Trying to understand angles of chart

I'm still pretty new to this and I'm looking at chart angles as viewed by modern astrology. I was getting the impression that the descendant and the midheaven are not really things that the native "has" in their personality but are rather things that they either seek out in others or is thrust onto them. Is this correct? How much do people "own" their descendant and midheaven?

From a modern astrology perspective, everything in the birth chart is a part of the psyche, and can also represent life circumstances, and can tell us something about what we need from others, especially if it's placed in one of the other oriented houses, such as the seventh. Those placements also show what we can give. Seventh house/DC placements are indicative of what kind of partner you need and of what kind of partner you are likely to be. Tenth house/MC shows what can make our reputation, what we are likely to be known for.

If the sun is in one of those houses, that shows the most crucial area for personal growth. Someone with sun in the seventh needs partnership in order to grow to the fullest, and partnership is defined quite broadly: romantic relationships, close friendships, business partners, rivals, practitioner/client relationships... every possible kind of relationship that is between equals and accomplishes something. Tenth house sun might have a strong drive to be noticed, to be highly visible (or might be terrified of the spotlight but repeatedly thrust into it anyway, because visibility is a crucial part of that person's growth). In short, signs and planets on the MC or DC are no less a part of the personality than what's on the AC or IC, they just play out in the other-oriented part of life.

The angles are all part of the real you. Yet all of us start out as tiny children, so it takes years for us to grow and develop into the potentials of our horoscopes.

The MC, for example indicates your vocation in life and your public image. It takes a while to develop a public image!

A truism of modern astrology is that the chart will manifest itself in some fashion. Your choice is to:

1. Manifest it in a positive, constructive way.
2. Manifest it in a negative, disempowering way.
3. Suppress and deny unwanted features of your chart, in which case they will show up as other people in your life who seemingly embody the unwanted characteristics.

I recommend option 1.

Option 3 is sometimes associated with your descendant, because the 7th is not only the house of marriage and other long-term partnerships, but also the house of "open enemies." The DC and 7th house indicate the type of person to whom you would feel attracted to for a long-term relationship. This doesn't mean that your Dreamboat will necessarily have the sun in that sign, merely that s/he will seemingly embody the personality qualities, whether positively or negatively, of that sign.

Just for example, Leo rising might be attracted to Aquarius qualities of originality, emotional detachment, and intellect-- but then be put off when an original, emotionally detatched intellectual doesn't give Leo rising the recognition, playfulness, and verbal strokes. that Leo craves.

A lot depends upon any planets in your 1st, 4th, 7th, or 10th houses; as well as what's happening to the planetary rulers of the signs on these house cusps, or planetary aspects to your angles.

Events may feel "thrust upon you," of course, notably with transits. But you're the one who processes their meaning in your life, not your externalities.

Right, but like, there still seems to be a huge difference between being "drawn" to something and having that "in" you. For example, the Leo isn't bringing Aquarius traits to the table... is he? Like I have a hard time considering something that one "likes" as something that one "is"... the difference in the saying "do as I say, not as I do."

Astrology teaches us that we are not monolithic individuals with but a single identity. Rather, each person is more like a committee or extended family, comprised of different individuals. Some of these committee members get along well, others may fight with each other. Some committees have loners, or members who want to be the big boss.

Each of us has all of the signs, houses, and planets in our horoscopes. Even with an untenanted house, we look to the planet ruling the sign on the house cusp for more information about it. So a sun-Aquarian always has some Leo somewhere, be it a lot or a little; just as a Leo rising will have a certain relationship with Aquarius because of that 7th house cusp. If Leo rising has any Aquarian planets in the 7th, the effect will be even more important.

But here's the thing about astrology. All of the bits and bytes of planets, angles, signs, houses, and so on-- they're all internal. They aren't just these events dictated by chunks of rock or frozen gas hurtling through space.

A great book that I strongly recommend is Steven Forrest, The Inner Sky. If you can't find it at your local bookstores, it is available via Internet booksellers like amazon.

Re: your post-- why do we "seek out" something? Isn't it because we have a bit (or a lot) of that quality within us-- and we wish to develop it further?

Again, we all start out in life as little kids. We are a work in progress, not fully-formed unitary, mature individuals.

waybread said:

Re: your post-- why do we "seek out" something? Isn't it because we have a bit (or a lot) of that quality within us-- and we wish to develop it further?

Again, we all start out in life as little kids. We are a work in progress, not fully-formed unitary, mature individuals.

Click to expand...

