From Julienne at Chaos-Stars:
"Pluto is the generational planet. Once upon a time, the cry was "Don't trust anyone over thirty!" -and the difference was Pluto. Those over 30 at that moment in history had Pluto in Leo - and those below, had Pluto in Virgo.
The Pluto in Leo generation - many, especially outside the US, had been born intowar, and into a world where many males had been killed - Pluto/death, in Leo-father/males.I remember Australia lost an incredible percentage of its men, and all around me were crying and damaged families.
I think there are still issues with Obama - with his Sun square Neptune, and Moon square Pluto.The giant abandonment issues can lead to control and power concerns - witness how he so easilyturns around and abandons people in his life who don't seem valuable any more, like his "white"grandmother, Rev.Wright, and his stands on various issues which he seems to turn on so easily -like off shore drilling, like nuclear, like campaign financing.
The Pluto in Leo generation has Pluto on Obama's Leo stellium and 7th angle.With his natal PLuto in Virgo, and Saturn in Capricorn, he can, if he becomes president,draw on those aspects of his own self to work through these Saturn-Pluto issues in theUSA for the coming years - jobs, health, financial and other hierarchies. Will he be willing to really transform those? - or will he remain beholden to the health insurancecompanies, the big corporations, Wall Street - all of whom helped to finance his campaign?With his Pluto in Virgo, he has applied what he learned as a community organizer who wastaught how to sign people up to vote, and he has used that skill to organize these people to support his candidacy. Can he return the favour, and find jobs and health care for theaverage Joe and Jill?
Americans are so vulnerable at the moment, and exhausted and depressed by the Bush-Cheney Mean Years, and the idea of a pure saviour is so appealing to many. With Obama's strongNeptune he can present as whatever anyone wants, but the problem is that none of those images may be strong enough to be consistent or to have depth. In addition, the idea of a saviour disempowers individuals. I am afraid that, if Obama becomes president, that whendisillusion sets in, people will be afraid to observe objectively, and will drift again intodenial and disillusionment. We need to empower ourselves, not worship at the feet of false gods.We all have to work together to ride the energy waves of Pluto entering Capricorn, and theUranus-Saturn upheaval."
Julienne's New Blog: http://www.myspace.com/youandthecosmos
Radio: "You and the Cosmos" Tuesdays, 4:30 pm EDST Live Stream WHRW.ORG
JVB's Astro News Headlines
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Monday, October 27, 2008
McCain's Chart
Well, I couldn't discuss Obama without discussing McCain. And my first reaction, looking at his chart was OMG! He doesn't simply have a Grand T-Square; he's got a DOUBLE Grand T-Square, even more massive and powerful than the Mystic Rectangle of the birth of our nation! But what a killer! I mean, it is NOT an easy thing and easily explains his tendency to rage.
The double T involves Jupiter in Sagittarius to Saturn in Pisces to Chiron in Gemini over to Venus in Virgo. The giant square shape of the aspects in the chart is open at one point because Venus does not square back to Jupiter. Rather Jupiter squares up to Neptune in Virgo (which is, however, in conjunction with Venus, thus bringing Venus into the giant square formation).
This also, of course, means that McCain has not two but three oppositions: from Chiron to Jupiter, and Saturn to both Venus and Neptune.
There also is an opposition that cuts across the midpoint of two sides of this giant square shape -- from Chiron to Venus and from Saturn to Jupiter.
McCain also has several nice trines thankfully somewhat softening the massive amount of hardship for him: from his Sun to Uranus (the Maverick element, surely) (I don't count the one to his node), from Mars to Uranus (Maverick again) and to Jupiter (expanding on the themes of wild warrior), and from Moon to both Venus and Mercury (be thankful for all blessings).
The issues involved in McCain's chart are too difficult to manage. Virgo is not usually a warlike sign. His three personal planets in Virgo would make him careful, sweet, domestic, reliable. The Mercury in Libra would make him fair-minded. Chiron in Gemini indicates a wound to the mind. Uranus should be somewhat tempered in Taurus -- or perhaps just erratically bull-headed or stubbornly eccentric? Saturn in Pisces probably brings form to the emotional content, Jupiter in Sagittarius (where it's sub-ruler) -- good, generous, philosophical, fun-loving. And so on.
While one could say the Mars in Leo is fired up, it is not warlike, and although Pluto in Cancer is not my favorite (a generation of secrets in the home?), again, it is not in itself bad.
It's the aspects! As I always say, it's the aspects! It's the angles between the planets that is what has made and makes things so hard for McCain. That he crashed three planes and didn't lose his wings is perhaps not surprising. What makes things hard for McCain is also what holds him together. But woe betide anyone who has to live or work with him!
Sunday, October 26, 2008
Independence Day Astrology
Herein I comment on the previous post by Ray (posted with his permission).
