Solunars by Aldebaran Sidereal Academy

Posted: **Mon May 08, 2017 9:01 pm**

Welcome to the Sun in Aquarius discussions project, which will run February 13 - March 14, 2017 (and then will remain around in case people want to revisit it in the future). Please gather your list of Sun in Aquarius people (especially those you know personally) and join us.

Here are Sun in Aquarius interpretive resources on the forum:
Primary section: viewtopic.php?f=13&t=35#p165
Garth Allen: viewtopic.php?f=13&t=33#p140
Cyril Fagan: viewtopic.php?f=13&t=101#p610
Rupert Gleadow: viewtopic.php?f=13&t=91#p577
Manilius: viewtopic.php?f=13&t=121#p748

Posted: **Mon May 08, 2017 9:02 pm**

Iaomai wrote:My younger brother-in-law.

He's currently in med-school, but refers to himself more as a scientist than a doctor. His studies were primarily genetic, and he was torn between doing medical research an becoming a clinician. Honestly, he seems more natural as a researcher, but to his mind, being a clinician was more flexible and stable. He thinks that will be more convenient to being able to live and have a family wherever he likes, and family is very important to him.

As I said, he identifies as a scientist more than a doctor, which comes up mostly in terms of his basic philosophy in the common religious/anti-religious conversations in his historically Catholic family. He created a bit of a stir in the family when he asserted himself formally as an agnostic. He does seem to be a true agnostic in the sense that he remains open to conversations about others' descriptions of what they consider to be spiritual experiences as well as to less dogmatic and personal conceptions of the Divine.

When he used to have more time, he was an avid reader of SciFi/Fantasy novels. In our conversations about them, he always seemed most interested in discussing the unique ideas and philosophies / alternate realities. He really likes philosophy and seems to steer conversations in that direction.

Posted: **Mon May 08, 2017 9:02 pm**

Arena wrote:Five women I know just came up on facebook as upcoming birthdays, but are not all my friends though so I can't say how they are in a very personal manner.
Two of them are very strong in the feminist movement and have been working for those kind of issues plus Unifem for many years. I think they have also both lived abroad.
Third woman is wife of my good friend and I like her very much. She is friendly and very intelligent. Has lived in different countries when younger and seems to read a lot. They seem like strict parents to me, but not the violent types, but just very very clear boundaries with their children

Fourth woman is a childhood friend that I moved abroad with when I was young - I moved back while she stayed abroad and has never returned to homeland. She has always seemed so "content" to me, she does not want much out of life it seemed and it has always been a riddle to me. But now I understand it better, she just has no ambition for anything. She just settled at a very young age and has never gone to University nor has she travelled much. I am not sure I ever understood what makes her tick, she seems to be so unlike myself and sometimes I used to wonder why we were friends. I guess it is just because of that small-town childhood friendship. I remember I used to ask her when we were younger if she didn't want to aspire to something, but she said no, I don't need anything, I am with my man and have my children and live in a nice place, that is enough for me. I just checked out synastry for Sun, Moon or Venus contacts and I see she has her Moon sextile my Sun, her Sun-Venus trine my Venus. So I guess we care about each other, even though we are not very much alike.

Fifth woman would be Pisces by tropical measure and I always saw her as such. She was and always has been a heavy swimmer and she keeps her daughter into that sport as well. She was a very dear friend to me when we were teenagers. She used to live abroad as a child and then moved to my hometown. We connected somehow on a deeper level and we both enjoyed poetry at the time. I even wrote her a poem that she still keeps She was also my inspiration to give my egg cells to other women, so they could have children - as she struggled to have children before she finally got twins - and it gave me insights and understanding of what that feels like. I see we have synastry with her Sun-Mercury trine my Venus, her Venus trine my Sun and opposite my Uranus-Vx.
She is a very very good person, always wants to do good for everyone that she cares about. She is one of the few women I know that seems to have such a good, healthy and strong/dedicated relationship with her husband, ever since they started during teenage. She also strikes me as being content, she loves to be a mother and wife and she loves her job as an educational counselor to teenagers. She has also worked as a teacher and I believe she is a good one. She seems also to be a strict parent, with very clear boundaries, but loving at the same time.

