Liz Greens Astrology Psychology

[Shining Ray]

deleted post

[prof_pant]

Hi I am a new member from india.If you want to read real good stuff including astro-psychology read Dr David Frawley and Robert Svoboda's writings on Vedic Astrology.

Regards,

Prof Pant

[Lissa]

Hi Shining,

I really don't know what to do but I think Liz Greene wanted her birth data to be protected.There was a bit of a mess in the Astrodiesnt forum with this,the moderators deleted some posts because some people were talking about her chart.I personally have never read a book by hers(I was soooo close to buying the book"Saturn" for a fairly cheap price at a book fair in Lisbon but a man got to the book first,believe it or not if I had got there1minute earlier I would have got the book,me and the man got to the books at the same time but I started looking at the horary books and so he found the book before,it was the last copy they had!!!Darn it,my Mars in Gemini felt like killing the man with one of the other books),I understand that she is very well-known and well loved by the astrology students so I understand there must be lots of people curious about what her chart,on the other hand I also think it's important to respect people's privacy.I'm quite biased about this but you're the moderator so you decide.

All the best,
Lissa

[prof_pant]

dear shining,

from your name you seem to be vibrating sun's/venus energy.pschyology fascinates people of water signs,ascendant/sun/moon sign a water sign or moon with nodes.what aspects of pschyology fascintes you?

prof pant

[StarNur]

Ive read some Liz Greene articles. Have one of her books which I havent been able to get into yet. Im however not a big fan of her writing. Maybe this is because I'm not a big fan of alot of the stuff out there in the field of psychology? She comes with fascinating ideas, but I don't necessarily beileve them. Actually I find some of her interpretations to be more unnecessarily focused on the negatives, most of which I don't believe to be an issue, than positives.

Her Sun is conjunct my Saturn.
Her Saturn is opposite my Mercury
Her Sun is quincunx my Sun.
Her NN is square my NN.
Her Pluto is opposite my Sun.
Her Moon is conjunct my Venus.
Her Uranus opposite my Venus

[Spin]

Shining Ray, I'm a Liz Greene fan too. I have almost all her books, although a few are too myth-oriented and dense for me (at least they were--I should reread them now). I consider her Saturn book one of the best on that planet. Also insightful is the book, The Outer Planets and their Cycles, a collection of lectures given in the early 80's, which in one she predicts the collapse of the Soviet Union, years before it happened.

I was also lucky enough to attend one of her lectures and she's as impressive as a speaker as she is an astrologer and writer.

[jagetoile]

deleted post.

[Spin]

I just scanned my bookcase and counted 10 Liz Greene books, some of them co-authored with others. Astrology for Lovers is probably the only book I don't have.

As a Pisces you may appreciate this quote from her "Dynamics of the Unconscious" book.

"I don't think I would call Pisces bitter. But world-weariness is perhaps an appropriate description. By the time one has got to the end of the zodiac, one has seen it all. There is a quality of sadness in Pisces, which is possibly one of the chief motivations toward the search for transcendent meaning which is so powerful in this sign. It is as though Pisces carries within it the experiences of the previous eleven signs and has lost the capacity to get attached to any one path or object in life. This melancholy quality is innate, although it is not melancholy in the Capricorn way--it is more a quest or a higher and deeper reality which can make sense of the transience of earthly life. It is this sadness, and an innate empathy with all suffering life, which creates such a fund of compassion in Pisces."

And that really does describe the sign's sadness and, at times, weariness. This Pisces, with Sun, Mercury, Mars there, was dragging herself around tonight, feeling unmotivated, until I began flipping through Greene's books again.

My astrology books are a treasured part of my library but I haven't read them in many years. Looks as if it's time to start--with Liz Greene of course. Thanks for the reminder. :)

[Lunar Pisces]

As a norm, birth times are a matter of public record so we don't really get to say much about "protecting" our own data. We can ask people to be discreet and respectful in terms of using that data. In Greene's case, she does have power over whether that data is posted on her own site, but I'm afraid anywhere else is beyond her control. She certainly can ask people to be respectful - and I think in most cases that request would be heeded.

