I actually did comment. I see the influence of Pluto but I disagree with a lot of what the modern interpretations say about what that influence actually is. That's why I said the notion to see Pluto as just a mixture of Mars and Saturn is interesting but not actually valid. I can see, however, how folks can come to that conclusion after reading the usual modern cook books. So in that sense, I can understand the traditionalists and appreciate your (plural 'you') comments. Current definitions of Pluto in astrology are not very satisfying. Point taken. To then say that Pluto is irrelevant and doesn't have anything to add because it doesn't fit into the tried and tested models is a rather bold statement, especially since no one here knows with absolute certainty why astrology actually works (myself included), we all just know how it works, and Pluto (and the other outer planets) force us to rethink our model and approach. With the emergence of the electric universe model, the old cosmological models seem to be outdated now, and with it the old astrological models. So, there's a lot of research and development to do.
Well said, but let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater.
There's somethings correct with the current beliefs pertaining to Pluto.
At least two Astrological Parts utilizing the Ascendant have been given rather appropriate titles of influence.
{How anyone figured those out prior to the internet, computer ephemeri that can cast a chart in seconds instead of the hours it used to take and with assured accuracy, internet astrological forums, such as AW's right here, where-in one can share results, findings, observations and opinions with other Astrologers in numbers even in the hundreds in a single day, is quite amazing, to me anyways.}
The Part of Libido which is derived from the formula Asc. + Pluto - Venus, has been revealing itself to be rather appropriate...although I believe the "Part" in question to be somewhat more than just that.
I find it to be about self gratification of such degree that one takes no thought as to anyone elses' interests or consideration as to their feelings or even repercussions if the desired has become a fixation.
Thus with only just that much about said 'Part" being satisfactorily accepted a few members of this forum, along with my self, were able to hypothesize what the opposite formula, i.e. Asc. + Venus - Pluto, represents.
We've tested this to about a couple of dozen natal charts to date and have yet to see one result that gave me any reason to doubt the theory is correct.
That particular formula for an Astrological part was titled the "Part of Influence". What we hypothesized is that while the other formula produces a point on the natal horoscope is about self gratification at someone else's expense, the opposite formula produces a point that is about "Self Sacrifice" even 'Martyrdom'.
We have had only positive results with this theory so far.
Just because it is small doesn't mean it has no weight of influence. As it sits on a single degree of the Zodiac for an average of 248 days a year it is of indomitable will. Yet I also believe it is imbued with a powerful influence that is independent of it's orbital positioning.
Also, I found the two author/astrologers Sakoian and Acker to be highly accurate in their description of the natal aspect of Pluto conjunct the Ascendant in their "Astrologer's Handbook" and as to date, as near as I can tel that is also true as to their assessment of Pluto conjunct the mid haven, as well. ...and not to mention most of the other aspects Pluto has in effect with the other eight planets, the Luminaries and the Moons' Nodes, that is those that I have personally and those that I've been able to find in other folks natal horoscopes that show Pluto is of affect upon them to begin with.
As I stated earlier not everyone is affected by all the planets.