I could easily see all of these women as teachers and I think they would do a good job as such.
I see them as patient, calm and not losing their temper.
Although these are intelligent women, I do not consider these very "science/inventor oriented" like I see my uncle that I shared before.
I would not picture any of these women as "business women" as in wanting to start their own businesses or work in the business world.

Posted: **Mon May 08, 2017 9:03 pm**

Iaomai wrote:Okay... Using the given pattern.

{Not just directed at Jim}

So first, characteristics of the nature of Uranus.
Second, characteristics unlike those of the Sun.

*** I get the characteristics of the nature of Uranus. I don't understand characteristics "unlike those of the Sun." The Sun represents the self, so "unlike the self" gets stuck in my mind, and I can't see around it.

Third, Hub constellation. http://solunars.net/viewtopic.php?f=40& ... 3ed368#p85

Fourth, embodies the archetypes of Aquarius....

*** Which are...?

*** Finally, I don't know which of Jung's types the Triplicity suggests.

Posted: **Mon May 08, 2017 9:03 pm**

Iaomai wrote:I don't understand characteristics "unlike those of the Sun." The Sun represents the self, so "unlike the self" gets stuck in my mind, and I can't see around it.

An easy place to start with this is that Aquarius is not royalist - quite the contrary - and is rarely impressed by pomp and circumstance (except when it's a great show!). Leo is quite class-and-rank in their framework, and capable of considerable judgment; Aquarius is sometimes so blind to class-and-rank that it trips them up, and is mostly judgmental only about those that are judgmental.

Of the first generation of Siderealists, Gleadow was probably clearest: "Being the opposite of Leo, he is averse from swaggering or extravagance of any kind; his manner is unaffected, he dresses quietly, talks in a gentle voice and is not in the least impressed by grandeur or officialdom."

Aquarius' orientation is toward the collective, the whole. While Leo and Aquarius have similar-seeming behaviors, they come from opposite motivations, e.g., Leo is generous and attentive to those in need because it's paternal and royal, "what kings do," etc. - from a distinct place of vertical inequity - while Aquarius does much the same because, to them, "this is what people do for each other." A flip of that is that Leo is often more personally involved at a feeling level with those they serve, while Aquarius relates to most people less personality, more as units of a wider humanity. Leo is more individual-focused, Aquarius more collective-wave focused. (I'm not sure I'm saying these things the best way they can be said, but it should stir some discussion.)

To get the un-solar side of Aquarius, it helps to look at them alongside Libras, who have a similar un-solar nature.

Fourth, embodies the archetypes of Aquarius....
*** Which are...?

Aquarius, to the Egyptians, was the flooding Nile itself - the great, sometimes almost violent surge of water during its flood season that brought quality soil from deep in the heart of Africa and dumped it in the Nile delta. In this way, the Nile literally was the foundation of civilization and science for the Egyptians, renewed annually. The regions around the major Egyptian settlements were turned temporarily into great seas - but it all stemmed from this irrepressible stream of life, richness, civilization, science, future, hope, etc.

The images are profoundly maternal, from the sea itself, to the annual chaotic birthing, to the delta at which it ended. Don't ever miss the fundamental femininity in the Aquarius symbol: To the Greeks and Romans, this constellation's patron was Hera or Juno, in contrast to the Zeus-Jupiter of Leo. In alchemical terms, it is the eagle to Leo's lion (as Aquila is nearby and rises with Aquarius, the ideas being heavily comingled). And the root image of Aquarius itself is the pot or bowl, the container for bearing water; and all such devices are feminine symbols. Even the later Roman ideas of the jug-carrier has the root feminine idea of bearing, which gave the original meaning to the 5th House to which Aquarius originally corresponded, aside from the other "he ain't heavy, he's my brother" ideas the image implies.