You can watch action movies until kingdom come and not become the least bit action movie-y.

But I guess more like this -- often people will assign other people traits, like, in most extreme examples "you're stupid", or something like that. Sometimes they're true, but sometimes they're not, but either way you can either violently reject it or it's said over and over again until you believe it's true. Perceptions, one's own and others, are not necessarily facts. A "public reputation" can be completely and utterly wrong and perpetuated simply by being repeated enough times. So can't say an MC be completely and utterly wrong as well?

graay ghost said:

A "public reputation" can be completely and utterly wrong and perpetuated simply by being repeated enough times. So can't say an MC be completely and utterly wrong as well?

Click to expand...

Gonna play devil's advocate for a second. A public reputation that is "utterly and completely wrong" is usually wrong for a reason. There is often some truth to it. Which negates it from being completely off the mark. Neptunes involvement would make people see what they want to see in the person if in the 10th. Which might not be 100% accurate, however, the native would still come across as neptunian. So therefore its not wrong, really.

A truly bad reputation would be offered by none other than Lilith in the 10th. And there is usually quite alot of truth to that one.

ashriia said:

A truly bad reputation would be offered by none other than Lilith in the 10th. And there is usually quite alot of truth to that one.

Click to expand...

Ah, yes, exactly what is in my 10th house, thank you.

graay ghost said:

You can watch action movies until kingdom come and not become the least bit action movie-y.

Click to expand...

Say what?

But I guess more like this -- often people will assign other people traits, like, in most extreme examples "you're stupid", or something like that. Sometimes they're true, but sometimes they're not, but either way you can either violently reject it or it's said over and over again until you believe it's true.

Click to expand...

Oh, for sure. Hopefully astrology teaches us to reject social conditioning that just isn't us. The real tragedy is for people who internalize such hurtful, harmful messages in childhood.

However, let's take for example a bold-as-brass triple Aries, and a hyper-sensitive Pisces-Virgo sort of person. The Aries might hear, "You're stupid," and dish back as good as s/he gets. And then some. The sensitive Pisces-Virgo, in contrast, might not only internalize that s/he's stupid, but also the unspoken hatred that comes with such a message, because they tend to be psychic sponges.

Hopefully astrology can help both the Aries and Pisces-Virgo can reflect on why a person would say such hateful things, and gain some understanding of the inter-personal dynamic, thus gaining some independence from it.

Perceptions, one's own and others, are not necessarily facts. A "public reputation" can be completely and utterly wrong and perpetuated simply by being repeated enough times. So can't say an MC be completely and utterly wrong as well?

Click to expand...

The horoscope should show reasons why one's public reputation might sour undeservedly. The 12th house deals with "secret enemies"-- the gossipers and backstabbers who are nice to our face, vs. the "open enemies" who are at least in your face about it. Suppose someone's MC is squared natally or in transit by Saturn or Neptune in the 12th? We might expect disappointments and frustrations with Saturn, or deceptions with Neptune.

So let's take an example: suppose someone has Cancer on the MC, and a moon in the 5th house. She might be known (MC) for being a mom of a teacher (moon in the 5th house of children.) But if Saturn in the 12th squares her MC and sesqui-squares her moon, she may be the target of undeserved rumours.

But "reputation" doesn't live in the domain of facts so much as in the domain of public opinion (for a public figure) or what others say about us. So the "facts" might be that this woman is known (MC) as a teacher; but the aspects suggest problems with her public image.

ashriia said:

Gonna play devil's advocate for a second. A public reputation that is "utterly and completely wrong" is usually wrong for a reason. There is often some truth to it. Which negates it from being completely off the mark. Neptunes involvement would make people see what they want to see in the person if in the 10th. Which might not be 100% accurate, however, the native would still come across as neptunian. So therefore its not wrong, really.

Click to expand...

You know what, I am going to play devil's advocate to your devil's advocate.

A public reputation can be "utterly and completely wrong" with no truth to it at all because there are facts that precede the person that come with associations that are actually completely and utterly wrong. This is how stereotyping works and even people who think they are above it are, nine times out of ten, not.

Let us take for example, a woman. Women are stereotyped as being bad at math. Let's suppose however that this woman is actually very good at math. Once, maybe, she made a mistake in front of someone. Math errors are very common -- switching signs and the like is very easy to do which is why in math teachers always encourage you to check work before turning it in. Making a single error does not actually make someone bad at math. There are many reasons why someone might make a single error, which is back to the reason why math is usually checked and rechecked if it has to do with anything important.

