Minderwiz
I pronounce it qwinkunks - Dont' know about others LOL
Chart Reading: Step #1, Martha Stewart.
dadsnook2000
A brief note of caution
We can indeed digress onto other subjects -- BUT -- one of the goals of this exercise is to explore how a disciplined path (not neccessarily the right or only path) can help us to deeply read and appreciate an astrology chart. We have looked at shaping, at elemental balance and at the quality balance. That was the goal for this step.
We have reached some conclusions from this phase of our examination.
1) The chart has a bucket shape, the Moon is the focus but it lacks a good opposition aspect -- a key expectation for a bucket shape. We can expect that other factors will either emphasize or support this situation -- but they will be discovered at another step.
2) There is a lack of Cardinal quality in the chart, so we will be prompted to look at (later) the Sun, Mars and Conjunction or Square aspects to see what effect this has on the full reading.
3) We see a lot of the Fire element in this chart. Will related planets work through fire signs or will other planets struggle for expression through the fire signs?
4) Because the Moon is one of the two "lights" in the chart, the Sun was observed to be at the MC -- will the strength of the Sun impact the Moon in a beneficial way. This is another key to the chart interpretation to come.
I myself do not want to explore the Moon's aspects just yet. If I were actually doing this chart alone, I would continue with the basic steps first; chart shaping & characteristics, sun position and aspects as an integrting force, moon positon (in the same way), how the sun and moon can work together, major aspectual patterns, etc. This keeps me from getting lost in detail. Dave.
We can indeed digress onto other subjects -- BUT -- one of the goals of this exercise is to explore how a disciplined path (not neccessarily the right or only path) can help us to deeply read and appreciate an astrology chart. We have looked at shaping, at elemental balance and at the quality balance. That was the goal for this step.
We have reached some conclusions from this phase of our examination.
1) The chart has a bucket shape, the Moon is the focus but it lacks a good opposition aspect -- a key expectation for a bucket shape. We can expect that other factors will either emphasize or support this situation -- but they will be discovered at another step.
2) There is a lack of Cardinal quality in the chart, so we will be prompted to look at (later) the Sun, Mars and Conjunction or Square aspects to see what effect this has on the full reading.
3) We see a lot of the Fire element in this chart. Will related planets work through fire signs or will other planets struggle for expression through the fire signs?
4) Because the Moon is one of the two "lights" in the chart, the Sun was observed to be at the MC -- will the strength of the Sun impact the Moon in a beneficial way. This is another key to the chart interpretation to come.
I myself do not want to explore the Moon's aspects just yet. If I were actually doing this chart alone, I would continue with the basic steps first; chart shaping & characteristics, sun position and aspects as an integrting force, moon positon (in the same way), how the sun and moon can work together, major aspectual patterns, etc. This keeps me from getting lost in detail. Dave.
gloria
going back
Have just read Lee's thread about chart tone.
[Quote....]
which one arrives at by determining the predominant element and the predominant quality (by counting the number of planets in the signs by quality and element), and then combining the predominant sign with the predominant quality and considering the resulting sign to be the chart tone or signature. [Unquote]
For our M.S chart I came up with majority of 4 in Fixed/Fire, and so hope that I'm right in assuming Leo is the tone or signature here. As you say Dave the Sun could play an important part in chart.
Hope you don't think I'm rambling, I just need to get a feel or insight to this.
Gloria.
Have just read Lee's thread about chart tone.
[Quote....]
which one arrives at by determining the predominant element and the predominant quality (by counting the number of planets in the signs by quality and element), and then combining the predominant sign with the predominant quality and considering the resulting sign to be the chart tone or signature. [Unquote]
For our M.S chart I came up with majority of 4 in Fixed/Fire, and so hope that I'm right in assuming Leo is the tone or signature here. As you say Dave the Sun could play an important part in chart.
Hope you don't think I'm rambling, I just need to get a feel or insight to this.
Gloria.
dadsnook2000
For Gloria
Yes, Leo is THE sign representing the element/quality balance of the Martha Stewart chart. It is possible, depending upon how you want to assign or split points, and what you want to include in your count to come up with Sag as the sign -- but, according to what I believe is mainstream practice, LEO is the sign.
So, the Sun would have to be considered as the ruler of Leo. I noticed the Sun immediately based on two factors; the Moon did not have any significant opposition aspect (appropriate for a bucket chart) and the Sun was at the MC. This suggests, even though it is not yet determined, that the Sun is a key to helping or negating the Moon's normal role in a chart. We'll see. Dave.
Yes, Leo is THE sign representing the element/quality balance of the Martha Stewart chart. It is possible, depending upon how you want to assign or split points, and what you want to include in your count to come up with Sag as the sign -- but, according to what I believe is mainstream practice, LEO is the sign.
So, the Sun would have to be considered as the ruler of Leo. I noticed the Sun immediately based on two factors; the Moon did not have any significant opposition aspect (appropriate for a bucket chart) and the Sun was at the MC. This suggests, even though it is not yet determined, that the Sun is a key to helping or negating the Moon's normal role in a chart. We'll see. Dave.
Moongold
I am still with you and really happy to proceed witht the general flow. 
Minderwiz
Yes, Dave is right we need to avoid disappearing off at tangents and follow an organised and directed approach.
We have talked in terms of strength and weakness of Sun and Moon respectively. I am not quite at one with Dave yet, on this preliminary interpretation. I do see the Sun as Strong because of its placement at or near the MC (and other factors). Up to this stage I simply see the Moon as being only relatively weaker - because its not angular.
I agree that in a classical bucket there would be an opposition to the Moon but whether the lack of it alone creates a weak Moon, I'm not sure. So I have at the moment a reservation on treating the Moon as necessarily weak, rather than relatively weak. However looking ahead to the planetary analysis I can see factors which would lead me to classify the Moon as weak. We can discuss those at the appropriate time.
Dave if you want to start the next round going tomorrow (Thursday) that will fit fine with my work pattern through the end of the week and the weekend.
We have talked in terms of strength and weakness of Sun and Moon respectively. I am not quite at one with Dave yet, on this preliminary interpretation. I do see the Sun as Strong because of its placement at or near the MC (and other factors). Up to this stage I simply see the Moon as being only relatively weaker - because its not angular.
I agree that in a classical bucket there would be an opposition to the Moon but whether the lack of it alone creates a weak Moon, I'm not sure. So I have at the moment a reservation on treating the Moon as necessarily weak, rather than relatively weak. However looking ahead to the planetary analysis I can see factors which would lead me to classify the Moon as weak. We can discuss those at the appropriate time.
Dave if you want to start the next round going tomorrow (Thursday) that will fit fine with my work pattern through the end of the week and the weekend.