The summertime sea into which Egypt was turned was also a reflection (literally, at night!) of the sea of space, the skies, the heavens, the ultimate mother - the two ideas are mostly inseparable.

All symbols of Aquarius stream out of these root ideas.

Finally, I don't know which of Jung's types the Triplicity suggests.

Triplicities are quite weak factors, but they have their distinction. The "Air" signs correspond closely to Jung's Intuitive type, especially in the sense that their primary orientation is to the future, rather than the past or present. However, the future is the one time-context in which we haven't actually lived, so it is a harder orientation to hold: It abstracts GeLiAqs from others, ironically, and contributes to the distance and isolation they feel. With all of us (all types), when our primary mechanism fails, we most typically reactively spring into its complement for compensation, and Intuitive types, compensatingly take up Sensation - the typical type of ArLeSas - which is most related to the immediacy of here and now, use concrete reality and physical sensation to anchor their seeming abstraction from the world. This, for example, is why Geminians, Librans, and Aquarians tend to be at ease with tools, fix-it tasks, "handy" chores, etc., even though it's not their fundamental focus.

Posted: **Mon May 08, 2017 9:04 pm**

Danica wrote:
Jim Eshelman wrote:...while Aquarius relates to most people less personality, more as units of a wider humanity. Leo is more individual-focused, Aquarius more collective-wave focused.
Agreed! Looking at my personally-known examples (16 people - 1 of them a child 8 y.o., so 15 adults ), and thinking about what they all have in common, I've come up with: "practical, to-the-point conversation; but always in the framework of the the broader picture, aware of the flow of life". This stands true for each of them, regardless of their age, specific life experience, education. They seem to function - by their mere existence - as harmonious connectors between the "we are all one" level and the practical reality of everyday life where we are all different.

Aquarius, to the Egyptians, was the flooding Nile itself - the great, sometimes almost violent surge of water during its flood season that brought quality soil from deep in the heart of Africa and dumped it in the Nile delta. In this way, the Nile literally was the foundation of civilization and science for the Egyptians, renewed annually. The regions around the major Egyptian settlements were turned temporarily into great seas - but it all stemmed from this irrepressible stream of life, richness, civilization, science, future, hope, etc.

The images are profoundly maternal, from the sea itself, to the annual chaotic birthing, to the delta at which it ended. Don't ever miss the fundamental femininity in the Aquarius symbol: To the Greeks and Romans, this constellation's patron was Hera or Juno, in contrast to the Zeus-Jupiter of Leo. In alchemical terms, it is the eagle to Leo's lion (as Aquila is nearby and rises with Aquarius, the ideas being heavily comingled). And the root image of Aquarius itself is the pot or bowl, the container for bearing water; and all such devices are feminine symbols. Even the later Roman ideas of the jug-carrier has the root feminine idea of bearing, which gave the original meaning to the 5th House to which Aquarius originally corresponded, aside from the other "he ain't heavy, he's my brother" ideas the image implies.

The summertime sea into which Egypt was turned was also a reflection (literally, at night!) of the sea of space, the skies, the heavens, the ultimate mother - the two ideas are mostly inseparable.

All symbols of Aquarius stream out of these root ideas.
Wow
Thank you for this picture & the analogies!

Posted: **Mon May 08, 2017 9:05 pm**

FlorencedeZ. wrote:This is really great.

The people I know who have the Sun in Aquarius (my son too) are in general very kind and extremely helpful. I notice they really want to help people and are true humanitarians. For example when someone is cold it may well be an Aquarian who will offer you his or her coat even when they get cold themselves. I sometimes call my son a shepherd because he always tries to keep the group together in a positive manner. They dress conservatively. I find them sometimes a bit maladjusted socially. The people I know don't always fit in so easily and don't always pick up social clues. Money is totally secondary. Quality in executing a task is paramount and many are in so many ways out of the box thinkers. I have noticed that almost all of them are not the prettiest people. Two of them are goodlooking, one has Venus on an angle and the other one a close Moon-Sun aspect. In my opinion, family is very important to them. The ones I know are academic.
Regards,
Florence

Posted: **Mon May 08, 2017 9:05 pm**

Iaomai wrote:I'm finally catching the connection between Uranus and Aquarius, primarily in the area of independent thinking, need for freedom, and creativity.

