Unaspected Planets

[Jim Eshelman]

To further the study of so-called "unaspected planets," I'm copying here some information generally not available. Most of this originated from or was summarized in Geoffrey Dean's 1977 book, Recent Advances in Natal Astrology. I have broadly (not necessarily precisely) found this to be worthwhile and accurate, but have never fully resolved an operative theory to integrate the empirical information.

Technically, there is no such thing as an "unaspected" planet, since the word "aspect" literally means the distance between two planets or other bodies. Astrologers, however, use the term to mean specific aspects. The meaning of the word "unaspected" needs to be defined, therefore, since any number of aspects of widely varying orbs could, theoretically, be under consideration. Because the existing studies have generally used a particular definition, I have adopted it as well - so that we are clear what we are examining, and are using the same definitions as other searchers.

Generally, therefore, I use "unaspected" to mean that a planet has no conjunction, opposition, square, trine, or sextile within 5° to the Sun, Moon, or one of the other eight standard planets. (Dean reports "finding" that "unaspected traits become less marked as the orb was reduced below 5° but were still detectable. Conversely, as planets became progressively less aspected beyond 3° orbs they tended to progressively manifest unaspected traits as well as aspected traits.")

[Jim Eshelman]

Geoffrey Dean generalizations:

Dean summarized his own findings on unaspected planets with four characterizations:

1. Not necessarily weak - grants a "distinctive flavour." (Seems almost to describe it as "strong" because he distinguishes the effect from "the strength conferred eg by proximity to the angles.")

2. The planet's principle "tends to be hard to control and thus lacks integration with the rest of the chart." As a generalization, it "acts by itself." [Compare this to my own observation that unaspected planets are "mavericks" in the personality.]

3. The planet's principle "tends to be either switched on or off with no half measures allowed," and there are often swings between the "on" and "off" expression.

4. "Strength is almost impossible to predict" as a consequence of the above characteristics.

[Jim Eshelman]

DEAN studied a pilot group of 70 people with known birth times and one or more unaspected planets (using the above definition). The initial findings were then "checked by six independent workers" against other small samples. I regard this all as a pilot study based on empirical data, resulting in postulates to be further tested. Information is also given by Dean of the results of an E.A. Moore study. (Moore used larger orbs: 7°.) Here is a summary of the findings, quoting from Dean's summary:

SUN unaspected
"Effects were among the least outwardly apparent of any planet. Inwardly they did not necessarily result in traumas. There was no special evidence of listlessness, vapidity, lack of morality, or weakness of will; in fact, the opposite was often true. Nor was success denied. Most natives felt inwardly fragmented; and identified strongly with the inner self and abilities/traits being on opposite sides of a fence with no way of bringing them together. Suggested interpretation: inner self feels fragmented or disconnected from the rest of character.
Moore suggests: independent and detached, an island unto themselves. Males are not close to father, females are not close to father or husband."
From my Notebook #93: A natural predisposition to take a leadership role. Even those who failed usually bespoke a great promise at the beginning.

MOON unaspected
"Effects could be the most personally traumatic of any planet. About half the natives seemed conspicuously unemotional and unfeeling most of the time, but had highly emotional periods seemingly beyond control. There was no special evidence for simple, immature or unforceful personality. Suggested interpretation: emotions seem to come and go by themselves as if beyond conscious control, tendency to be either all emotion or none.
Moore suggests: unstable emotions, subconscious urge for freedom. Females are not close to mother, males are not close to mother or wife."
From my Notebook #93: The woman are marked "caretakers" [whether they are any good at it is a separate matter], but also characterized by outbursts of uncontrollable reactive emotion. The men are on the passive, gentle side and sometimes seem more than a little "lost."

MERCURY unaspected
"Effects were often marked. Most natives seemed conspicuously intellectual... Natives were often especially talkative in the sense that once they got started there was no stopping them; the native could be quite untalkative otherwise. Suggested interpretation: tendency to be either all reason/intellect or none (usually all), probably talkative given the chance.
Moore suggests: restless innovative mind, agile voice."
From my Notebook #93: Tendency (especially among women) to think their opinion is the only one that matters.