On the other hand, I have serious issues with famous astrolgoers who try to hide their birth data yet freely acquire and interpret data of other famous people without those persons' consent. It's a bit hypocritical in my opinion. I don't know if that's a common tactic on Greene's part, but I definitely know many other astrologers who do that.

I like Greene a lot myself and have gotten a lot from her, but I wouldn't look to her as a sole source of astrological learning. I recommened you diversify your resources a bit more.

[Spin]

On the other hand, I have serious issues with famous astrolgoers who try to hide their birth data yet freely acquire and interpret data of other famous people without those persons' consent. It's a bit hypocritical in my opinion.

I like Greene a lot myself and have gotten a lot from her, but I wouldn't look to her as a sole source of astrological learning. I recommened you diversify your resources a bit more.
I agree--it's very hypocritical to freely examine other's charts but hide your own.

Who would you recommend besides Liz Greene? I haven't bought astrology books in ages since I now learn by doing but some oldies but goodies for me are Donna Cunningham, Joanne Wickenburg, and Tracy Marks.

[starlink]

Hello there Spin! I can highly recommend Stephen Arroyo, he is fabulous and it is marvellous to read. Most of his books have workshop parts in them which is great because you get all these questions (you have yourself) and answers from him. Great astrologer, really. I have:
1. Astrology, psychology and the four elements (an energy approach to astrology and it's use in the counseling arts)
2. Relationships and life cycles
3. Astrology, Karma and Transformation
4. The practice and profession of Astrology and
5. Practicing the cosmic Science (which is actually the same book as no.4, but it expands the scope of the subjects considered and has an update on observatons on developments that seem increasingly important today, such as the extensive use of computers in astrology, new astrological methods and interpretive factors that he has come to regard as extraordinarily important, from the perspective of over 30 years experience in his field.) So maybe better to buy this one.

Also on my favorite lists are all books from Marion March and Joan McEvers
(The only way to...Learn Astrology, Volumes I,II & III-
Excellent for beginners and advanced students alike.

[wilsontc]

http://www.geocities.com/wilsontctc/Author_list.htm

[Libra20]

I'll second Starlink on recommending Stephen Arroyo :)
________
PAXIL ATTORNEYS (http://www.classactionsettlements.org/lawsuit/paxil/)

[starlink]

Nicely done Tim, thanks for mentioning this link. Extremely useful, especially for beginning students. I will mention it to others if I see the need for it.

[StarNur]

Shining Ray,

my only LG book is the one you need. I usually buy my astrology books second hand, and I found "The Astrology of Fate" for $2 at a second hand store. Even though I don't agree with some of her ideas, I still like to know the other points of views and theories out there.

The reason I probably don't own her other books is because from what Ive read from her so far I get the impression that she writes in a way to convince (or brainwash) the reader of what their problems are. I do feel like I learn a great deal from her writing. Shes very knowledgeable in astrology. But then I feel the other portion of her writing is BS; mainly her connections to different schools of psychological thought. Well, even if I find some of her examples to be way off and unnecessarily depressing at times I do find I can still extrapolate other meanings from them.

[jagetoile]

deleted post.

[Natasha]

Its true Liz Greene does not reveal her birth chart. I only know of one discussion she had about her birth chart which talks about how she got into astrology.
She discussed transits & progressions.
If you work backwards thru the ephemerous from what she said you can figure out her chart. It is possible that her chart was constucted that way.

Whatever she is a fabulous astrologer & has done a lot for psychological astrology. While Howard Sapportas was alive they produced some amazing books & lectures. But now she continues to write wonderful books & give amazing seminars.
Whatever her birth details she has made an amazing contribution to astrology.

[Natasha]

Yes that is the reference I was thinking of also. I have never seen Liz Greene speak as she hasnt been to Australia to my knowledge but if she ever does I would definately love to go to the conference.
But do have most of her books.

[Nexus7]

I have seen that Liz Greene does not as a rule talk about her chart, and I did read her recount of what happened regarding her first reading in The Astrology of Fate.

Another astrologer who wrote extensively about other people and their charts whilst keeping her own data secret was Linda Goodman.