However, I notice in the list of imagery for Aquarius, the maternal is heavily emphasized, and I'm trying to get a handle on the associated characteristics.

So there's an emphasis on being family conscious an an emphasis on the collective instead of the individual... I relate to those two things as being associated with the maternal type. Can anyone else help me draw any further lines of association between the maternal symbolism and Aquarian characteristics?

Posted: **Mon May 08, 2017 9:06 pm**

I think you don't want to think of maternal-feminine in terms of current cultural stereotypes (e.g., family oriented). Aquarius, of all signs, isn't prone to easy cultural stereotype.

It's larger than that - Hera to the Greeks, Isis to the Egyptians and, even more, Nuit to the Egyptians, e.g., the idea of the all-encompassing, all-containing fabric of the whole, instinctively viewed as universal etc. (Remember, that feminine idea you are tapping - Universal Feminine - is an archetype, not even a symbol but, rather, a psychic pool from which individual symbols emerge.)

Posted: **Mon May 08, 2017 9:06 pm**

My collection of famous Aquarians has quite a few writers, many of whom are unfamiliar to me. I want to read a bit about them and note highlights of their themes, styles, etc., to see if commonalities emerge. (I exclude published authors who were primarily known for something else, and the writing was secondary, e.g., Adele Davis, Ella Armitage; and I have not included writers who were primarily poets, such as Edna Vincent Millay, Elizabeth Barrett Browning, George Seferis.)

ANAIS NIN. Foremost figure in a literary movement (much of it inspired by and built around her) involving publishing personal journals. Also known for ground-breaking erotic literature. Aquarian themed titles include the otherwise provocative Delta of Venus, A Cafe in Space, and The Novel of the Future. In Aquarian style, she lived outside of conventional society, was artistically avant garde and sexually libertine, and committed through her whole life to self-exploration.

ANDRE BRETON. Author and painter, the primary force originating Surrealism, which he defined as "pure psychic automatism," and standing for "complete freedom in art." His chief work is The Surrealist Manifesto. Aquarian titles include Arcanum 17, The Communicating Vases, At the Black Washtub, The Starry Castle, Constellations, and Free Rein. He studied psychiatry (as Nin had studied and practiced psychoanalysis), and was moved by literary movements of personal transformation. As an artist, he was strongly affected by Vache's "anti-social attitude and disdain for established artistic tradition." He was a political extremist, being deeply interested in Marx and Trotsky yet managing to get himself expelled even from the Communist Party, and eventually embraced anarchism.

BRET EASTON ELLIS. A Gen X author of highly controversial works, particularly the violent novel American Psycho, which was initially fiercely rejected and made him a literary pariah before it earned him cult status. One wonders if there is an Aquarian theme in his important title Less Than Zero. Satirist, "whose trademark technique... is the expression of extreme acts and opinions in an affectless style." Claims each of his works came from "a specific place of pain" that he was experienced at the time of writing. Sexual versatile and disparages labels on it. Speaks of periods of deep alienation that seem to have arisen out of trying to life in a very orthodox, conventional way.

CHRISTOPHER RICE. Novelist son Anne Rice and poet-painter Stan Rice. Openly gay, and uses this as a cultural background for his work. Known for Aquarian titles such as A Density of Souls, Light Before Day, The Moonlit Earth, 1,001 Dark Nights, and The Heavens Rise. He recently turned from thrillers to erotic romance novels.

(Do you notice how much their sexuality is a pronounced theme? I suspect this is Uranus bursting against deep cultural restrictions, but it could be a previously unsuspected Eros theme per se.)