VENUS unaspected
"Effects were often not obvious. In general, Venusian traits could be marked: in 21 cases there were 3 music teachers, 2 art teachers, 2 art students, and at least 3 musicians... there was no more evidence of... indecisiveness than when aspected. Suggested interpretation: tendency to either unrestrained love affairs or none, affections and artistic inclinations do not blend with reason, action or control.
Moore suggests: unusual or erratic love relationships, unique or unusual artistic ability, males relate poorly to the opposite sex."
From my Notebook #93: The women practically wear as a "name tag" that they've had serious trouble with men, and often decided to do without them. The men have a really infectious attractiveness that makes them likable even when other behavior things are against them; very magnetic in this way.

MARS unaspected
"Effects were the most outwardly marked and distinctive of all unaspected planets. Energy (not necessarily strong physical effort, but in the sense of being occupied doing something, ie being busy) was usually conspicuously present. There was invariably a tendency to be always starting new things before others were finished... 'flahes of temper' were absent in only 4 cases in 27, all 4 were femalinterpretationd interpretaton: generates endless work for self, always busy, probably moments of explosive impatience that seem apart from self. A useful confirmation of these traits is provided indirectly by the work of Dobyns and Roof: 6 of their 13 charts and psychological assessments are described as 'busy', and all 6 have Mars unaspected either by itself or in a duet.
Moore suggests: always busy, scatters energies, quick temper, mechanical ingenuity, sporadic sex life, females tend to have unusual love relationships and relate poorly to the opposite sex."

JUPITER unaspected
"Effects were not always marked.... Suggested interpretation: urge for expansion and growth tend to be beyond conscious control, inclined to solitude.
Moore suggests: erratic overindulgence, unusual ambivalent ideas and philosophies; no special inclination to solitude was noticed."

SATURN unaspected
"Effects were often (but not always) marked. In general, natives appeared to be well controlled but were subject to moments of extravagance or impetuosity out of keeping with their control.... Suggested interpretation: tendency to be either all caution/control or none.
Moore suggests: erratic selfseriousl, not always serious and responsible, lacks self-discipline."
From my Notebook #93: The women show an interesting picture regarding autonomy: They are basically on their own, attentive to details of personal business, quite able to take care of themselves, and yet seem to be persistently struggling with autonomy and authority and power issues that seem so internal that they are not always visibly related to anything in the present environment. These issues typically emerge in their close relationships. (I don't see a marked, identifiable pattern in the men except that they are quietly confident, with a gentle or sweet manner. I'm not at all sure that this is a trait of this particular astrological characteristic.)

URANUS unaspected
"Effects were often very marked. Unappeasable restlessness was strongly identified with in 21 cases without exception. There was also a strong love of innovations and new things, but only slightly more than when Uranus was aspected. Suggested interpretaton: moments of marked restlessness with no apparent cause, often a love of innovations and new things.
Moore suggests: inventive, rebellious tendencies, must be free at all costs...; marked restlessness was quite noticeable."
From my Notebook #93: They seem to do best when they are "off on their own," with nobody looking over their shoulders. They don't necessarily thrive in those circumstances, but they seem rarely likely to thrive under any other circumstance. They seem to need to thrive or fail on their own merit, on their own schedule.

NEPTUNE unaspected
"No obvious differences could be found between aspected and unaspected Neptunes... a lack of aspects did not deny Neptunian traits [examples given of esoteric interests, psychics, &c.]...
Moore suggests: creative, imaginative, intuitive, very strong psychic ability that is either very spiritual or very misdirected."

PLUTO unaspected
"Effects were not especially marked... Suggested interpretation: subject to sudden compulsive urges that are difficult to direct.
Moore did not have sufficient examples on which to base on opinion."

[Jim Eshelman]

Jim, do you have some similar advice about my natal unaspected Mercury?
my birth data: April 22nd 1983. 22:25h CEDT Zajecar, Serbia

For an unaspected Mercury, we normally expected a kind of "rogue of the intellect and communication" effect. The studies cited above emphasize that such people typically seem "conspicuously intellectual... especially talkative in the sense that once they got started there was no stopping them" (or quite untalkative otherwise - an "all or nothing" type of effect). I've observed, among people that I know, that women especially tend to think their opinion is the only one that matters when Mercury is unaspected.