Ray points out a few major aspects for the natal chart for July 4, 1776: Sun (13.19 in Cancer) square Saturn (14.49 in Libra) and Mercury (24.12R in Cancer) opposite Pluto (28.29 in Capricorn).
Pluto opposite Mercury
First of all, I have noticed that just because planets might not have been discovered at a the time the person was living, they still affect birth charts (and life courses). So the fact that Pluto (or Neptune or Uranus) were not discovered doesn't matter in interpreting the chart.
A Pluto/Mercury opposition causes tremendous pressure on communication. There can be two possible results, either with an either/or choice, or with an oscillation between the two, or with the two in sequence. The first possible result is complete suppression of communication. Absolute secrecy and silence. The stopper is put on the bottle and the bottle is put in a hole dug in the ground far away from the beaten path where it will never be found.
The second possible result is explosive communication, intense discourse going very deep into whatever the subject is (often dictated by the signs the planets are in).
Cancer is about protecting the home (the homeland) and one's loved ones. Capricorn is about work and achievement.
Oppositions are often push/pull things. Here the Pluto/Mercury opposition could mean a going back and forth on the issues -- first swinging to one side, then to the other.
Mercury in Cancer may cause thinking about how best to protect one's "home." Pluto in Capricorn -- well, Pluto is often about abuse of the subjects related to the sign it's in. The reason for this is not that Pluto is "bad," but that few can figure out how to use it because it requires one to go through hell and fire before arriving at any conclusion. I think of Pluto as like a Black Hole. It sucks everything into it, willy nilly.
More important than the fact that Mercury was retrograde (which I think is way overrated) is that Mercury and Pluto were BOTH retrograde, but since Mercury is faster, Mercury was actually backing away from the opposition (with Pluto chasing after it).
It would be interesting to see which went direct and how long they were mutually chasing after or running away from each other.
The Mystic Rectangle
And another thing about the Mercury/Pluto opposition is that it is part of a Mystic Rectangle aspect that involves Mercury, Neptune, Pluto, and Chiron. This means that Mercury is not only opposite Pluto but sextile Neptune, which is then opposite Chiron, which is sextile Pluto, forming a big rectangle that dominates the entire chart.
This also means that Pluto and Neptune are in trine and Chiron/Mercury are in trine. Neptune is 22.25 in Scorpio and Chiron is 00.00 in Aries. (In other words, there's a trine between Cancer and Aries, which is sort of unusual. Usually trines are between signs of like elements -- so normally, it would be Aries and Leo, or Cancer and Pisces. But because Chiron is right on the cusp, the trine crosses elements.)
And strangely, the same thing is true of the Neptune/Pluto trine: it's between Scorpio and Capricorn - crossing elements -- not sharing them.
What does this all mean? I could spend days analyzing it (and probably will). It certainly is a huge mix of things. I'll leave it unanswered for now, for future discussion. (Comments, of course, welcome.)
Saturn/Sun Square
The Sun/Saturn square is also, I agree, very important. Because Mystic Rectangles tend to dominate charts, and the Sun/Saturn square is not touched by it, the square may be less important. (And there are other important aspects in the chart, too -- a few other squares and trines, but we wont' go into them yet.)
Saturn tends to harshly restrict or put pressure on what it squares. Coming out of Aquarius, of which it is sub-ruler, it might have had the effect of shattering the Sun's sense of home. Mars and Uranus trining Saturn out of Gemini may have had the effect of increasing Saturn's shattering effect. Uranus buddying up with Saturn is pretty powerful and rambunctious. Mars trine, too, adds energy and drive to it.
About Pluto and Saturn Effects
I'm highly suspicious of any hard Pluto or Saturn effects in a chart. I have found them in the charts of the early prime players in the Bush Administration and found them to represent criminal doings, indeed even a criminal enterprise. When Saturn and Pluto are in hard aspect to each other, they are the stuff of Mafia.
Here, in our country's birthchart, Saturn and Pluto are NOT in hard aspect to each other, but they are in hard aspect to two personal planets (Mercury and, more importantly, the Sun).
With such combinations, I often find abuse of power and cruelty.
Ray points out a few major aspects for the natal chart for July 4, 1776: Sun (13.19 in Cancer) square Saturn (14.49 in Libra) and Mercury (24.12R in Cancer) opposite Pluto (28.29 in Capricorn).
Pluto opposite Mercury
First of all, I have noticed that just because planets might not have been discovered at a the time the person was living, they still affect birth charts (and life courses). So the fact that Pluto (or Neptune or Uranus) were not discovered doesn't matter in interpreting the chart.
A Pluto/Mercury opposition causes tremendous pressure on communication. There can be two possible results, either with an either/or choice, or with an oscillation between the two, or with the two in sequence. The first possible result is complete suppression of communication. Absolute secrecy and silence. The stopper is put on the bottle and the bottle is put in a hole dug in the ground far away from the beaten path where it will never be found.
