The Real Astrology by Frawley

Senecar

Well-known member
This book arrived today. I have been buying a few Astrology books this month, and I need another bookshelf.

It looks another interesting book by Frawley. I read a few pages, and the line which attracted my attention was,

"Modern Astrology is rubbish." pp.2 (TRA, Frawley)

Quite bold and strong assertion, I thought, but maybe it could be debated, why and how?
 
Last edited:

dr. farr

Well-known member
Personally I cannot stand the Frawley book: YES, a great deal of what he has to say, both about Traditional astrology, and also certain criticisms about Modernist astrology, is quite valid, but the WAY this guy writes STINKS (in my opinion); further, Frawley's information about Traditional astrology has been far surpassed by other Traditionalist authors, who write without the bitterness and hatred endemic in Frawley's presentation.
 

rahu

Banned
I agree with dr farr( by the way it is good to see posting again)
I am not versed in traditional astrology and read the book on the recommendation of a friend . I found it a waste of time for similar reasons to dr.farr.it seems that a large percentage of the book was wasted bashing modern astrology for no good reason(the only good point was acknowledging that without the emergences of modern astrology, traditional astrology would have gone by the wayside).
and as I wanted to learn about traditional techniques, I found what he wrote limited and virtually useless as it was not comprehensive at all.

rahu
 

Senecar

Well-known member
I have not read it further doing other stuff, but was quite looking forward to reading it.

The books were recommended by a respectable member in Cartomancy forum, so I ordered them in. We had discussion about the books, and I expressed a bit of apprehension pointing out the negative reviews in Amazon towards Frawley's books mentioning his way of treating Modern Astrology, but the member said that it is just sour grapes type reviews, and should be ignored. He praised the books as one of the best for Traditional Astrology, and Frwaley is a very witty writer with clear explanation on the topics.

But I leave my judgement open until I finish the books.
 
Last edited:

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
I have not read it further doing other stuff, but was quite looking forward to reading it.

The books were recommended by a respectable member in Cartomancy forum, so I ordered them in. We had discussion about the books, and I expressed a bit of apprehension pointing out the negative reviews in Amazon towards Frawley's books mentioning his way of treating Modern Astrology, but the member said that it is just sour grapes type reviews, and should be ignored. He praised the books as one of the best for Traditional Astrology, and Frwaley is a very witty writer with clear explanation on the topics.

But I leave my judgement open until I finish the books.
Wonder whether you shall find time to read all those books :smile:
including Bonatti you bought recently

If you have Kindle Unlimited subscription
you can loan John Frawley's Horary example book for free:


I agree with dr farr
( by the way it is good to see posting again)
I am not versed in traditional astrology
and read the book on the recommendation of a friend .
I found it a waste of time
for similar reasons to dr.farr.
it seems that a large percentage of the book was wasted
bashing modern astrology for no good reason
(the only good point was acknowledging that
without the emergences of modern astrology
traditional astrology would have gone by the wayside).
and as I wanted to learn about traditional techniques
I found what he wrote limited
and virtually useless
as it was not comprehensive at all
.

rahu
 

Senecar

Well-known member
Last edited:

Senecar

Well-known member
Just finished 1st chapter of the book, and it is indeed annihilating the Modern Astrology and Modern Astrologers into bits for their groundless assertions and self limiting methodology.

I am still not sure whether it is objective criticism or not, but at the same time I am not too concerned about it, because I don't belong to any of the schools or divisions, and furthermore I don't know enough about them.

But one thing clear is that the book is written with so much wit and sharp logic, that it is good fun reading :)
It is far better than some of the books which are written dull and boring :D

Recommended.
 
Last edited:

Senecar

Well-known member
Although, I don't agree everything in this book, it gave me huge amount of knowledge in astrology, and also enlightened me my grey areas on the subject, which I used to wonder and not sure about.

Some people might find his writing style a bit too bold, I can see why, and some people say witty. Honestly it didn't bother me in that respect. There are some good stuff in this book.
 
