Patrick's parans

[Jim Eshelman]

At Patrick's request, I've worked up his natal parans. All but one are already ecliptical aspects. Here's the whole list:

Mercury-Uranus co 0°17'
Venus-Jupiter 0°47'
Jupiter-Saturn 0°57'
Moon-Mercury co 0°59'

[Patrick Machado]

Thank you.

I've been taken with the mundane natal Jupiter-Saturn square that has emerged in Return charts once in a while, so the first instinct is to think that it is something that doesn't exist routinely, but Returns have multiple things going on at once, and just because they put something in the spotlight doesn't mean that thing doesn't already exist with less emphasis. (Jupiter and Saturn are my most background planets.)

So, reading it now as a regular natal Jupiter-Saturn aspect, I say that I can identify with it substantially. I am much more attuned to legacy and tradition than my overall autonomous and individualistic demeanor might suggest. My Capricorn Moon might not be enough for that if that's taken to include heritage and not just ancestry.

I do have some type of relationship to orthodoxy (i.e., it isn't at all a matter I'm indifferent to) and, again, while my overall character leans most strongly and obviously in the direction of opposing it (or, at least, questioning it heavily), I have surprised some folks across the years with positions more aligned with the established and conventional than was perhaps expected. A lot of that has to do with religion. For instance, I've always been comfortable with employing the word "God" (or rather, "Deus"), even if my worldview doesn't align with the surrounding orthodoxy the word implies to some. Some might take issue with my acknowledgement of spiritual authority at all.

Astrology as a field of knowledge provides an interesting example of this tension. Sidereal astrology puts me at odds with both astrology detractors and Tropicalists. Both represent something akin to orthodoxies. At the same time, as a Siderealist I am myself amidst a legitimate legacy. Yet it's the minority position. And it's also part of a broader astrological tradition. And a broader scientific endeavor. There are both overlaps and divisions. And so on and so forth.

The other overall traits and attitudes from the aspect fit me quite well.

So, for what one example from one person is worth, this one is good.

[Jim Eshelman]

Thanks much.

I also notice that you still live at your birth place. One of the eventual questions to answer is whether that matters.

[Jim Eshelman]

For the record, here are mine for birthplace (somewhere I haven't lived in 50 years):

Jupiter-Uranus 0°12'
Mars-Jupiter 0°37'
Mercury-Saturn 0°38'
Mars-Uranus 0°49'
Mars-Saturn 0°53'

[Patrick Machado]

I also notice that you still live at your birth place. One of the eventual questions to answer is whether that matters.

When I move far enough for parans to change, I lean toward somewhere I have Jupiter (and Venus) angular. With Saturn already strong natally, the coexistence of pronounced Jupiter and Saturn might make it impossible to tell that an aspect between them has been "lost" even if it indeed has.

For the record, here are mine for birthplace (somewhere I haven't lived in 50 years):

Jupiter-Uranus 0°12'
Mars-Jupiter 0°37'
Mercury-Saturn 0°38'
Mars-Uranus 0°49'
Mars-Saturn 0°53'

The one is not fitting, is it? (But your Mars is otherwise configured in a very different direction.) That suggests parans are either only valid for location, or not at all.

[Jim Eshelman]

The one is not fitting, is it? (But your Mars is otherwise configured in a very different direction.) That suggests parans are either only valid for location, or not at all.

I don't think it described me. (It may have been something of an add-on or push to other things in motion.) It does describe unusually well events occurring to me pretty routinely while living there, though much the same might be expected from my Mars-Neptune square being 0°07' instead of a mere Class 1 aspect.