The second possible result is explosive communication, intense discourse going very deep into whatever the subject is (often dictated by the signs the planets are in).
Cancer is about protecting the home (the homeland) and one's loved ones. Capricorn is about work and achievement.
Oppositions are often push/pull things. Here the Pluto/Mercury opposition could mean a going back and forth on the issues -- first swinging to one side, then to the other.
Mercury in Cancer may cause thinking about how best to protect one's "home." Pluto in Capricorn -- well, Pluto is often about abuse of the subjects related to the sign it's in. The reason for this is not that Pluto is "bad," but that few can figure out how to use it because it requires one to go through hell and fire before arriving at any conclusion. I think of Pluto as like a Black Hole. It sucks everything into it, willy nilly.
More important than the fact that Mercury was retrograde (which I think is way overrated) is that Mercury and Pluto were BOTH retrograde, but since Mercury is faster, Mercury was actually backing away from the opposition (with Pluto chasing after it).
It would be interesting to see which went direct and how long they were mutually chasing after or running away from each other.
The Mystic Rectangle
And another thing about the Mercury/Pluto opposition is that it is part of a Mystic Rectangle aspect that involves Mercury, Neptune, Pluto, and Chiron. This means that Mercury is not only opposite Pluto but sextile Neptune, which is then opposite Chiron, which is sextile Pluto, forming a big rectangle that dominates the entire chart.
This also means that Pluto and Neptune are in trine and Chiron/Mercury are in trine. Neptune is 22.25 in Scorpio and Chiron is 00.00 in Aries. (In other words, there's a trine between Cancer and Aries, which is sort of unusual. Usually trines are between signs of like elements -- so normally, it would be Aries and Leo, or Cancer and Pisces. But because Chiron is right on the cusp, the trine crosses elements.)
And strangely, the same thing is true of the Neptune/Pluto trine: it's between Scorpio and Capricorn - crossing elements -- not sharing them.
What does this all mean? I could spend days analyzing it (and probably will). It certainly is a huge mix of things. I'll leave it unanswered for now, for future discussion. (Comments, of course, welcome.)
Saturn/Sun Square
The Sun/Saturn square is also, I agree, very important. Because Mystic Rectangles tend to dominate charts, and the Sun/Saturn square is not touched by it, the square may be less important. (And there are other important aspects in the chart, too -- a few other squares and trines, but we wont' go into them yet.)
Saturn tends to harshly restrict or put pressure on what it squares. Coming out of Aquarius, of which it is sub-ruler, it might have had the effect of shattering the Sun's sense of home. Mars and Uranus trining Saturn out of Gemini may have had the effect of increasing Saturn's shattering effect. Uranus buddying up with Saturn is pretty powerful and rambunctious. Mars trine, too, adds energy and drive to it.
About Pluto and Saturn Effects
I'm highly suspicious of any hard Pluto or Saturn effects in a chart. I have found them in the charts of the early prime players in the Bush Administration and found them to represent criminal doings, indeed even a criminal enterprise. When Saturn and Pluto are in hard aspect to each other, they are the stuff of Mafia.
Here, in our country's birthchart, Saturn and Pluto are NOT in hard aspect to each other, but they are in hard aspect to two personal planets (Mercury and, more importantly, the Sun).
With such combinations, I often find abuse of power and cruelty.
USA's Birthday a Bad Pick?
Ray Andrews wrote on alt.astrology.moderated@googlegroups.com:
I have read about how the founding fathers of USA were into Astrology.....especially Benjamin Franklin.
I have read about how the founding fathers of USA were into Astrology.....especially Benjamin Franklin.
My question is why did they pick July 4, 1776 to sign the Declaration of Independence?
To me, it seemed like a bad day to sign because of Sun Square Saturn and Mercury retrograde in Cancer
The Sun is in alignment with Sirius which is said to be a powerful star.
but I don't think that it trumps Sun square Saturn
***
it would seem to me that planetary aspects are more important than fixed star alignments.
maybe USA's Sun-Sirius alignment and Sun square Saturn share a theme. It could be issue of pride, ambition as well as arrogance of a patronizing nature (how dare our nature we act like somebody else's parents because our culture is superior - views shared by many outside the USA)
Sirius * the Dog Star the Sun of the Sun the prime Sun of our Galaxy Ambition, pride, emotionality, fame, leadership, wealth, fires, drought, danger through impetuosity.
http://www.astrologycom.com/fixedstars.html#Cancer
a retrograde Mercury in Cancer, is not a good time to be signing documents....obviously when they signed the declaration of Independence,they didn't have all Americans in mind
the retrograde Mercury has an opposition to Pluto, but the founding fathers didn't know about the undiscovered Pluto at the time. But to me, this country can have emotional biases that adversely affect decisions as well as can be very suspicious,and distrustful of others who they might not see as patriotic because they question the government.