Last edited:

Chrysalis

Well-known member
I love J Frawleys humor in his book, it makes it much more interesting to read for learning purposes, and for me it allowed the information i was reading to click very easily...i wasn't needing to go back over and re-read time and time again, and because he kept it very light hearted i didn't find it a chore to read, i enjoyed reading it.

His book was a very good base for me to build from.
 
I am reading this very book (first edition) at the moment. I am half-way through it. Objectively, the book is a nice read for a brief overview of all aspects of astrology. From natal to mundane. It does not teach anything, it just describes the fields and their application. Nothing more.

On a personal level, the author wrote this for his personal own marketing. And it is obvious: He loves to hate modern astrologers, devalues the use of all other planets excepts the basic 7, he thinks that only traditional (i.e. old) astrology is best and ALL modern astrologers are terrible blah blah. He purposefully disses everyone else but his "kind". I am planning to read his horary book and sports astrology as well to have a full view of his writings.
I would not recommend Real Astrology as a mandatory reading. It is redundant.

I am still studying, but I have to say one thing to anyone who might share a similar approach to Mr. Frawley. Not all traditional techniques work. Same goes for many new modern techniques. Yeap, that's the only thing I care for when studying astrology.
 

muchacho

Well-known member
This book arrived today. I have been buying a few Astrology books this month, and I need another bookshelf.

It looks another interesting book by Frawley. I read a few pages, and the line which attracted my attention was,

"Modern Astrology is rubbish." pp.2 (TRA, Frawley)

Quite bold and strong assertion, I thought, but maybe it could be debated, why and how?
I've read that book years ago and my impression was that he doesn't really understand modern astrology and also has an ax to grind. His books on horary are excellent though.
 

Senecar

Well-known member
I've read that book years ago and my impression was that he doesn't really understand modern astrology and also has an ax to grind. His books on horary are excellent though.

I agree with you. Although he writes clearly and interestingly, not all his claims might be accurate.

As you pointed out, I too believe that, there are parts of Modern Astrology which are more flexible, more powerful, richer, hence seem work better. For instance, I tend to use the new planets in most cases, and they definitely add deeper and richer information to the readings.

And plenty more of Modern Astrology are interesting and useful.

So, I would not take the book as Bible of Horary textbook, but still there are excellent stuff to learn from.
 

muchacho

Well-known member
I agree with you. Although he writes clearly and interestingly, not all his claims might be accurate.

As you pointed out, I too believe that, there are parts of Modern Astrology which are more flexible, more powerful, richer, hence seem work better. For instance, I tend to use the new planets in most cases, and they definitely add deeper and richer information to the readings.

And plenty more of Modern Astrology are interesting and useful.

So, I would not take the book as Bible of Horary textbook, but still there are excellent stuff to learn from.
I think he mostly does horary, not natal. If you mostly do horary, I'd say what Frawley says does make sense. If you mostly do natal, then what he says is a rather extreme position which shows a certain lack of understanding of how modern astrology works. I've seen a similar attitude among some members here who also mostly do horary instead of natal.

Frawley also recommends using the new planets, although in a limited way. In The Horary Textbook he says:

"Uranus, Neptune and Pluto do have their uses in horary... They each have a very few things with which they seem to have a natural connection: Uranus with divorce and other disruptions, such as house-moving; Neptune with illusion and deceit; Pluto seems generally and unspecifically malefic... Treat them like fixed stars: ignore them unless they are right on a relevant house cusp or in immediate aspect with one of the main significators."
 

Senecar

Well-known member
I think he mostly does horary, not natal. If you mostly do horary, I'd say what Frawley says does make sense. If you mostly do natal, then what he says is a rather extreme position which shows a certain lack of understanding of how modern astrology works. I've seen a similar attitude among some members here who also mostly do horary instead of natal.

Frawley also recommends using the new planets, although in a limited way. In The Horary Textbook he says:

Fair and accurate comment. :)
 
Top