Jim Eshelman wrote:TheScales_BothWays wrote:I wonder what a relationship will be like when one's angles are in aspect with another's?
That's an insightful question. I don't have an easy answer. Going from memory, it has seemed that, in most ways, it is nothing at all, except when they are close enough that transits occur at the same time - and then
that is the main importance.
Over the years, I've gotten various intimations - impressions - that I started to formulate into theories; but, as you may already know about me, I try to shy away from telling people about things that I consider theories, because people interested in astrology have a tendency to jump on these as if they were fact, based on far too little information. I'll tell you some of my vague impressions on this, but have to ask you not to take them as anything other than a passing idea, especially because - if what I'm about to say
s true - it has far-reaching, cascading implications that I'm not at all sure are true.
The impression I this: When the angles are aligned by conjunction (e.g., same Ascendant, more or less), it has sometimes seemed that they have the same filter on the world - they are looking out through the same window, the same kind of colored or stained glass - and, quite distinctly, when they have flipped charts (e.g., one Ascendant is the other Descendant), they have flipped perceptions of what the world is like, and this makes them in some senses seem alike and confirming each other's perceptions, and in some ways quite at odds with their honest perceptions of the world.
But, remember, this could just be my mind, in the moment, wanting to find
some kind of meaning in the contact, and then imposing a logical interpretation based on too few and too vague impressions.
For about four dozen women that have been (briefly or for long stretches) important in my life, and for whom I have timed birth charts, I make the following observations:
Only seven have either of their angles within 5° of conjunction, opposition, or square of either of my angles. (By pure chance, somewhat more than 1/9 should have it, so this is about that number.) More important is the quality of these relationships: They are all some of the most minor encounters of my life (with one exception that was of medium importance). The list of contacts, for example, does not include my first wife; the woman I spent over 20 years with; one other I lived with briefly; a years-long girlfriend; my mate for the last (roughly) decade; or a woman I contemplated having a child with. That's a pretty big batch to miss altogether! Of the seven,
1. MC 5° from my Asc. We had a powerful intellectual relationship building over a few years to an erotic relationship that, when we finally met, after one encounter, went no where and we rapidly lost contact. (For complicated reasons, not for lack of interest.)
2. Angles aligned to mine exactly within about 2°. We've known each other for four decades but I think rarely liked each other - we had an important friend in common - and had one physical encounter that led neither of us to seek a repeat or, really, even think much about the fact that it happened. (Three others were "friends of friends," single encounter, and exactly the same sense of neither of us ever remembering it more after the fact than if we'd had a cup of tea. I would never appear in any of their memoirs, nor them in mine. Two had MC to my Dsc, one had Asc to my MC.)
3. Ascendant 5° from my Midheaven. A woman I met at an astrology convention in my early 20s, we spent the week together - furiously passionate - then departed back to our respective states and never heard from each other again. (I've looked, because I'm sentimental about such things, but she seems to have dropped off the face of the planet.)
4. One that might have been important - and was a valuable multi-level relationship to both of us for a while - but timing and opportunity never worked and we moved on. Many other aspects showing strong passion, friendship, and respect, along with her Asc opposite my MC 2°.
In all of these, abundant other aspects describe the events very well, but these contacts don't seem to contribute much at all. These are the only ones in the set that that have even wide synastric contacts of the angles with my chart (but none partile), and the simplest reading is that the angle-to-angle contacts had no significance at all.
PS - If we limit ourselves to the more reasonable 3°, there were only four contacts.
) when they lived at Ipoh, Malaysia. When they moved to Klang, the horizon square is still partile but they're set apart by 50 minutes.
) .