So it can happen and does beg the question of how such a person relates to the power implicit in having full knowledge of another's chart, whilst remaining inscrutable themselves. I have read Liz Greene's 'live' scripts of where she reads for members in her audiences and workshops and did conclude that I would not be signing up for one myself, whilst still very much enjoying her books. I can relate to what someone here commented about the potential here for being virtualy brainwashed and would rather now trust my own insights on my own chart than those imposed by any self-styled guru.

I do can understand why some people might get secretive about their charts. I have had experiences myself that mean now that I still do not feel ready to be too open about my chart in any great hurry again. Perhaps Liz Greene was so deeply hurt by that original astrologer that on some level, she never really got over it?

I believe she also might have kept her own data under wraps in order to maintain her profesional distance, in the way a counsellor looks exclusively at the issues of the client, rather than allow the client to project or use unduly what they know of the counsellor.

I do not agree with her perspective on a lot of things either, although reading her book 'Relating' at a tender age was a real eye-opener. I think there are always wonderful insighs to be had from all her books, but I would not necessarily want to buy into her philosophy and take on things at all times.To give a small example, in The Astrology of Fate: I thought her piece on autism in the family, for example, was fascinating on some levels, but incredibly flawed in others - and the Mercury/Saturn square she produced for her subject with autism was one of the most extraordinary-looking squares I have ever seen. Somehow, I don't think her views on the topic would win her many friends amongst autism lobbyists nowadays, either but then to be fair, the book was written maybe before Bettelheim's views were discounted.

I recently bought her book on Uranus and noted the way she confronted one participant for being Uranian in a negative sense by not 'counting' a trine because the orb was considered too wide. Liz Greene very much in the drivng seat again.....

[jagetoile]

deleted post.

[Sag Moon]

I have seen that Liz Greene does not as a rule talk about her chart, and I did read her recount of what happened regarding her first reading in The Astrology of Fate.

Another astrologer who wrote extensively about other people and their charts whilst keeping her own data secret was Linda Goodman.

So it can happen and does beg the question of how such a person relates to the power implicit in having full knowledge of another's chart, whilst remaining inscrutable themselves. I have read Liz Greene's 'live' scripts of where she reads for members in her audiences and workshops and did conclude that I would not be signing up for one myself, whilst still very much enjoying her books. I can relate to what someone here commented about the potential here for being virtualy brainwashed and would rather now trust my own insights on my own chart than those imposed by any self-styled guru.

I do can understand why some people might get secretive about their charts. I have had experiences myself that mean now that I still do not feel ready to be too open about my chart in any great hurry again. Perhaps Liz Greene was so deeply hurt by that original astrologer that on some level, she never really got over it?

I believe she also might have kept her own data under wraps in order to maintain her profesional distance, in the way a counsellor looks exclusively at the issues of the client, rather than allow the client to project or use unduly what they know of the counsellor.

I do not agree with her perspective on a lot of things either, although reading her book 'Relating' at a tender age was a real eye-opener. I think there are always wonderful insighs to be had from all her books, but I would not necessarily want to buy into her philosophy and take on things at all times.To give a small example, in The Astrology of Fate: I thought her piece on autism in the family, for example, was fascinating on some levels, but incredibly flawed in others - and the Mercury/Saturn square she produced for her subject with autism was one of the most extraordinary-looking squares I have ever seen. Somehow, I don't think her views on the topic would win her many friends amongst autism lobbyists nowadays, either but then to be fair, the book was written maybe before Bettelheim's views were discounted.

I recently bought her book on Uranus and noted the way she confronted one participant for being Uranian in a negative sense by not 'counting' a trine because the orb was considered too wide. Liz Greene very much in the drivng seat again.....
"A Ur trine to wide"

Luckily my first astrologer noted this trine and it has a great influence on my life. Mn=24 Sag Ur=17Leo

I also have Ju 2 Cap and consider it a wide Conjunct and it is one of the best conjunctions to have per Carl Jung.

[starlink]

Mn=24 Sag Ur=17Leo Yes, it looks wide indeed but only because Moon is outgoing. If Moon is ingoing I do allow bigger orbs as well. Normally 7 degrees is OK with Moon and Sun (ingoing). Liz apparently goes up till 8 or maybe even larger degrees. I take a Maximum of 10° only for oppositions from Sun and Moon, all others 7°. Starlink.

