FireNwater
Well-known member
Dear FireWater,
Your point is well-taken regarding Moon not being VOC. Thank you.
I would mention that you misread my post: I did not describe him as a cad. I said that his behaviour points more toward his not wanting to be a cad. Rather than blowing her off after telling her "to move on, " he chose to say "but let's be amicable." That doesn't suggest that he continues to have romantic feelings for her. And quite honestly, it's a lot to ask and usually can't be achieved by most broken-up couples because one or both are too angry or hurt. All of this freely reported, subjective information from client has to be processed and built into the delineation of the chart.
How do I sense that he is finished with her? The reception from him as Moon to her as Saturn, donned in the sign of Capricorn, the sign of his/Moon's detriment. This is an unfavorable response to her, however you choose to describe it. And not only do their primary significators not aspect, they are disjunct. They do not see eye-to-eye. There is a significant breach between them.
I've referred to the client's subjective reporting and would conclude by suggesting that the very act of delineation is a subjective impression. The chart and the astrologer's impression of it cannot be separated and the astrologer's impression can only be subjective.
You wrote:
In reality, we can make up whatever we want if we want to go on our subjective impressions, but the chart is what tells the real story. The chart doesn't say anything like that.
I think I have explained in simple and clear astrological methodology how I subjectively analyse a chart based on the "objective" rules of astrology. I use the symbolism that I have learned over 25 years of experience with astrology and then do a gestalt-like take on the chart. It is clearly subjective combined with some somewhat objective "facts" of astrological symbolism. I can't see how it could be any other way: I am guilty as charged about being subjective.
If you look carefully at how you delineate, if you are not creatively making up a story about the chart, then I have to wonder what you actually doing?
Thank you for patiently reading this.
Well, lets look at the context. You are right that the main significators are not aspecting and that means they are not seeing each other, or not seeing eye to eye as you put it. Of course they aren't! They aren't together right now.
Her regard toward him is mixed and his regard toward her is favorable enough, especially considering he didn't get what he wanted from her which was a more amicable split.
Yes, I did misread your post about calling him a cad, sorry. I did read your post saying he did a twisted thing and she should forget him. I thought you were still going off of that point.
When you look at the chart, you can clearly see his moving toward Venus, which in my opinion, is her. If Venus were recieving the Moon, we would see a stronger incination to act, but the fact that he is moving toward her,shows that he is coming for her. Moon antiscia the Sun shows his motivation... sex. Which doesn't have to be a bad thing. She said she has been thinking about it.
This chart is showing is that right now they aren't together-- makes sense-- they are in inconjunct signs-- they are not. But look at the actual question.
The question was "is it really over?" Not "will we live happily ever after?" Or "does he love me?"
The important thing is it shows it's not really over and it shows when they will meet.
You can think Venus is someone else, but I strongly strongly doubt it. We will see how it plays out. Hopefully the querent updates.
About subjectivity, I don't really follow your logic, I'm sorry. I don't make up stories about what a chart says based on *how what he did to her, or she said she did, or what he didn't do subjectively made me feel* or based on my own values or biases. I don't say that what someone did is "twisted", especially if the chart doesn't show that. I look at what is *specifically* asked and answer a question based on a set of very straightforward rules.
Last edited: