Feb 20: Poitier, O'Neill, Hearst, Cobain

[Jim Eshelman]

Poitier, Sidney. Feb 20, 1927, 9:00 PM EST, Miami, FL (A).
O'Neill, Jennifer. Feb 20, 1948, 1:00 AM BZT2, Rio De Janeiro, Brazil (A).
Patty Hearst. Feb 20, 1954, 6:01 PM PST, San Francisco, CA (AA).
Kurt Cobain. Feb 20, 1967, 7:38 PM PST, Aberdeen, WA (AA).

Two of these people may be of unusual importance in understanding relocation of the natal chart because they moved from their birthplace almost immediately. Sidney Poitier was born in Miami when his parents were visiting, then returned with them to the Bahamas where he was raised (on Cat Island). Jennifer O'Neill was born in Brazil when her parents were visiting, then was raised in New Rochelle, NY and Wilton, CT.

[Avshalom Binyamin]

Patty Hearst

Venus-0-Aquarius Sun-90-Scorpio Mars on the angles. Whew! Charming narcissistic bad girl, fueled with a little moon-60-mars emotional mania, and and weighed down with a Venus-120-Saturn. Another Mercury-90-Jupiter--great for actors to be able to play educated characters. (I assumed she was an actress--I'm too young to remember the Hearst trial story. But I looked it up after I wrote this).

Kurt Cobain

Oh, wow. That's intense. Uranus-Pluto-0-Asc--180--Mercury-Venus-Saturn-0-Dsc . Angular Mercury of course common with commercially successful, legendary musicians, but also expressing all that "grunge" mix of Pluto, Saturn, and Uranus--heavy, strange, authentic, dark, gritty. Oh, and that Mercury-120-Moon,Jupiter-120-Neptune--that's the emotional inspiration plus those artistic illusion-creating skills.

[Jim Eshelman]

Our standard teaching is that, while charts (especially natal charts) relocate as one moves on Earth, one never loses one's natal chart. Is this true?

The rule was determined primarily by observing that people who move, as adults, to new locations still retain the characteristics of planets angular at their birthplace. For example, I'm still a very lunar person despite having not lived (or even been, except for brief visits) where my Moon is angular for nearly half a century. Dozens to hundreds of examples of demonstrated this pattern over the years.

However, there is another possible explanation: It's possible that one only retains the traits of birthplace angular planets because one responded to them and built one's character structure (general way of being) and particular, habitual reactions and behaviors while living under the birthplace chart. Perhaps these are only residual, habituated traits, not continually reinforced innate and invariable traits.

The one way that occurs to me to test this is to examine people who left their birthplace almost immediately at birth and grew up elsewhere. Two such public examples share the February 20 birthday: actors Sidney Poitier and Jennifer O'Neill.

Sidney Poitier
Sidney Poitier was born in Miami when his parents were visiting, then returned with them to the Bahamas where he was raised (on Cat Island).

At birth, he had a single planet foreground: Pluto was 4°55' from Midheaven. On Cat Island, Bahamas (24N27, 75W30), Pluto is 0°32' from MC with Moon 6° from Asc.

It's tempting to say, Yes! - this clearly is a better showing for a figure singled out from his generation for extraordinary talent and accomplishment, especially as an actor. Unfortunately, it doesn't take anything away from the natal chart: His birthplace Pluto remains foreground and became even stronger when his parents went home.

I'm inclined to say, though, that living his entire youth where he was uniquely singled out must have had its impact on him. Relocation served him well the rest of his life; for example, relocate his chart to Los Angeles to see the factors that impinged upon the launching of his film career. Also, in NY he had Pluto on MC almost as close as in the Bahamas (and Moon a little closer).

This was not the clear-cut example I hoped it would be.

Jennifer O'Neill
Jennifer O'Neill was born in Brazil when her parents were visiting, then was raised in New Rochelle, NY and Wilton, CT.

In Rio (her birthplace), O'Neill had Jupiter 1°47' above Asc, Moon 1°18' below Dsc, Moon-Jupiter in 0°09' mundane opposition, and a more widely angular Uranus. It's hard to imagine angular planets more appropriate for an actor (Jupiter) whose Summer of '42 posters made her practically a "pin-up girl" of her time.