However, because one person witnessed one single error (and possibly has no understanding of how checking for errors works, which a startling number of people do not), and because the error was made by, gasp, a woman, this person decides that this woman is bad at math. And worse, that person spreads this idea around and it's repeated over and over again, and suddenly, this woman who is, factually, quite good at math, becomes, by reputation, horrible at math, which is actually a total lie that could objectively be proven untrue.

This is an ever-present danger for anyone of any group that is subject to stereotypes. There are likely other explanations for a complete lie of a reputation, but this is the most obvious one. Confirmation bias is pervasive and horrible.

waybread said:

Say what?

Click to expand...

I guess what I'm trying to say that the type of media one enjoys, or the types of things one absorbs, well, you're living through it vicariously because it's just so not you.

waybread said:

Oh, for sure. Hopefully astrology teaches us to reject social conditioning that just isn't us. The real tragedy is for people who internalize such hurtful, harmful messages in childhood.

However, let's take for example a bold-as-brass triple Aries, and a hyper-sensitive Pisces-Virgo sort of person. The Aries might hear, "You're stupid," and dish back as good as s/he gets. And then some. The sensitive Pisces-Virgo, in contrast, might not only internalize that s/he's stupid, but also the unspoken hatred that comes with such a message, because they tend to be psychic sponges.

Hopefully astrology can help both the Aries and Pisces-Virgo can reflect on why a person would say such hateful things, and gain some understanding of the inter-personal dynamic, thus gaining some independence from it.

Click to expand...

But it can also go the opposite way around. If you're constantly told you're smart and your ego is stroked in just the right way, you start to believe that, too, when that might not be true either.

That view of astrology doesn't really seem that well supported in a lot of what I've read. The single problem/solution set I see in so many astrology resources is "you are the problem -- so learn to submit." There is little acknowledgement that, perhaps, it is the environment or other people who are wrong and/or bad for you and that the solution is to high-tail it out of there. Even on HYS's new site, on the natal chart generator, they have to write in the Q&A an answer to, "I have many disharmonious aspects, am I a bad person?".

graay ghost said:

You know what, I am going to play devil's advocate to your devil's advocate.

A public reputation can be "utterly and completely wrong" with no truth to it at all because there are facts that precede the person that come with associations that are actually completely and utterly wrong. This is how stereotyping works and even people who think they are above it are, nine times out of ten, not.

Let us take for example, a woman. Women are stereotyped as being bad at math. Let's suppose however that this woman is actually very good at math. Once, maybe, she made a mistake in front of someone. Math errors are very common -- switching signs and the like is very easy to do which is why in math teachers always encourage you to check work before turning it in. Making a single error does not actually make someone bad at math. There are many reasons why someone might make a single error, which is back to the reason why math is usually checked and rechecked if it has to do with anything important.

However, because one person witnessed one single error (and possibly has no understanding of how checking for errors works, which a startling number of people do not), and because the error was made by, gasp, a woman, this person decides that this woman is bad at math. And worse, that person spreads this idea around and it's repeated over and over again, and suddenly, this woman who is, factually, quite good at math, becomes, by reputation, horrible at math, which is actually a total lie that could objectively be proven untrue.

This is an ever-present danger for anyone of any group that is subject to stereotypes. There are likely other explanations for a complete lie of a reputation, but this is the most obvious one. Confirmation bias is pervasive and horrible.

Click to expand...

I've seen this way too often, and seen lives destroyed by it. One of the reasons I won't gossip or listen to gossip.

But yes, it will show up in a chart. And no, it's not because 'it's part of a person'. There are all kinds of weird circumstances in life that happen to people. That does not mean people actually draw it to themselves by some inherent quality. Unless somebody wants to suggest that, as in your example, women avoid becoming mathematicians.

That's just nuts. The whole concept of 'deserve' is pretty wonky the way most people use it. Because most folks in the world don't get what they 'deserve' at all.

Of course you can wreck your own reputation (Nixon, anyone? but even with him, his aides were all trying to take the fall first - he's got a fascinating chart), but it isn't always like that.

graay ghost said:

You can watch action movies until kingdom come and not become the least bit action movie-y.

Click to expand...

What do you mean by "action movie-y"? Someone who likes action movies? If you're watching action movies til kingdom come, you must like them in the first place, otherwise, why would you be watching them?