Ironically, USA was a country founded by people who rebelled against the ruling British government. If anything, back in those days, they could have been viewed as being unpatriotic or traitors to their sovereign nations.
the same with Sun in Cancer square Saturn in Libra which doesn't seem like they truly cared about justice when they signed the document.
Justice was very limited...I would say. Of course, conflict with authorities.
I would like to get some thoughts from others about this.
Friday, October 24, 2008
Enantiadromia
I asked permission from Maureen, who posted on an astrology list, to cross-post her comments, copied below. Maureen picks up on the term enantiadromia from an earlier post on that list.
Although the earlier poster had defined the term, I looked it up in dictionary.com. It was not found there. So I did an extended google search on it. These were two of the definitions I found, one from an astrology site and the other from a psycho-therapist's publication:
Enantiadromia: A psychological phenomenon wherein, when one resists something long enough and hard enough, one becomes that thing by flipping violently to the opposite. After the Jews resisted the Nazis, they established one of the most militaristic states in the developed world. From: Definition of Jungian Terms, by Nancy R. Fenn
*This pendulum swing, or enantiadromia, is defined by the Greek Heraclitis as “Where the deepest point of saturation with darkness gives birth to a rapidly expanding point of light.”*
From: Dream Talk, by Ken Kimmel, M.A., C.M.H.C.
Notice that Kimmel's quote from Heraclitis suggests something quite different than Jung's definition (or at least, than how people are quoting Jung's definition, since I couldn't find Jung's original). More on this separately, later.
Maureen, in her post, contrasts wholeness (or the collective) with enantiadromia. Here's her post:
From: Maureen Press
Subject: Re: SATURN-URANUS OPPOSITION EXACT ON ELECTION DAY
Date: Monday, October 20, 2008, 1:27 PM
In the larger picture, I think Americans are tired of being "spliced and diced" into ever smaller constituencies - "special interest groups" - and then being set against each other.
Obama was the first candidate to articulate a notion of national wholeness, at the 2004 Democratic Convention, where he spoke of finding a common ground, a common vision and a common purpose. In the upcoming months, I suspect this notion of community (also beautifully expressed by Hillary Clinton they day she formally ended her campaign) will become more and more important.
More than the concept of enantiadromia (which I have seen on two occasions!), I find much value in Jung's notion of the collective. Something has been brewing for a very long time in the unconscious of many people and Obama was the first to give it credible, public expression - his is a powerful message of unity.
Because I perceive him to be a healer - in this case, attempting to heal the divisions in America (between left and right, secular and religious, hawk and dove, etc), I would expect his presidency to include a number of conservative principles . . . because he is attempting to do more the build a bridge between differing perspectives, he is looking to create a completely new "third way" that can transcend the old opposites.
I don't know if this is possible, but I do know that people are hungry for it - especially at a time when people are beginning to understand that they have been divided - and picked clean by those doing the dividing.
At the more collective level of the two parties, I do see some enantiadromia being expressed. McCain is the antithesis of a "conservative" in his public persona, while Obama is far removed from the emotionally driven "bleeding heart" stereotype as one could get. Their policies may each be driven by their respective parties (party's?) traditional stands, but their public performances have enacted alot of the opposites.
Perhaps this gives the public a opportunity to understand some of the madness behind the Republican party's orientation, and some of the critical thinking (and intellectual heft) that grounds the Democratic Party.
. . . or this could all be wishful thinking :-)
It's strange to wake up in the middle of history, isn't it? To realize that were living in times that will define the direction of the world far into the future . . .
Thanks again, Claudia - and cf! - for your thoughtful reflections on this strange and wondrous times we're living in.
Maureen
(the view from Canada)
Although the earlier poster had defined the term, I looked it up in dictionary.com. It was not found there. So I did an extended google search on it. These were two of the definitions I found, one from an astrology site and the other from a psycho-therapist's publication:
Enantiadromia: A psychological phenomenon wherein, when one resists something long enough and hard enough, one becomes that thing by flipping violently to the opposite. After the Jews resisted the Nazis, they established one of the most militaristic states in the developed world. From: Definition of Jungian Terms, by Nancy R. Fenn
*This pendulum swing, or enantiadromia, is defined by the Greek Heraclitis as “Where the deepest point of saturation with darkness gives birth to a rapidly expanding point of light.”*
From: Dream Talk, by Ken Kimmel, M.A., C.M.H.C.
Notice that Kimmel's quote from Heraclitis suggests something quite different than Jung's definition (or at least, than how people are quoting Jung's definition, since I couldn't find Jung's original). More on this separately, later.
Maureen, in her post, contrasts wholeness (or the collective) with enantiadromia. Here's her post:
From: Maureen Press
Subject: Re: SATURN-URANUS OPPOSITION EXACT ON ELECTION DAY
Date: Monday, October 20, 2008, 1:27 PM
In the larger picture, I think Americans are tired of being "spliced and diced" into ever smaller constituencies - "special interest groups" - and then being set against each other.