So, first, before we deal with "correctives," I think you should identify what, if anything, you dislike about yourself from this trait. No use treating the healthy!

Some other elements in your chart play to this in a most interesting way. Your exactly rising Uranus, and exactly-on-the-Eastpoint Neptune reinforce some of the above traits either directly, or by sharp polarity. For that matter, your foreground Venus and Jupiter take an interesting twist in the presence of your Mercury - a (usually harder to see) Mercury-Jupiter polarity leaning the Jupiter way, and the more obvious Venus-Mercury polarity easily going the Venus way.

What's interesting in your chart (on this point) is that Mercury is essentially "missing" in more than the unaspected sense. There are no luminaries (or, for that matter, any planets) in Gemini or Virgo. Mercury is background and under the earth. It doesn't even have wider aspects to fall back to. It's a "missing" planet in the chart. The most characterizing element is its sign placement in Aries - you might read Mercury in Aries for insight into how that manifests. Usually a background Mercury means that someone grows up thinking they aren't allowed a voice, not listened to, "no opportunity to be heard" - I could easily see the sign traits providing a compenation on that.

I'm guessing - considering the number of very strong, affirmative traits in your chart - that the outcome is more an emphasizing of the things that are strong, and only a bit of "but Mercury is missing" hiding in the shadows.

[Jim Eshelman]

I think you should identify what, if anything, you dislike about yourself from this trait.

I feel (and see) that I can only use it in a sort of divinatory manner - I do not see the process of how thoughts develop and emerge, it's like they just "pop up" out of the void... in writing, for example, I just feel inspired and start to write and the words flow through me, so to speak - I don't acually think when doing it.
but, when I have to write something in a ascientific and disciplined manner (a paper for my studies - that's a current problem ) - it seems almost impossible to do it! sure there are ideas, insights and a general (and a lot of particular ones..) opinion on the subject, but I feel like there is a huge gap between that and the actual systematic manifestation of them into written words - I do not see the sequence of thoughts, I just have insights, and the work requires systematic elicitation (not sure if this is the right word... ).

so, the systematic, structured manifestation of Mercury seems to be the main problem!
(and it rules my MC, to make it worse!)

should I consider the wide 150°aspect with Pluto as something worth taking into account? - and consider Pluto as a sort of bridge between inner Mercury processes and their manifestation...?

[Jim Eshelman]

I just realized that my Sun is unaspected, and I notice traits and observations like you mention above in my personality. How does one go about bridging that gap? Can you offer any thoughts?

Yes, your Sun does fit the definition. - I don't have a firm strategy for that worked out. A general strategy would start (as with any other astrological manifestation) with identifying (itemizing) exactly what you observe to be true in yourself that you want to change.

Another thing you might do is focus on what the strongest conditioning factors of the Sun actually are. For example, its Sagittarian placement gives an anchor to its nature. Also, your closest Sun aspect, even though it's fairly wide, is the conjunction to Uranus. Look at that and actively develop Sun-Uranus traits that you would like to have, especially those that are consistent with your Sagittarian nature.

[Jim Eshelman]

Thank you for the thoughts, Jim. I took a look at Sun-Uranus and see some of those traits in myself (easily bored, perfectionistic, preachy/dictatorial qualities, focused on my work), but they seem to be in the background compared to my far more prominent Moon-Neptune, angular Mars, etc.

In fact, many Sun-Uranus traits seem to be related to throwing off the chains (what a Uranian phrase) of the negative qualities of my other aspects - need for social approval, tendency to withdraw and shut myself off, obsessiveness (particularly obsession with fears or past events), inability to see myself objectively, etc. I think can develop a battle plan to bring these out.

What about Sun-Jupiter, though? I don't particularly care for many of those traits, but is my Sun anywhere near opposing Jupiter? (My Jupiter opposes Uranus. I still can't fathom how you memorize all of these charts.)