Or do you mean like an action movie hero, running around and shooting up bad guys and getting into reckless car chases? Action movies are fantasy. People watching movies aren't running around shooting up bad guys, they're sitting on their behinds. The more movies you watch, action or any other kind, the less like an action movie hero you become, and the more like a couch potato. Not that any of us are really action movie heroes in the first place. The point of fantasy is, it's fantasy.

graay ghost said:

But I guess more like this -- often people will assign other people traits, like, in most extreme examples "you're stupid", or something like that. Sometimes they're true, but sometimes they're not, but either way you can either violently reject it or it's said over and over again until you believe it's true. Perceptions, one's own and others, are not necessarily facts. A "public reputation" can be completely and utterly wrong and perpetuated simply by being repeated enough times. So can't say an MC be completely and utterly wrong as well?

Click to expand...

A public reputation can be wrong, yes. Rumors can be spread about someone that give them an entirely false public reputation. But that's situational. The MC in the natal doesn't indicate every last situation (although I suppose transits involving the MC might be linked with rumors being spread about you). What it gives is the general sense of what you become known for, and there are lots of options.

One of the first astrological interpretations I ever got (it was on another online forum, from an amateur astrologer), included, "Others see you as an oddball, but an oddball who gets along with people." That was so true, it shocked me that someone who only knew me online could figure that out just by looking at my chart. The giveaway for that turned out to be Uranus in Libra conjunct my midheaven. Uranus=oddball; Libra=gets along with people.

How much of an oddball I get seen as, though, depends on what kind of social setting I'm in. If I'm surrounded by oddballs--or Uranian types, to describe them in astrological terms--there's nothing that odd about me. And that is mostly who I am around these days.

Now, I suppose I could get famous for doing something Uranian, and it would probably be something social justice oriented and/or artistic (Libra).

Oddity said:

I've seen this way too often, and seen lives destroyed by it. One of the reasons I won't gossip or listen to gossip.

But yes, it will show up in a chart. And no, it's not because 'it's part of a person'. There are all kinds of weird circumstances in life that happen to people. That does not mean people actually draw it to themselves by some inherent quality. Unless somebody wants to suggest that, as in your example, women avoid becoming mathematicians.

That's just nuts. The whole concept of 'deserve' is pretty wonky the way most people use it. Because most folks in the world don't get what they 'deserve' at all.

Of course you can wreck your own reputation (Nixon, anyone? but even with him, his aides were all trying to take the fall first - he's got a fascinating chart), but it isn't always like that.

Click to expand...

Again, let's point out a crucial difference between modern and traditional astrology: in traditional, the birth chart shows life circumstances, while in modern, the birth chart shows the whole person. Graay ghost asked the original question from a modern perspective. Oddity responds from a traditional perspective.

Now, I think both perspectives probably work. A chart could be read for personality indicators or for life circumstance indicators. And even in modern astrology, I would think that the life circumstances are activated by the person acting in ways that fit with their birth chart indicators, so it might be a chicken or egg question.

graay ghost said:

this woman who is, factually, quite good at math, becomes, by reputation, horrible at math, which is actually a total lie that could objectively be proven untrue.

This is an ever-present danger for anyone of any group that is subject to stereotypes. There are likely other explanations for a complete lie of a reputation, but this is the most obvious one. Confirmation bias is pervasive and horrible.

Click to expand...

In your example, whatever bad reputation this woman had at math would be proven untrue, when her talents would be known at other opportunities.
Getting back to the astrology, in your example this fictional women's 10th house natally would not show this event, since it's such a small event... likely activated by a transit of some kind. And most people deal with such events at some point in their lives.[ But I am not sure what we are talking about here anymore.]

btw I happen to be very fond of studying lilith in a chart, which is why I mentioned her placement in the 10th. I have lilith in the 1st. She ends up somewhere in every chart, and will effect a native's life in some way. There are amazing things done with lilith energy as well. Usually activists have strong lilith placements for example, and have the power of creating fundamental change. There are positive manifestations to every aspect and planet, it's up to the native to understand and make use of them.

ashriia said:

In your example, whatever bad reputation this woman had at math would be proven untrue, when her talents would be known at other opportunities.

Click to expand...

This is assuming that there is some fairness in life. To me, it seems quite possible that such an opportunity may never arise, and she's just stuck with that reputation.

ashriia said:

btw I happen to be very fond of studying lilith in a chart, which is why I mentioned her placement in the 10th. I have lilith in the 1st. She ends up somewhere in every chart, and will effect a native's life in some way. There are amazing things done with lilith energy as well. Usually activists have strong lilith placements for example, and have the power of creating fundamental change. There are positive manifestations to every aspect and planet, it's up to the native to understand and make use of them.

