gimzo23
Well-known member
Is the elements analysis in examining natal charts not a little overrated and overall not too telling at all? I mean, half of the planets are either generational or not personal anyway and thus aren't really too significant in their sign positions. So I don't see how looking at the elements strength here can be too telling either, can it? I could see a meaning if only the 5 personal planets are judged by their elementary placements. But with all of the planets it doesn't really make too much sense to me.
For instance, there could be several non-personal planets gathered in one or two elements over several years, and so the chance is relatively high that many people born during this time and years would have a certain element strongly and another probably rather weakly represented in their charts. But is that really telling on a personal level?
Or someone might have 3 or 4 outer and non-personal planets in one element, but a strongly placed and aspected sun or moon in a different element as the only planet in that element. It would be stated that this element would be rather weakly represented in the chart, because only one planet would be in that element, and on the other hand the element with the many non-personal planets would be indicated as strongly represented and first conclusions would be drawn, while it very well could be that the person with the strong sun or moon would be much stronger influenced and characterized by the element they are in and the aspects they make to other planets than the element where the generational planets reside, I would assume. I guess strong aspects or many aspects and specific house positions by planets make up a lack of certain elements often times anyway, doesn't it? And wouldn't generally the anlaysis of the house placements be more telling than the sign/elements analyses anyway?
Or another thing I wonder about is with grand-trines in certain elements. Would that be really telling and important in what element the grand-trine occurs if it involves 3 non-personal planets? I can't quite see it.
Just some stuff I was wondering today, as I so often read about lack or emphasized elements everywhere. Any opinions or thought corrections are welcome.
For instance, there could be several non-personal planets gathered in one or two elements over several years, and so the chance is relatively high that many people born during this time and years would have a certain element strongly and another probably rather weakly represented in their charts. But is that really telling on a personal level?
Or someone might have 3 or 4 outer and non-personal planets in one element, but a strongly placed and aspected sun or moon in a different element as the only planet in that element. It would be stated that this element would be rather weakly represented in the chart, because only one planet would be in that element, and on the other hand the element with the many non-personal planets would be indicated as strongly represented and first conclusions would be drawn, while it very well could be that the person with the strong sun or moon would be much stronger influenced and characterized by the element they are in and the aspects they make to other planets than the element where the generational planets reside, I would assume. I guess strong aspects or many aspects and specific house positions by planets make up a lack of certain elements often times anyway, doesn't it? And wouldn't generally the anlaysis of the house placements be more telling than the sign/elements analyses anyway?
Or another thing I wonder about is with grand-trines in certain elements. Would that be really telling and important in what element the grand-trine occurs if it involves 3 non-personal planets? I can't quite see it.
Just some stuff I was wondering today, as I so often read about lack or emphasized elements everywhere. Any opinions or thought corrections are welcome.