Also, with both of these Sun aspects - WTF is it with murdered rape victims?! I'm sorry Jim, but I am NOT going to try to actively develop that.

FWIW, Danica - I have Pluto-Mercury sextile.

[Jim Eshelman]

does this make the house of the unaspected planet more relevant in influence and manifestation in the preson's life?

What has been identified so far doesn't say anything one way or the other about the relevance of the house placement. AFAIK, that issue hasn't been looked at in any pilot or larger study.

However, I see your thinking: If there are not aspects, then do the other factors affecting a planet take on greater relevance, right? It's a worthy theory.

Among the inner planets, I certainly have seen (isolated anecdotal cases: nothing systematic) that the sign placement comes through more clearly.

In theory, we could make a mistake in over-interpreting. That is, there might be a desire to think that every planet has to be characterized to something, and to try to figure out what it is, but perhaps not every planet has to be characterized by anything at all. It may act like someone at a party who simply is "left out of all the conversations." Such a person might simply be invisible, so that one hardly notices it's there. OTOH, the same circumstances makes that person less predictable, less integrated with anything particular going on at the party, and this idea is consistent with the things that have been tentatively found about unaspected planets.

I'll take a look at a few dozen charts with unaspected planets (excluding unaspected luminaries) and see if, on first impression, I can see any thematic intensification of the planet's house placement.

[Jim Eshelman]

I have 34 examples of people I know with Mars unaspected. (Some of these people I know very, very well; some I barely know at all. Obviously, I'm focusing more on the ones I know best.) If the house theory is correct, then some significant conflict or significant energization should be evident in their lives in the particular area suggested by the house, and this should be a life-pattern rather than an isolated incident or passing phase.

A few examples:

A woman with Mars unaspected in Aries & the 6th House: Yes, she has displayed a passion for service and contribution that, when it seemed balked, turned into years of strange, energy-related ailments and health depletion of no clear etiology. Hit.

A man with Mars unaspected in Gemini and the 5th House: A highly conflictual individual (I credit it to overcompensation of a very background Mars), highly fearful to my impression, with no evident link to the 5th I can see unless you count his defensiveness and overcompensation about his sexual orientation. Miss.

A woman with Mars unaspected in Aquarius in the 7th House. I know her character well, but not her life detail history very well. During my time of knowing her, she wasn't partnered, probably is too cantankerous to partner well or easily, though I'd be hesitant to draw that as a final conclusion. Uncertain hit or miss (i.e., other chart factors could easily describe the same thing, but this one factor in isolation might be descriptive).

A woman with Mars unaspected in Virgo in the 8th House. Half of her is well-presented and an emerging professional, half of her is a mess. There are a lot of 8th House themes, though I'm inclined to attribute that simply to the pile-up of Mars, Uranus, and Pluto in the 8th in combination with other things in the chart. Uncertain hit or miss.

A man with Mars unaspected in Gemini in the 4th House. As an adult, he has a reasonably balanced relationship with formative family. He lives alone, so there is no discernible issue of others in his living space. No evident blaring issues of significant conflict or significant energization of 4th House issues. Miss. (The Mars in Gemini is highly evident in his creative expression.)

A man with Mars unaspected in Scorpio in the 7th House. A fairly ordinary range of successes and stumbles in relationships. This area is clearly more driven by his partile Venus-Mars conjunction in Libra near the Descendant, and his generally strong desire for close relationship shown by the rest of the chart. Miss.

A man with Mars unaspected in Libra in the 5th House. He outwardly seems a "lady's man" (to use the polite, affectionate term <g>), but actually is rarely in a relationship or even ongoing "arrangement." I see themes of a background Mars trying to work through 5th House expression in several ways, but that almost disproves the "emphasis on the house placement of Mars" as a defining factor. Uncertain, probable miss.

A man with an unaspected Mars in Virgo in the 6th House. No clear 6th House issues unless you count his addiction history. Not service driven. No evident defining major themes. Miss.

In these examples, there is only one clear hit, and mostly misses. I'm not inclined to see this as stand-out, defining characteristic based on this collection of charts.