Obama was the first candidate to articulate a notion of national wholeness, at the 2004 Democratic Convention, where he spoke of finding a common ground, a common vision and a common purpose. In the upcoming months, I suspect this notion of community (also beautifully expressed by Hillary Clinton they day she formally ended her campaign) will become more and more important.
More than the concept of enantiadromia (which I have seen on two occasions!), I find much value in Jung's notion of the collective. Something has been brewing for a very long time in the unconscious of many people and Obama was the first to give it credible, public expression - his is a powerful message of unity.
Because I perceive him to be a healer - in this case, attempting to heal the divisions in America (between left and right, secular and religious, hawk and dove, etc), I would expect his presidency to include a number of conservative principles . . . because he is attempting to do more the build a bridge between differing perspectives, he is looking to create a completely new "third way" that can transcend the old opposites.
I don't know if this is possible, but I do know that people are hungry for it - especially at a time when people are beginning to understand that they have been divided - and picked clean by those doing the dividing.
At the more collective level of the two parties, I do see some enantiadromia being expressed. McCain is the antithesis of a "conservative" in his public persona, while Obama is far removed from the emotionally driven "bleeding heart" stereotype as one could get. Their policies may each be driven by their respective parties (party's?) traditional stands, but their public performances have enacted alot of the opposites.
Perhaps this gives the public a opportunity to understand some of the madness behind the Republican party's orientation, and some of the critical thinking (and intellectual heft) that grounds the Democratic Party.
. . . or this could all be wishful thinking :-)
It's strange to wake up in the middle of history, isn't it? To realize that were living in times that will define the direction of the world far into the future . . .
Thanks again, Claudia - and cf! - for your thoughtful reflections on this strange and wondrous times we're living in.
Maureen
(the view from Canada)
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Upcoming: Human/Animal Connection - Survival of Our Species
I will post soon on the important connection between humans and animals. Our survival may depend on this.
Does Obama use hypnosis?
Does Obama use hypnosis?
Okay, I admit it. On this post, I am doing no astrological sorcery. This time, it is all hypnotic sorcery. If you are interested in this topic (hypnosis), read on and stay with me, because I plan to do more posts on it. It is a topic too little talked about -- and when it IS talked about, it is out of ignorance or paranoia. I am going to tell you what hypnosis is and how it works.
Here is a post I came upon on a radical left listserve, which I have divided up into sections with titles, and interspersed with my comments (subtitles in red, my comments in blue):
**Someone posted a message claiming that Obama's wild popularity is the result of a hypnosis technique developed by Milton H. Erickson back in the 1970s. I checked him out on Wikipedia and the following article is a bit dense but what it describes is frightening:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milton_H._Erickson**
Erickson is indeed considered one of the master hypnotists of all time. See below for my comments about Obama.
The Handshake
**Especially disturbing was a method of hypnotizing a victim via a casual handshake. Start off with a normal expected handshake, then breaking off the shake gradually by gently stroking the victim's fingers in succession. This arouses the victim's attention and then you distract him with a casual but expected comment, distracting his attention again and putting him into a mild trance.
Once the victim has been entranced by the handshake, the victim can be manipulated verbally. Speak in somewhat vague terms and let the victim fill in the blanks unconsciously. Confuse the victim by using words with more than one meaning, double negatives, etc., which deepens the trance by occupying his conscious mind with word definitions instead of critical thought. Finally, if the victim resists a suggestion, suggest something else because once a suggestion is accepted, it weakens resistance to other suggestions.**
(It is true that Erickson was able to hypnotize a woman, who spoke no English, via a handshake, but it was not a "causual handshake." And the fear of being "manipulated verbally" is a bit misplaced. See more below.)
Without Consent or Knowledge
**Erickson believed his technique had therapeutic value, on the grounds that most people were frightened by the idea of hypnosis and would resist it, so this indirect technique would be useful in "psychotherapy" to hypnotize people without their knowledge or consent. Although Erickson is the first to document this brainwashing method, I'm sure he is not the first to employ some or all of the techniques described. Salesmen and cult leaders have long had this ability, suggesting that their victims buy a rusty old Pinto or drink poison Kool-Aid.**
The first sentence above is inaccurate. Erickson never advocated using hypnosis without his clients' consent or knowledge, nor did he practice it. Here's my reply:
**Well, despite the pooh-poohs others have posted, I can attest to the power of Ericksonian hypnosis, since my father used it (both on his family members and on others). Obama doesn't use it, but it does exist.
See Therapeutic Trances: The Cooperation Principle in Ericksonian Hypnotherapy, by Stephen G. Gilligan -- http://www.amazon.com/Therapeutic-Trances-Cooperation-Ericksonian-Hyp....
