Gene Hackman (Actor)

[Jim Eshelman]

Gene Hackman AA rated: 1/30/1930 7:45 AM San Bernardino, California

Another angular Jupiter for an actor.

Acting was a positive way to channel his anger and restlessness into art.

Jupiter trine Venus with Venus cnj Sun for his acting success. I think we see his anger and restlessness in his partile Mercury-Mars cnj.

A former barroom brawler, Hackman has a reputation for being difficult, for having run-ins with directors. His authority problem dates back to his troubled youth with an alcoholic mother and a father who deserted them in 1943. When his dad came to the set of "Zandy's Bride," Hackman never came out of his trailer to see him.

I think this part of his bio is reflected again in his Mercury-Mars cnj forming a midpoint with Sun/Saturn. Mundo Neptune 3,44 cnj Dsc. Mundo Moon partile cnj Asc for his strong emotional personality.

http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Hackman%2C_Gene

[Jim Eshelman]

Steve, I notice you (almost) never make reference to the luminary signs - which is puzzling, since that's the only thing that distinguishes this as Sidereal astrology rather than a Tropicalist mindful of angles and aspects (say, a Cosmobiologist).

The anger and restlessness (in a chart that otherwise looks calm and lazy: Venus, Jupiter, Neptune, and the luminaries foreground) is the Capricorn Sun and Moon. It's a classic "angry young man" pattern, especially centered around the authority issues mentioned later.

A large percentage of the material you quote about these public figures is usually traceable immediately to their luminary signs. Hackman is a fantastic example, because, if we went only by "angles & aspects" (admittedly of enormous importance) we'd see him as charming, gracious, magnetic, relaxed, enjoying comforts, outgoing, generous, easy-going. That would all ignore his fundamental Capricornian nature, and even his more basic Double Rim nature.

[Jim Eshelman]

I understand Jim. I rely mainly on aspects and angles to astrologically interpret/see the bio for a person. Planets are the verbs of astrology and I like to see/analyze how these verbs are manifesting through a natal chart with their known bios.

The anger and restlessness (in a chart that otherwise looks calm and lazy: Venus, Jupiter, Neptune, and the luminaries foreground) is the Capricorn Sun and Moon. It's a classic "angry young man" pattern, especially centered around the authority issues mentioned later.

You must understand I don’t have the knowledge you have with Sidereal Signs and their natures. I never have associated “anger” with the Lights and their Signs. Whenever I see the word “anger” or disputes I look at a native’s natal Mars and its aspects. Hackman hated his father and the media. I see this hate with his Mercury- Mars cnj and the two authoritative bodies in the heavens, Sun & Saturn, and their midpoint falling on his partile Mercury-Mars cnj, more so than the authority issues with the sign Cap and its nature. I rely very little on the natures of Sun Moon Sign astrology in my practice; my business clients could care less about Sign interpretation and their natures. I do recognize the importance of the Sidereal Signs and their natures with Sidereal Astrology and clearly understand you have a much more in-depth knowledge of the Sidereal Signs natures than me-- so I will leave the Signs interpretations and their natures for your keen analysis. My bio analysis is based on the intrinsic meanings of the planets with aspects and angles taught to me primarily my Fagan, Bradley, and Ebertin through their writings.

[Jim Eshelman]

I understand Jim. I rely mainly on aspects and angles to astrologically interpret/see the bio for a person. Planets are the verbs of astrology and I like to see/analyze how these verbs are manifesting through a natal chart with their known bios.

Yes, I got it. These are very important.

For me, though, if it weren't for the signs, I'd likely be a Tropicalist. It just wouldn't have been worth the hassle and professional ostracizing within the astrological community to have bothered. Ultimately, using a precession-free context is what makes us Siderealists (small s), but it's the signs that make us Siderealists (capital S).

The anger and restlessness (in a chart that otherwise looks calm and lazy: Venus, Jupiter, Neptune, and the luminaries foreground) is the Capricorn Sun and Moon. It's a classic "angry young man" pattern, especially centered around the authority issues mentioned later.

You must understand I don’t have the knowledge you have with Sidereal Signs and their natures.

I try to do my best to represent all this in the sign interpretation sections of the forum. There are "depth" issues I probably never have gotten around to writing about, and we need to flesh those out. Using the existing interpretations are ways of continuing to test and refine them.

I never have associated “anger” with the Lights and their Signs.

Capricorn is a Mars + Saturn constellation. Luminaries in Capricorn act as if they are simultaneously conjunct Mars and Saturn. Imagine! And to have both Sun and Moon acting as if they are conjunct Mars + Saturn pushes this even further.

A lot of the "radical" reputation of Tropical Aquarius is rightly Sidereal Capricorn. It arises out of suppression, hardship, lots of "daddy issues" generalized to authority issues in general. Though every life has its own circumstances, Capricorns do manifest the "difficult early childhood" pattern, sometimes through organic / health / disability issues, and often through their parent / home relationships. There is a lot of parental struggle, and the Capricorn mind responds to this. They are fighting back against their own authority issues, fighting back against perceived hardship. As a result, when you take simply a calendar pile-up of U.S. Revolutionary War generals or Civil War southern generals, you get this huge pile-up of births in late January and early February - these "fighting back against suppression, fighting for our homes" figures are Sidereal Capricorns. Saturn for the authority issues, Mars for the fight.