[Jim Eshelman]

Let's take another planet: Jupiter. (A good choice because it's a different nature, more likely to be positive than negative - a flourishing in the chart area - and the sign position is not likely to be a strong consideration.)

I have a collection of 29 people that I know (some well, some poorly) with Jupiter unaspected. Here are a few examples:

A woman with Jupiter unaspected in the 9th House (very close to the 9th cusp). No major 9th House themes flourishing. Some characterological (humanitarian etc.) lineups for Jupiter in the 9th, though these are shown very well by her luminary signs. Miss.

A woman with Jupiter unaspected in the 10th House. Career has been vague though successful, having private recognition and success in one area, creative success in another, often having more than one thing going with a need to keep the different professional areas of her life from colliding or event intersecting. Not a striking example of classic Jupiter in the 10th, but quietly (almost in an obscure way) so. Hard to call it a hit on the house placement being a primary expression of the Jupiter outworking, so I'll judge it: Miss.

A man with Jupiter unaspected in the 12th House: He fits a characterological, but not so much a circumstantial, profile for Jupiter in 12th rather well. Another example btw of a legitimate celebrity, though in a small area of specialization. I'll call this one a Hit.

A very Saturn-dominant woman with Jupiter unaspected in the 6th. I do think that she is keenly service-oriented, and she has been keenly health-conscious and contributing to the health of others. Though the indications aren't sharp, I'm inclined to call this a Hit.

A woman with Jupiter unaspected in the 11th House. I would not say that she has been even moderately successful in hopes and dreams, or in group integration. Miss.

A woman with Jupiter unaspected in the 9th. She has been easily published, but in venues that would be better considered 3rd house matters. In some key ways she is quite the opposite of 9th house temperament and circumstances. Miss.

A woman with Jupiter unaspected in the 9th. She's a porn star with very superficial philosophical etc, interests. 9th house isn't exactly what you'd call the major outworking or expression of her Jupiter side. Miss.

A man with Jupiter unaspected in the 12th house. Moving from addiction and mental instability to a mental health professional with a specialization in substance abuse has been a success path for him. Solid hit.

A man with Jupiter unaspected in the 4th House. His major psychological solace has been a group of adult friends he thinks of as "selected family." Though this hasn't always been successful for him, it's a strong streak of his character and generally successful. Probably a Hit.

Overall, there are more misses than hits. I'm inclined to doubt the premise.

[Avshalom Binyamin]

For Mercury and Venus, my only aspects are:

Mercury semi-square Jupiter by less than 1 degree
Mercury semi-sextile Moon by a little over 1 degree
Mercury sextile Venus by over 6 degrees
Venus square Mars by over 6 degrees

Would those be considered un-aspected?

I have had a lifelong, hard-to-admit, strong desire to write. And I have written a lot--short stories, a novella, poetry, songs, speeches, essays--a lot of it well-received by the audience, though none of it is particularly good (yet). The craft part of storytelling and consciously building a story as a cohesive machine is a long and challenging path for me, and I tend to focus on intricate detail to the detriment of the whole.

Still, I harbor a secret belief that I will be an amazing writer one day.

The un-aspected Mercury description fits well--I'm quiet a lot, and have a hard time getting my words started, but when I get going I really get going.

With the Venus, I have had a lifelong, hard-to-admit, strong desire to perform as a musician. I would consider myself musically inclined, but not particularly blessed.

Regardless of how much my rational mind says it's impractical for me to ever make a living as a writer or musician, I can't help but invest a lot of energy into either music or writing.

[SteveS]

Av wrote:

Regardless of how much my rational mind says it's impractical for me to ever make a living as a writer or musician, I can't help but invest a lot of energy into either music or writing.

Av, your natal midpoint analysis shows your creative abilities as a writer-artist/musician beautifully! The most potent midpoints in a chart are midpoints to the angles, and your natal chart features a direct midpoint (most potent) Mercury/Venus=MC (1,24), MC has to do with career ‘goals and objectives.’ Ebertin from his great book ‘Combination of Stellar Influences’ says about this Midpoint:

An understanding of art, the pursuit of artistic aims, a sense of beauty, “the wings of artistic genius and inspiration”, light hearted living. Artists, writers.