Click to expand...

Lilith 10th house Aquarius. I don't understand why people are so down on Lilith. So she's hated because... she refused to be subservient? Sounds unjustified to me. I would have done the same thing.

Osamenor said:

Again, let's point out a crucial difference between modern and traditional astrology:
in traditional, the birth chart shows life circumstances,

Click to expand...

Crucially in fact
traditionally, the natal chart shows not only life circumstances but also shows "the whole person"

i.e.

for example
1st House in traditional astrology describes
Stature, colour, complexion, form and shape of body.

and
Older sources note1st House influence upon the intellect, the way the mind works, and speech.

Traditionallly, 1st House describes Life, vitality and health
and
as well as describing the physical appearance,
the condition of 1st House and that of its planetary ruler
indicates the level of personal vitality and strength http://www.skyscript.co.uk/temples/h1.html

Osamenor said:

while in modern, the birth chart shows the whole person.
Graay ghost asked the original question from a modern perspective.
Oddity responds from a traditional perspective.

Click to expand...

Oddity's response is certainly traditional
however
traditional astrology does consider the person as a whole

Osamenor said:

Now, I think both perspectives probably work.
A chart could be read for personality indicators or for life circumstance indicators.
And even in modern astrology,
I would think that the life circumstances are activated by the person acting in ways that fit with their birth chart indicators,
so it might be a chicken or egg question.

Click to expand...

Osamenor said:

One of the first astrological interpretations I ever got (it was on another online forum, from an amateur astrologer), included, "Others see you as an oddball, but an oddball who gets along with people." That was so true, it shocked me that someone who only knew me online could figure that out just by looking at my chart. The giveaway for that turned out to be Uranus in Libra conjunct my midheaven. Uranus=oddball; Libra=gets along with people.

How much of an oddball I get seen as, though, depends on what kind of social setting I'm in. If I'm surrounded by oddballs--or Uranian types, to describe them in astrological terms--there's nothing that odd about me. And that is mostly who I am around these days.

Now, I suppose I could get famous for doing something Uranian, and it would probably be something social justice oriented and/or artistic (Libra).

Click to expand...

I guess I've never gotten a clear read on what other people think of me. I get a lot of blatantly contradictory information on my impression that I think people will see what they want to see and this only matters as much as they will prevent me from doing things because they don't like what they've made up about me.

Graay ghost, it's good that you are applying an open yet critical mind to astrology. With your consent, let's exercise it a little further.

Let's not confuse the midheaven and 10th house with other chart placements. Not every astrological issue belongs to the angles or their affiliated houses. If my feelings are hurt because somebody calls me "stupid," feelings are a moon issue. If I get angry because somebody calls me "stupid," probably it's become a Mars issue for me. If Mercury conjuncts my sun, I may identify (sun) with my intelligence (Mercury) so then my ego (sun) feels threatened.

The midheaven has two related meanings: (1) career, but this is in the sense of your vocation or even calling in life. Just-a-job is a 6th house matter (work and service.) (2) public image. For a very few people this might be fame or notoriety. For most people, however, your public image is connected to your profession.

Few young people have much of a public image. It's something they grow into over time. So here we would look at the chart's potential. Obviously, if a teenager has a serious disabling accident, that potential may never be reached. As explained above, with a troubled 12th or 7th house (secret and open enemies, respectively,) even a blameless person's career can be torpedoed by jealous co-workers. People may or may not know you personally with 10th house matters.

The ascendant and first house show more about what other people will think about you on an inter-personal level. Some people read facial types from rising signs, but I've seen these confounded by planets in the first house or squaring the ascendant. Heredity (such as brown eyes) and ethnicity (such as Hispanic) are not subject to one's horoscope placements. However, people generally will display the personality and mannerisms common to their rising sign.

A big caveat, however, is Neptune in the first house. Can you see why?

Regarding action movies, some people lead more interior lives; other people more exterior lives. As you learn more astrology, you can hopefully infer which people will satisfy their Mars instincts with action movies; whereas other people need to be at the centre of their own action. According to modern astrology, if you have a lot of upper hemisphere planets, you need to exteriorize your life events. If your planets primarily cluster around the IC, you work out your life puzzles primarily on an interior level.

Film, by the way, seems to be ruled by Neptune. So if someone loves action movies, how is Neptune located in his chart?

Please realize that learning astrology is a job of several years for even an intermediate level of mastery. So often learners conclude that "astrology doesn't work," when actually they haven't learned the tools that do work with greater success.