We then find a lot of "angry young men" types. I personally know South African rock star Robbie Robb, whose band, Tribe After Tribe, got a lot of political heat for battling apartheid. Newspapers called him "the angriest young man in South Africa." Sure 'nuff, Capricorn Sun. Think of other Capricorn Suns who are battlers (and also passionate political conservative or libertarian figures from Paul Ryan, Jeb Bush, & Sarah Palin to Ayn Rand), or known for portraying out of control youth:
Joan of Arc
Dick Cheney
Janis Joplin
Burt Reynolds
Paul Newman
James Dean
Wolfgang Mozart [that out of control, wild & crazy guy]
Andy Kaufman

We get a different (sometimes more threatening) list from Capricorn Moon:
Larry Hagman [you loved to hate him]
Russell Crowe [don't you just love to hate his characters?]
Denzel Washington [everybody loves him, still places angry badass characters]
Augustus
Charles Manson
David Koresh
Edward Kelley [such a scoundrel]
John Lennon [much loved, but a clear "angry young man"]
John McCain [self-identified maverick, a noteworthy soldier]
Sarah Palin [his "maverick-in-arms" partner]
Napoleon
Orson Welles
etc.

Whenever I see the word “anger” or disputes I look at a native’s natal Mars and its aspects.

Yes. But you also can look to see if the luminaries are in Mars constellations, of which Capricorn is one.

Hackman hated his father and the media. I see this hate with his Mercury- Mars cnj and the two authoritative bodies in the heavens, Sun & Saturn, and their midpoint falling on his partile Mercury-Mars cnj, more so than the authority issues with the sign Cap and its nature.

I'd rather credit it to something basic, like a Sun-sign, than dig into midpoints. I consider them valid but "backup" matters, "fleshing out the fine points." Also, I don't know that Mercury-Mars is angry: It is scathing (whether from pain or from extreme wit - it varies). Pulling a list of partile hard Mercury-Mars aspects off SF, I get a mix of people, including people known for grace (though mostly quite astute, piercing even when diplomatic, etc.).

so I will leave the Signs interpretations and their natures for your keen analysis.

LOL, OK, my friend. Just throwing up a flag about how much information is there. Nearly every example you give (with the excellent character and history notes) leaps with sign-characteristics. I'll continue to point them out.

My bio analysis is based on the intrinsic meanings of the planets with aspects and angles taught to me primarily my Fagan, Bradley, and Ebertin through their writtings.

And this is sound. The thing is, the sign natures are primarily planetary natures. I think of Sun in Virgo (for example) as relying primarily on the same intrinsic meanings of the planets - in this case, Mercury coloring and directing Sun - as if it were a Sun-Mercury conjunction.

Normally I would say that aspects to a planet definitely outweigh sign-placement. I can't say that with the luminaries, though. In Hackman's case, there is a very close Sun-Venus conjunction, but the Capricorn coloration shows so much more vividly than the Venus. (He' not known for being gracious, and certainly isn't what you'd call cute <g>.)

[Jim Eshelman]

Jim wrote:

Capricorn is a Mars + Saturn constellation. Luminaries in Capricorn act as if they are simultaneously conjunct Mars and Saturn. Imagine! And to have both Sun and Moon acting as if they are conjunct Mars + Saturn pushes this even further.

I now understand exactly what you are seeing with Cap for both lights in Hackman’s Natal Chart. I always learn from your posts and wish I had your innate knowledge/sight with Sidereal Sign interpretations.

[Jim Eshelman]

We all continue to learn - more or less every day.

The keys to signs are:
1. Probably 80% of the meaning of a planet in a sign is the same as the planet conjunct the ruler & exalted planet of the sign
2. Sometimes harder to mental sort through: It is unlike the planets ruling / exalted in the opposite sign.
2. There's other stuff, though, that we learn by observation and statistical examination, and these are recorded in the interpretations

The "other stuff" is quadruplicity meanings, an archetypal character of the sign, etc.

[Jim Eshelman]

We all continue to learn - more or less every day.

The keys to signs are:
1. Probably 80% of the meaning of a planet in a sign is the same as the planet conjunct the ruler & exalted planet of the sign
2. Sometimes harder to mental sort through: It is unlike the planets ruling / exalted in the opposite sign.
2. There's other stuff, though, that we learn by observation and statistical examination, and these are recorded in the interpretations

The "other stuff" is quadruplicity meanings, an archetypal character of the sign, etc.

[Jim Eshelman]

Yeahbutt... this is easier for some constellations than others.

Leo. It's the Sun, conjunct the Sun, opposing Saturn (and maybe Uranus) and that's it. (Does that mean Leos are a little simple or something? )

Actually, Leo's are shockingly simple most of the time.

It's just... Sun.