Unlike with Poitier, we get a LOT of difference when she moved to New Rochelle. Moon-Jupiter (+Uranus) leave the angles altogether. Pluto is now 2°40' from MC conjunct Saturn 6°16' away. (Wilton, CT is nearly identical.) While this doesn't reflect her eventual form of success as well as her birthplace chart does, do we find Pluto (+Saturn) marks the turns her life took?

My impression is that the birthplace chart shows the type of success and fame, though perhaps would have suggested more of it. (She "became big" for a while, but never gigantic. She had greater persisting success in modelling than in acting, though.)

Perhaps clearest - not a matter of mere degree of a trait, but a quite different set of traits - she had a religious conversion, becoming a born-again Christian. This is quite consistent with Jupiter rising in Sagittarius exactly opposite Moon, and (if anything) inconsistent with culminating Pluto conjunct Saturn.

However, this isn't a clearcut case. I now see I was wrong that she moved immediately. (One reference said her parents were only briefly visiting a relative.) Wikipedia says she didn't move to NY until she was 14. That makes her ill-suited for this particular inquiry: Her character and general habits of response to life were already formed.

A minor aside not related to the present question: With Sagittarius rising, she's especially known as a skilled equestrian.

An other aside: With Moon closely conjunct Descendant (and well-aspected), it's interesting that she's been married nine times.

[Jim Eshelman]

Not exactly satisfying the "moved within days or few weeks" criterion, but for what value you may find in it: Gene Roddenberry, born August 19, 1921 in El Paso, TX, family moved to L.A. in 1923.

This is why this question has never really been addressed. There are almost no good examples. I would expect that within two years significant behavior patterns would be set in.

I've thought for years that this is an area astrology has missed putting reasonable attention: People build habits and patterns of response and behavior based on formative conditions. These will persist even when the original causes are gone - simply because they are habituated. Behavior can change, and might even change with passage of time, but might require the right kind of therapy, or affirmative efforts to take up a new energy available to them - or at least some strong Uranus and Pluto transits!

This is basic to what psychologists know of human behavior and astrologers have almost never looked at it. Persistence is one thing when a cause continues to be present, but is something else when the original cause is removed.

In Roddenberry's case, his genius is tied into such things as his Aquarius Moon conjunct Uranus while Sun is in Leo. Natal angularities mostly bring his Jupiter-Saturn conjunction and, indeed, he grew up to be an effective executive. But the clear addition is that, when he moved to LA, that Moon-Uranus conjunction straddles Midheaven (and Saturn slides to the Nadir). The relocation is more about what he gains than what he loses. The only factor dropping away in LA is the moderately foreground Jupiter, which I don't think he lost - two years into life is surely too late to change behaviors that developmentally trace to initial bottle or nipple feeding. He trades Pluto mundane aspects to his Jupiter-Saturn (birthplace) for Venus mundane aspects to his Jupiter-Saturn (LA). I could argue either way whether he lost the birthplace ones, but do think the ones he acquired in LA fitt his life out here.

[Veronica]

I reflected on how strong my "nesting" urge came too me when I was full with pregnancy and that biological drive to nest arose out of a very important need to stay put after the trauma of childbirth.
I think possibly that the samples of humans who have been uprooted in the very very early stages of life like it sounds like we need to examine are few and far between because it goes against a mothers intuition to nest down with her newborn and build new habits into her life like nursing and cleaning.
It did make me think for example of that horrible hurricane that caused millions to relocate and how statistically there probably had been new mothers in that population of "environmental refugees. "
It may be more fruitful to find charts of mothers who relocated immediately after a nature disaster....It just seems like your not going to find many because it goes against part of our inner wisdom to not relocate with a newborn as it is very stressful and disturbing and decreases survival rates.

[Jim Eshelman]

Of course, some relocation may come from being orphaned or parental separations or other change of custody. Tracking the mothers wouldnt be much help. The children themselves have to have well documented birth data including times, and need to have reached sufficient eminence that their lives are documented. - It might be more fruitful to follow one of Danica's examples (Morrison) and try to search famous people with military fathers (which usually means frequent moves during childhood). Another possibility is female entertainers who toured extensively and gave birth on the road (then, as soon as they could - days later - continued the tour).