Oh, btw. I have a Mars-Venus conjunction of 6 degrees and it is very prominent in my chart. I feel it constantly!

[Nexus7]

I don't know in which book she discusses anal fixations or transcribes the reactions to her ideas. I would hope that it does not all boil down to the equation that if the client disagrees with her on any point at all, then ipso facto they must be maladjusted. That would certainly still smack of an unequal power relationship to me.

The square given for the chart of a woman with autism was of Mercury at 6 degrees, Saturn at 26 of the fixed signs. I should think that with orbs of 6 degrees, 8 or whatever, there is planty of room for debate over whether an aspect is operative or not though, admittedly.

As said, I should think that any mother of a child with autism nowadays might be less than happy with the position adopted by Greene in The Astrology of Fate. I have often wondered what one or two autobiographers with autism might make of some of the other insights she had to make abou the condition in that book, however.

[holly]

I lost all respect for Liz Greene after I stumbled upon this particularly disturbing comment:

"Recognising that erotic feelings may be shared between parent and child does not constitute an excuse for child sexual abuse. Nor does it imply an "abnormal" relationship. But children can be very seductive, in a childlike way. They are "trying on" their sexuality. They neither want nor expect an adult sexual response, but they need to discover their own physical and emotional identity through expressing it to the parent."

and

"They are not pathological; they are human, and intrinsically healthy."

I don't agree that children are in any way sexual, and wonder about the character of someone who does.

http://www.astro.com/astrology/in_triangle_e.htm

[Moondance]

Holly, for heaven's sake, of course children are sexual-among the cells to first differentiate in the development of the foetus are sexual. Foetus' are awash at different times with sex hormones and are born with a gender. Granted, they are, or should be, totally "innocent", but our sexuality is an inherent trait or bundle of traits,maybe. This doesn't mean they should be preyed upon by warped adults, it just means they're people.

Re: Liz Greene, her "Saturn, a new look at an old devil", is great. I just bought two copies, one for myself and one for a highly Saturnian friend. At the time Greene was getting her education, I suspect maternal abandonment and the many devastating problems it causes was confused with autism sometimes. At any rate, Bruno B. and other leaders in the field were convinced that the child withdrew because of a massive lack of nurturing. Today we know the causes are usually physical, but this was unknown at the time.
A friend in Australia told me she got her degree from some notorious American rightwing Christian diploma mill, and I didn't much like to hear THAT, but I still think the work I have seen is very very good. Overall, her work seems quite brilliant.:)

[holly]

No, I still disagree. Children don't make sexual advances at adults, as Liz Greene suggests. Children don't even know what sex is!

[gaer]

Since this topic talks about Liz Greene and her supposedly reluctance to disclose her own natal chart, does anyone have any idea if the information shown here is correct?

http://www.astrotheme.fr/en/portraits/qn3V8kEpKg6y.htm (http://www.astrotheme.fr/en/portraits/qn3V8kEpKg6y.htm)

I wonder if this is simply made up, invented, or information distributed that is wrong, on purpose?

Gaer

[starlink]

Hi Shiny! Interesting read, especially for me because I have not one book of Liz Green in my library! For some inexplicable reason I just never choose one of her books to read. I still dont feel like getting one, even after reading several articles about her and finding them most interesting. Wonder why.....? I cant love or hate her for anything (yet) Maybe I should buy one.
Cheers, Starlink

[jagetoile]

deleted post.

[jagetoile]

deleted post.

[Nexus7]

Here is another article where Liz Greene's views on homosexuality, was challenged in her book relating and the chapter on Sex life of the psyche. This person was not too happy with her thoughts on the subject as well as other astrologers views on homosexuality in the natal chart. It is hard to talk about these subjects without a strong reaction from somebody.


Article on Homosexuality and Astrology (http://www.aplaceinspace.net/Pages/PClampHomophobia.html)

I read that article a while ago. I did not think it betrayed a strong reaction necessarily, it seemed quite a fair critique to me, rather than one where the writer's buttons have been unduly pushed.

I enjoy Liz Greene's books, still enjoy them and will probably read more and can see that she may well have great insights to offer her clients. However, my point with the piece I raised on autism is that however deeply perceptive and insightful she might be, she might well still on occasion be wrong, make mistakes and not incapable of having buttons and prejudices along with some of these insights occasionally herself.