I would say you are definitely following a strong destiny track with your desires to become a writer/musician. Never give-up your dreams! This is a great direct midpoint example where on the surface of a natal chart we see the planets for artist (Venus) and writer ( Mercury) 'unaspected', but Mercury & Venus shows-up big time when we do a midpoint analysis.

[Jim Eshelman]

For Mercury and Venus, my only aspects are:

Mercury semi-square Jupiter by less than 1 degree
Mercury semi-sextile Moon by a little over 1 degree
Mercury sextile Venus by over 6 degrees
Venus square Mars by over 6 degrees

Would those be considered un-aspected?

The original posts (above) sound like aspected-unaspected is a binary switch. That's somewhat necessary in order to discuss the topic, but it's also artifice. Everything is aspecting everything all the time - just very weakly! Two planets 14°59' from an exact square technically have them in square, and about to flip (2 later) into a sextile or a trine - but their connection is so minimal as to seem completely disconnected.

So, saying we are defining this as "no Ptolemaic aspects within a 5° orb" means that this is the definition used in the studies from which I have drawn. It's not a hard line, but it is a binary threshold that has been used to distinguish one group from another.

It does seem, in practice, to be a workable definition In general, it seems important not to count octiles as aspects for this purpose, though if I saw a planet in a 10' luminary semi-square I'm going to be hard pressed to really call it "unaspected" even for this specialized purpose. - Also, I don't know that the "unaspected" state is a big deal in a chart (though it may be a bigger deal than I credit).

"Unaspected" obviously doesn;t mean tbe planet is weak. Sometimes it seems quite the opposite! There is an "unleashed" quality, an "on its own terms" quality that feels a little like the "all or nothing" Pluto effect (sorta kinda). You;re clearly not un-Mercurial at al (five planets in Virgo including two luminaries, and add the MC for good measure); but you do seem to me to fit the idea that both your thoughts and your affections are "on your own terms," as if you were making choices (if that's the word) without collaboration with other ideas. Does that make sense? I know what I'm saying, but it has too damn many nested negatives in it.) And, knowing you, I see you having far more Venus than your chart infers.

So yes, I'd call both of those unaspected. I technically accept that you have a Mercury-Venus sextile, but put it in the category of "two weak to really matter" (like my Sun-Mars and Sun-Neptune aspects). You think and speak on your own terms, including much of the time that you choose not to. You love on your own terms, including much of the time that you choose not to. Does that make sense?

[Avshalom Binyamin]

Yes that makes sense. Thank you.

They are choices, but yes, made independently of every other aspect of my life and personality. So they don't feel quite like choices. But they are. "On its own terms" makes a lot of sense. How I find myself thinking and writing and loving bears little relation to what is going on with the rest of me. Compartmentalized might be another word to use, or not integrated.

I technically accept that you have a Mercury-Venus sextile, but put it in the category of "two weak to really matter" (like my Sun-Mars and Sun-Neptune aspects).

Agreed. I have moments of charm, but this wide aspect feels like a pretty weak force--especially in the face of all that Virgo. The Mercury-Jupiter oct. seems a bit stronger, but still not a huge force.

[Jim Eshelman]

I think this subject is quite fascinating. It isn't necessarily a big part of a chart's picture, but tends to be interesting when it shows. Like it plugs in something we didn't know we were looking for.

[Avshalom Binyamin]

The most potent midpoints in a chart are midpoints to the angles, and your natal chart features a direct midpoint (most potent) Mercury/Venus=MC (1,24), MC has to do with career ‘goals and objectives.’

I see that the midpoint between Mercury and Venus is about 13 degrees Virgo, and MC is about 10'48" Virgo. Is that what you mean?

[SteveS]

Hi Avshalom, I show your MC at 11,38 Virgo, your natal chart: https://imgur.com/a/XHDtEAC Solarfire expresses this midpoint in the following manner below. I use a 1,30 orb for direct midpoints, the (d) stands for direct midpoints, the most potent type of midpoint.
MC
Mer/Ven +1°24' d