ERNEST RENAN. French philosopher, writer, and Semitic linguist, known especially for historical works on early Christianity and political views on national identity. He was described at school as "docile, patient, diligent, painstaking, thorough," though he ultimately proved ill-suited for a life of orthodoxy, surrendering a vocation in religion for the sciences, becoming "ravished by the splendor of the cosmos" and the conviction that arose from natural science. His character should perhaps be studied more thoroughly as a case study of the somber seeker expression of Aquarius. For his time, he was considered "the embodiment of the progressive spirit" and "the incarnation of modernity."

GABRIEL GARCIA MARQUEZ. Latin American writer, author of One Hundred Years of Solitude. (Solitude is one of his primary themes.) His work defines the literary style called magic realism. Other Aquarius-themed titles include The Autumn of the Patriarch. Politically outspoken and "a committed Leftist."

JACK KEROUAC. Core of the Beat Generation, known for a life and writings themed to freedom, experimentally styled, and iconoclastic in approach and impact, especially On the Road. Other Aquarian titles include The Dharma Bums, Desolation Angels, The Sea is My Brother, Big Sur. Not aligned with extreme Left views but sympathetic voice for minorities and marginalized social groups. Sexually bohemian. Depression, extreme alcoholism that eventually killed him.

JOHN RECHY. Sexually iconoclastic author, especially expressing Los Angeles gay culture of the 1970s, much of it autobiographical. Aquarian titles include City of Night, Sexual Outlaw, Our Lady of Babylon, The Coming of the Night.

JUDITH BUTLER. Philosopher, gender theorist, and political activist, diversely writing with Renaissance breadth on literary theory, modern philosophical fiction, feminist and sexuality studies, 19th- and 20th-century European literature, Kafka and loss, mourning and war, etc. Known for her theory of gender performaitivity (gender as the cultural interpretation and enactment of biological sex, from which it is distinguished: gender is a performance one delivers in society, an enactment), and much more than spun out of it.

MICHEL HOUELLEBECQ. Highly controversial author, filmmaker, and poet, writing in the tradition of literary provocation (cf. de Sade, Baudelaire). Aquarian titles include The Elementary Particles (considered a nihilistic classic of a novel or, otherwise, as deeply repugnant) and Atomised. Writings express many aspects of radically varied world view economically, culturally, politically, sexually, etc. with mostly Rightest and occasionally Leftist extremes, including much obscenity, racism, misogyny, and Islamaphobia.

OCTAVE MIRBEAU. 19th century journalist, art critic, travel writer, novelist, and playwright, popular yet form-breaking and avant-garde. A typical Aquarian title: In the Sky.

PIER PAOLO PASOLINI. Displays Aquarian traits of high controversy and challenging forms, and of great breadth and versatility in media, being distinguished as a poet, journalist, philosopher, linguist, novelist, playwright, filmmaker, newspaper and magazine columnist, actor, painter and political figure. Intellectual, pensive, thought-provoking. SYmpathizer with Commnism as the only likely source of cultural revolution. Much of his work focussed on confronting sexual taboos, and he was known for sometimes illegal sexual behaviors. His final film, The 120 Days of Sodom, exceeded most viewers' tolerance for explicit, intense sadistic violence. He was murdered in a quite fierce, violent way.

VICTOR HUGO. France's most prolific, and arguably greatest, 19th Century writer, producing The Hunchback of Notre-Dame and Les Miserables, among much else. Also one of the great poets of his era. Also a social activist, especially for abolition of the death penalty, and wrote much social commentary. Whether it be church or government, he became increasingly at odds with institutions, e.g., moving from Catholic to rational deist to Freethinker.

VICTORIA (VITA) SACKVILLE-WEST. Writer, mostly of "the beauty of the Kentish countryside." Both she and her husband were primarily gay, had a long and happy marriage with children, while openly married, both pursuing many other lovers (e.g., her 10-year affair with Virginia Woolf). It seems to me her social impact is more important than her literature.