Since I grew up with this, even though I was subjected to it and didn't know what it was for most of my life, I learned how to do it. It's quite real and quite powerful.**
So, here are some secrets of Ericksonian hypnosis:
A hypnotist cannot simply zap the "subject" and attain control over him or her. This was one of Erickson's main points: it is a collaborative relationship.
You (the hypnotist) must develop rapport with your subject. This is sina qua non. Hypnosis is generally almost impossible to generate without rapport.
The second key element is disorientation. You disorient your subject. You do this by any number of means. One of the easiest is via nonsequiturs. These are sentences and thoughts that simply don't follow -- but you state them as logical and sensible. This throws the subject out of linear/logical/cause-and-effect thought processes into nonlinear/"both-and" trance "logic."
"Both/and logic" is not really logical. It means we are able to accept both sides of polar opposites, we accept incongruencies and contradictions without having to resolve them. This can, as Erickson discovered, be highly beneficial to healing processes where a person was stuck in unfruitful psychological feedback loops.
I don't think it would be far-fetched to say that most so-called highly creative people use hypnosis frequently (usually self-hypnosis). In my Archetypes for Writers book, I discuss this under the term "artistic trance." There have been studies done on this and I'm sure I've written about it in other places.
Okay, but now back to Obama and the possibility of nefarious uses of hypnosis. Obama doesn't use it, I'm certain -- and I don't believe he has to, although one could argue (I think fairly) that Obama does know how to use persuasive techniques, such as benevolent facial expressions, gentle concessions to his opponent, strong sunny demeanor in his delivery. He's a great orator and persuasion is part of good oration.
Can it be used nefariously? Yes, absolutely. But, I would say that it would have to be used in one of two contexts: (1) either with a child or other person whose life is in your hands, or (2) in a social, cultural context where the content is already widely acceptable and accepted.
More on these two elements in hypnosis in a future post.
And friends, please email me at jennifer.vanbergen(at)gmail.com or post here to let me know what you like and what you would like to hear more about. :-)
Okay, I admit it. On this post, I am doing no astrological sorcery. This time, it is all hypnotic sorcery. If you are interested in this topic (hypnosis), read on and stay with me, because I plan to do more posts on it. It is a topic too little talked about -- and when it IS talked about, it is out of ignorance or paranoia. I am going to tell you what hypnosis is and how it works.
Here is a post I came upon on a radical left listserve, which I have divided up into sections with titles, and interspersed with my comments (subtitles in red, my comments in blue):
**Someone posted a message claiming that Obama's wild popularity is the result of a hypnosis technique developed by Milton H. Erickson back in the 1970s. I checked him out on Wikipedia and the following article is a bit dense but what it describes is frightening:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milton_H._Erickson**
Erickson is indeed considered one of the master hypnotists of all time. See below for my comments about Obama.
The Handshake
**Especially disturbing was a method of hypnotizing a victim via a casual handshake. Start off with a normal expected handshake, then breaking off the shake gradually by gently stroking the victim's fingers in succession. This arouses the victim's attention and then you distract him with a casual but expected comment, distracting his attention again and putting him into a mild trance.
Once the victim has been entranced by the handshake, the victim can be manipulated verbally. Speak in somewhat vague terms and let the victim fill in the blanks unconsciously. Confuse the victim by using words with more than one meaning, double negatives, etc., which deepens the trance by occupying his conscious mind with word definitions instead of critical thought. Finally, if the victim resists a suggestion, suggest something else because once a suggestion is accepted, it weakens resistance to other suggestions.**
(It is true that Erickson was able to hypnotize a woman, who spoke no English, via a handshake, but it was not a "causual handshake." And the fear of being "manipulated verbally" is a bit misplaced. See more below.)
Without Consent or Knowledge
**Erickson believed his technique had therapeutic value, on the grounds that most people were frightened by the idea of hypnosis and would resist it, so this indirect technique would be useful in "psychotherapy" to hypnotize people without their knowledge or consent. Although Erickson is the first to document this brainwashing method, I'm sure he is not the first to employ some or all of the techniques described. Salesmen and cult leaders have long had this ability, suggesting that their victims buy a rusty old Pinto or drink poison Kool-Aid.**
The first sentence above is inaccurate. Erickson never advocated using hypnosis without his clients' consent or knowledge, nor did he practice it. Here's my reply:
**Well, despite the pooh-poohs others have posted, I can attest to the power of Ericksonian hypnosis, since my father used it (both on his family members and on others). Obama doesn't use it, but it does exist.
See Therapeutic Trances: The Cooperation Principle in Ericksonian Hypnotherapy, by Stephen G. Gilligan -- http://www.amazon.com/Therapeutic-Trances-Cooperation-Ericksonian-Hyp....
Since I grew up with this, even though I was subjected to it and didn't know what it was for most of my life, I learned how to do it. It's quite real and quite powerful.**
So, here are some secrets of Ericksonian hypnosis:
A hypnotist cannot simply zap the "subject" and attain control over him or her. This was one of Erickson's main points: it is a collaborative relationship.
