Sun signs on trial:)

Recently there was a hype about sun sign astrology. Astronomers pointed at the differences between the constellations and the astrological zodiac. Even though they are mistaken about the concept, they are a bit right. Astrology uses the picture in the sky to explain the character of persons born in a period that is not in line with the constellation of the period’s name any more. That is odd. Why is a Taurus like a bull (patient but don’t anger him…) referring to a constellation of the same antique name and say that that Taurus constellation and the picture have nothing to do with the sun sign Taurus. Of course people are confused, especially when ‘being a Taurus’ is all they know about their natal chart! The explanation about the seasons and Zero Aries is a valid one, but still doesn't correspond with the picture in the sky. That is why I am making a plea for an astrology without sun signs, as the devil's advocate and I am also the defender and judge (that is the good thing about being the writer:). 

REQUISITORY

Sun signs are confusing. They stand between real astrology and the people. Nobody 'is'  a sun sign, a chart is more than that. Sun signs are responsable for misconceptions about persons and about the art of astrology. Astrology was once the art of 'interpreting the picture of the sky'. But now the picture of the sky and the drawing of the astrologer are not the same anymore. Signs carry the 'wrong'  names and apart from that: they aren’t even exactly 1/12^th of the circle (30 degrees)! Pisces, for example, is a wider sign than Libra is. That is why more people have a Pisces Ascendant than a Libra Ascendant. The ascendants are corresponding with the width of the signs, but the sun signs are not. How to explain that to a modern guy or girl with lack of time? And then there is the number of signs. Someone says that there are 13 signs. For example: Walter Berg, using Ophiucus, it seems that Ophiucus, the sign number 十三 -　じゅうさん - (13 in Japanese, I hope:) is popular in Japan. And another one counts even 14 of them! They are multiplying! Maybe one of them is exactly right, but who is? 

I ask for the judge to find the sun signs guilty of fraud and send them out of the chart drawing forever! WHY do we go one with them? Skip them! 

 Who needs sun signs? Astrology can do without.

DEFENSE

I am sorry that you are confused, but my client is confused, too! Sun sign astrology is the portal to real astrology! How many of us started to study astrology after learning about sun signs? And they are valid! Isn't it true, that we can find differences in statistics that show us that for example Sagittarius and Aries drive faster and cause more accidents than Capricorn does? When Sun signs don't match, it is harder to keep a relationship going. Many examples on Astrology-love-romance.blogspot.com! The sun signs have a certain value and they are easy starters! They are also very popular. It won't help to skip them or to leave them out of the picture, because people will keep asking for them. 

Astrologers just need a zodiac! Maybe they could read a chart without using the signs, but their clients and readers don't buy it when they don't see the signs! That is my plea and I hope that the judge finds the sun signs not guilty and free to carry any name or to work (or not to work) in any system.

VERDICT

The defense understands the criticism? I see you nod, make a note of that! And do all of us understand the impact of skipping sun sign astrology for editors, authors, computer program makers, astrologers AND their audience? Maybe in the long term every could benefit from charts without sun signs, maybe we can read charts without using them, but do we and should we want it? And can we afford it!?

Millions of people who don't get any further than their sun sign and maybe the ascending sign, just because they don't want to calculate charts or learn about astrology or see an astrologer.  Is that reason enough to "let the sun (sign) shine in", forever, however? I have come to a verdict after many considerations. The sun signs are not guilty. They can't help it that they are being misunderstood and misplaced. They are just one of the tools of astrology, but the public made them the main object of interest. I write about astrology, too. About 80% of what I write on this blog is without mentioning a house or a sun sign. That is on purpose*). But I can't (yet) skip that 20%. I am guilty.

 =====

*) I hardly mention houses or signs and prefer to work with tight aspects, midpoint combinations and prominent placements (angular, square Ascendant or without aspects in sign or orb 5 degrees). 

LINK

Cosmobiology explained by Selfgrowth

About Reinhold Ebertin (Wiki)

http://astropost.blogspot.com/2010/08/prominent-positions-like-in-august-18.html

This post is about the meaning of prominent positions with an example chart.

Picture this...sun signs and Ophiucus

Yesterday morning, shortly after 11, I opened my StarWalk App (great tool!) on my Iphone and watched the South-Western part of the sky, just for fun. It happened to be the moment that Ophiuchus (Slang/Slangendrager in this picture) was right opposite me, just above Libra (Weegschaal) with Venus on the edge of both and Saturn just above the horizon. Even Pluto is part of the picture. Saturn and Pluto are on either side of Venus. Of course, all that was invisible for the eye. It was daylight and even if it were night: there were clouds. If I hadn't had StarWalks, I would have been able to guess the positions of Venus, Saturn and Pluto when I looked direction South-West, but I would have been completely wrong about the constellations if I used the chart of that moment:

See?

This morning the Sun had not risen yet, when I tried my StarWalk App again:

The Sun (Zon) and Mars are close and just as close is 'Steenbok' (Capricorn for you). Sun in the constellation Capricorn, not in Aquarius today. Mercury has just risen.

Pictures say more than words do. They led me to the next post. And to a lot of questions about the length of signs, Ascendants and Midheavens and Sunsigns. Personally, I'd like to see the picture of my StarWalk correspond with the picture of the chart. That is because I like to think that astrology started with watching the picture of the sky, with fantasies about the names of constellations and with thinking of what the picture of the sky meant for us, on earth.

A few days back I tried 'public transportation' again and of course I ended in the wrong corridor, just like an English speaking man who said: 'I am confused! I want to get out!' 'But', I said, 'How did you get in without a ticket? You need a ticket to get out'. 'Does it matter?' he said.' Now that I am in, I want to get out'. And he followed me right through the doors, pushing them away by force and freed himself. It is a bit like I feel today.

The picture of the sky is beautiful. How I would like it to be the picture of today's chart...But even sidereal astrology doesn't produce the right picture (because the signs have different sizes!). BTW It's that we know that someone needed to name this constellation 'Capricorn' but I don't see a goat at all, without those lines. The history of naming the constellations is a mystery in itself. And that brings me to the next post...