I have no doubt that children are extemely sexual, over mother's milk, poo and beyond, though I would also question whether or not a 6-year-old, for example, is really capable of coming onto an adult.

Venus-Pluto asptects in the natal chart, Mars-Pluto or any other Pluto combination - I could admire Liz Greene too for going where angels most certainly would fear to tread in looking at the implications for Fate in such a child's chart, but ultimately, can there still be any justification for saying that such a child in any way 'wanted' to be abused?

I am not saying that Liz Greene is making that conclusion, but I think this is still a heading in a direction that maybe quite a few more people might be unwilling to tread. It is only recently that the law changed regarding the victims of rape in court in not assuming that their word might in any way be unreliable.

It is also worth bearing that she did change her mind on one or two things. In her book Relating, she was very much Jung's disciple, not just in his more Hermetic insights, but in possibly some of his more old-fashioned views too, particularly on women. I remember once coming across a Jungian lecturer who liked Greene who, when I tried to quiz her on one or two things, tried to suggest to me that all this stuff must be totally beyond my feeble comprehension! As far as she was concerned (excluding herself, of course), as a woman, as I could only be a 'feeling' type and therefore not especially bright, or rigidly animus possessed!

In her Uranus book, however, Greene is a lot more critical of Jung's atitude in this direction. Time or trends in thought can be a great decider in how you 'choose' to categorise someone's issues or problems.

[jagetoile]

deleted post.

[jagetoile]

deleted post.

[gaer]

This was my question:
Since this topic talks about Liz Greene and her supposedly reluctance to disclose her own natal chart, does anyone have any idea if the information shown here is correct?

http://www.astrotheme.fr/en/portraits/qn3V8kEpKg6y.htm (http://www.astrotheme.fr/en/portraits/qn3V8kEpKg6y.htm)

I wonder if this is simply made up, invented, or information distributed that is wrong, on purpose?

Gaer
Was my question totally ignroed because it was boring, because it did not seem to be part of the topic, or because for some reason my questions and thoughts are no longer considered important enough to comment on??????????????????????????

Gaer

[Nexus7]

No, not boring at all.

Someone who went to a lot of workshops in London showed me a copy of her chart, it looks a lot like the illicit one he showed me.

Sun on Midheaven came as no surprise to me somehow, nor did the Moon Uranus opposition, though it is a relatively wide one.

[Moondance]

Boy, this thread has convinced me to go get a Greene psych chart done. I had no idea she had written on the range of subjects you are all citing. Yummy. After Christmas when I'm not broke, it's the bookstore for me.

I don't mean to imply that children (healthy children)go around seducing adults, but I think children approaching puberty often "try on" their sexuality by flirting with adults, even unconciously. This doesn't excuse any adult that responds, of course. It is our job to help children mature, not to exploit their immature behavior.To do so is criminal.

It is also a common phenomenom that when we first are exposed to an astrologer, or school of psychology, that has strong personal and intellectual meaning for us, that we sometimes casually assign this or that label to others. It's human nature, like when medical students get convinced that they or someone close has a disease they are studying. Liz Greene is one of those that should be read with gusto and applied with caution, I think. When I get my Greene psych chart done, I'll report back. :)

G, I assume no one had an answer, I'm sure no one meant to slight.

[gaer]

No, not boring at all.
Someone who went to a lot of workshops in London showed me a copy of her chart, it looks a lot like the illicit one he showed me.

I see. By illicit I assume you mean not okayed by Liz Greene. I suppose we'll never know then.

I don't mean to imply that children (healthy children)go around seducing adults, but I think children approaching puberty often "try on" their sexuality by flirting with adults, even unconciously. This doesn't excuse any adult that responds, of course. It is our job to help children mature, not to exploit their immature behavior.To do so is criminal.

There is a fine line between understand what sex is, which I don't believe small children do, and enjoying sexual feelings (genitals), which small children most definitely DO do—often to the embarassment of adults who don't quite know how to handle it.

G, I assume no one had an answer, I'm sure no one meant to slight.
I assume at this point that the site I linked to is, at best, questionable.

Gaer