You (the hypnotist) must develop rapport with your subject. This is sina qua non. Hypnosis is generally almost impossible to generate without rapport.
The second key element is disorientation. You disorient your subject. You do this by any number of means. One of the easiest is via nonsequiturs. These are sentences and thoughts that simply don't follow -- but you state them as logical and sensible. This throws the subject out of linear/logical/cause-and-effect thought processes into nonlinear/"both-and" trance "logic."
"Both/and logic" is not really logical. It means we are able to accept both sides of polar opposites, we accept incongruencies and contradictions without having to resolve them. This can, as Erickson discovered, be highly beneficial to healing processes where a person was stuck in unfruitful psychological feedback loops.
I don't think it would be far-fetched to say that most so-called highly creative people use hypnosis frequently (usually self-hypnosis). In my Archetypes for Writers book, I discuss this under the term "artistic trance." There have been studies done on this and I'm sure I've written about it in other places.
Okay, but now back to Obama and the possibility of nefarious uses of hypnosis. Obama doesn't use it, I'm certain -- and I don't believe he has to, although one could argue (I think fairly) that Obama does know how to use persuasive techniques, such as benevolent facial expressions, gentle concessions to his opponent, strong sunny demeanor in his delivery. He's a great orator and persuasion is part of good oration.
Can it be used nefariously? Yes, absolutely. But, I would say that it would have to be used in one of two contexts: (1) either with a child or other person whose life is in your hands, or (2) in a social, cultural context where the content is already widely acceptable and accepted.
More on these two elements in hypnosis in a future post.
And friends, please email me at jennifer.vanbergen(at)gmail.com or post here to let me know what you like and what you would like to hear more about. :-)
Sunday, October 19, 2008
Obama & Election Day
Just a few , simple short comments about Obama and coming events.
Obama's Rising Sign is (18 degrees 03 minutes) in Aquarius opposite his Leo Sun. This is not an easy combination but it's one I trust better than most Leo combos, because the Aquarius Ascendant will force the self-glorifying Leo Sun to consider humanitarian purposes in whatever he engages himself in.
Obama's Moon in Gemini really helps his Aquarius Ascendant, too. If Aquarius Rising has a lightning quick intellect, Gemini Moon people are even smarter -- fast and accurate thinkers. But they aren't doing it as a mind game (like Mars Gemini people do). They do it in their sleep, in their dreams, in their souls.
Okay, so that's about Obama. What about election day?
On November 4th, Saturn and Uranus will be in exact opposition. This is a momentous thing. Uranus and Saturn are the two rulers for Aquarius. Uranus is the primary ruler; Saturn the sub-ruler. They don't necessarily get along though, these two planets. In opposition, it's likely to be a fight between the cold, righteous lawmaker (Saturn) and the unrepentent innovator and rule-breaker (Uranus). Duh!
The opposition takes place between Saturn (at 18 degrees 55 minutes) in Virgo and Uranus (at 18 degrees 58 minutes) in Pisces. Obama has Mars at 22 degrees 35 minutes in Virgo, in almost an exact conjunction with Saturn on Election Day (and in opposition to Uranus).
Mars in conjunction with Saturn doesn't feel so great; it feels crushingly restrictive. With Uranus in opposition to his Mars, as well, Obama is likely to feel like throwing everything to the winds ... but if Obama can bear it, Saturn the lawmaker is on his side that day ... with the rule-breaker opposing him.
It's a weird twist, since one might consider Obama as tending to side with Uranus (via his Aquarian Ascendant) over Saturn. But Obama has a good understanding of Saturn because his own Saturn resides in reliable and responsible Capricorn (of which it is the primary ruler) and he has his Jupiter right next to it in Aquarius (the conjunction crossing the border of the two signs).
This is a powerful placement and Obama shares it with one of the great builders of this nation: Thomas Jefferson. These people know how to make things that last well beyond their lifetimes. Obama couldn't have these two planets better placed. They reside in the signs of law and change.
Saturday, October 18, 2008
Introduction to my approach to the uses astrology
A few years ago, I wrote a long analysis of the Bush Gang using astro-mythological tools and terms. It was titled:The Beast from the Depths of Chaos: Astro-Mythology & the Bush Gang.
At the time, I was best known as a political/legal commentator. I had worked hard to build my reputation and establish my credibility as such. I used my law training diligently to craft careful analyses of the laws being passed under Bush and of the administration's interpretations and uses of those laws. My work was widely known and respected. The reason was that not only did I tell people what was really going on, I also broke news on many unspoken issues. I was the first to write against the PATRIOT Act, the first to raise the problems with FISA, the first to discuss the Bush Administration's violations of the laws of war, and the first to report on Bush's misuse of signing statements. All this, when others were silent.
My reputation was not lost after I posted the Depths of Chaos article, nor is it lost today, although I have stopped writing legal/political analyses for reasons of my own.
