by nature. A true Capricorn man would find it difficult to keep up with a true Aquarian wife - she likes freedom, isn't keen on routine.

(Two Saturn hybrids might get along pretty well though!)

Jupiter's People
Mars People
Venus People
Mercury's People

(Details of sign and planet percentages obtained from lists at Astrotheme.)