However, after that article, one reader approached me (in person) and commented: "Great way to establish your credibility."
I wrote no further political astrological pieces after that, mostly because they take a huge amount of time and work, but also because I felt they would not be productive since many people pooh-pooh astrology. But I still find astrology accurate in doing character assessment -- political character assessment as well as personal. So I have started this blog.
My assessment of the Bush Gang turned out to be horribly accurate, more so than I could have known when I was starting my research on it. What I learned through doing that analysis was worse than I had seen before, and it has been borne out by the administration's subsequent actions.
Please read it and post comments there and here.
But before I sign off here, let me add some comments about my approach to astrology. I do not use astrology predictively, nor do I think it should be so used. I use it exclusively to look at the hard-wiring of individuals. But there is a caveat here: just because you are wired in a certain way doesn't predict how you will use that wiring. You still always have choices, but the choices are dictated by the wiring. The wiring is discernible through the planetary aspects in your birth chart.
Thus, I do almost exclusively planetary aspect analysis. I do very little with houses, points, harmonics, transits, and never do predictions of political events, etc.
The reason for this is that planetary aspects are concrete. WHERE a planet is situated in the heavens relative to the other planets is a literal, concrete event. (It's all about angles, like billiards and geometry -- which is also most interesting if you know anything about sacred geometry.) I'm not saying the other astrological tools are completely abstract, but they are not as concrete as planetary aspects.
Further, there is solid scientific research that planetary aspects do have physical affects. I will write more on this later separately.
But I also always keep in mind the principle of nonlocality in quantum physics. This expresses the fact that if you split an atom or an atomic particle and send half of it light years away in one direction and the other half light years away in another direction, and you then DO something to ONE of those particles, the OTHER one behaves as if that action were done to IT, as well. Einstein called this "spooky action at a distance."
As Shakespeare wrote:
And therefore as a stranger give it welcome.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
Thanks for reading and I hope you enjoy this blog and send others its way.
JVB
P.S. For my political writing, go to my JVB Line website. For my work on the use of archetypes in creating characters, go to my Archetypes for Writers website.
At the time, I was best known as a political/legal commentator. I had worked hard to build my reputation and establish my credibility as such. I used my law training diligently to craft careful analyses of the laws being passed under Bush and of the administration's interpretations and uses of those laws. My work was widely known and respected. The reason was that not only did I tell people what was really going on, I also broke news on many unspoken issues. I was the first to write against the PATRIOT Act, the first to raise the problems with FISA, the first to discuss the Bush Administration's violations of the laws of war, and the first to report on Bush's misuse of signing statements. All this, when others were silent.
My reputation was not lost after I posted the Depths of Chaos article, nor is it lost today, although I have stopped writing legal/political analyses for reasons of my own.
However, after that article, one reader approached me (in person) and commented: "Great way to establish your credibility."
I wrote no further political astrological pieces after that, mostly because they take a huge amount of time and work, but also because I felt they would not be productive since many people pooh-pooh astrology. But I still find astrology accurate in doing character assessment -- political character assessment as well as personal. So I have started this blog.
My assessment of the Bush Gang turned out to be horribly accurate, more so than I could have known when I was starting my research on it. What I learned through doing that analysis was worse than I had seen before, and it has been borne out by the administration's subsequent actions.
Please read it and post comments there and here.
But before I sign off here, let me add some comments about my approach to astrology. I do not use astrology predictively, nor do I think it should be so used. I use it exclusively to look at the hard-wiring of individuals. But there is a caveat here: just because you are wired in a certain way doesn't predict how you will use that wiring. You still always have choices, but the choices are dictated by the wiring. The wiring is discernible through the planetary aspects in your birth chart.
Thus, I do almost exclusively planetary aspect analysis. I do very little with houses, points, harmonics, transits, and never do predictions of political events, etc.
The reason for this is that planetary aspects are concrete. WHERE a planet is situated in the heavens relative to the other planets is a literal, concrete event. (It's all about angles, like billiards and geometry -- which is also most interesting if you know anything about sacred geometry.) I'm not saying the other astrological tools are completely abstract, but they are not as concrete as planetary aspects.
Further, there is solid scientific research that planetary aspects do have physical affects. I will write more on this later separately.
But I also always keep in mind the principle of nonlocality in quantum physics. This expresses the fact that if you split an atom or an atomic particle and send half of it light years away in one direction and the other half light years away in another direction, and you then DO something to ONE of those particles, the OTHER one behaves as if that action were done to IT, as well. Einstein called this "spooky action at a distance."
As Shakespeare wrote:
Horatio:
O day and night, but this is wondrous strange!
And therefore as a stranger give it welcome.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
Thanks for reading and I hope you enjoy this blog and send others its way.
JVB
P.S. For my political writing, go to my JVB Line website. For my work on the use of archetypes in creating characters, go to my Archetypes for Writers website.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