Posted: **Mon May 08, 2017 9:07 pm**

There are quite a few famous Aquarian scientists. I want to group here the ones I have at hand, perhaps to find some commonalities. They do tend to have a certain kind of mind that I (even I, an Aquarian Moon) have a hard time describing, and the often (but not invariably) are involved in pushing the boundaries where social issues intersect with science.

ADELLE DAVIS. Popular writer and pioneering evangelist on issues of nutrition and a vision of producing food that considers the whole world as an interdependent system. Views originally regarded as eccentric are now, half a century later, considered mainstream.

ALEXANDER GRAHAM BELL. One of the best known inventors based on the transformative impact of his invention on the world.

FRANCIS GALTON. Anthropologist, eugenicist, tropical explorer, geographer, inventor, meteorologist, proto-geneticist, psychometrician, and statistician. Notice the Aquarian tendency to diversity and multi-discipline. He provided much of the foundation of modern statistical analysis as a basis for his interest in eugenics studies, especially about inheritance and intelligence. He also essentially founded modern meteorology.

GALILEO GALILEI. I don't even need to mention who he is, yes? Either in science or as a challenger of the authority of the church? In astronomy and physics alone he was fundamental, and he especially was instrumental in overthrowing the anti-empirical Aristotelian foundation of science up to his time.

GEORGE ABELL. A significant astronomer (I used his text in college) and a fierce foe of astrology. His mission in life appears to have been exciting interest in science, and he is responsible for several technical thresholds in modern astronomy's progress.

JOHN HUNTER. Established field of pathological anatomy in England in the 18th Century. Empiricist who opened and aggressively researched several medical-related fields, especially physiology, increasing knowledge of teeth, inflammation, lymphatic system, venereal diseases, developmental physiology.

LINUS PAULING. Epochal chemist and molecular biologist. Also peace activist (won Nobel prize in both chemistry and peace).

PATRICK MOORE. Amateur astronomer and prominent astronomy writer (70 books), researcher, and broadcaster, credited with raising astronomy's popularity in Britain through his "The Sky at Night" program on BBC. Also a gifted composer and instrumentalist. Politically conservative, especially anti-immigration. Science fiction fan, aviation fan, and widely travelled.

Posted: **Mon May 08, 2017 9:07 pm**

What I notice most about the scientists (besides their deep investment in science) is their versatility, their cross-discipline interests and expertise. (This, of course, appears in the writers and in other Aquarians, too.) I have long thought that Aquarius' particular genius is not just in the fact that they are, indeed, often geniuses, but especially in their wide interest in diverse, often seemingly unrelated, topics. Aquarians have breadth.

In fact, I think a general theme of Aquarius, which binds together so much else about the constellation, is this instinct for interconnection. Aquarians instinctively know just how vastly all things are interconnected. This informs their social views, integrates both the "sea" and "space" themes, and much more - especially in the idea space.

This is equally true of Aquarius Moon, BTW. In fact, this rounded, cross-discipline expertise is the quality usually called "Renaissance Man," and the figures that always top the list of "Renaissance Men" are all - all! - Aquarius Moons. Think Da Vinci and Michelangelo, Benjamin Franklin, and others. You can count on them to know something (usually just enough to have the correct kernel of the subject) about almost anything and almost everything. (In a totally different way, I have to include J. Edgar Hoover in the same description, not as a Renaissance Man but as tending to know just enough about almost everyone and almost everything.)

The Aquarius Sun scientists, of course, also have, in most cases, the traits of "taking on the system," challenging orthodox with their ideas. (Capricorn is a rebel with action, muscle, often violence; Aquarius with ideas.) They found veins of thought, invent wide-impact techniques. Yet, through them all, there runs this prevailing instinct for interconnectivity.

BTW, we don't have a reliable birth time for Thomas Edison. The circulated chart, for early in the day, is founded on nothing much at all. Were he born late in the day, Sun would be in Aquarius, not Capricorn. We just don't know. It has always seemed to me that Edison and Bell belonged together in Aquarius.

Notice that they aren't necessarily liberals. Consider Patrick Moore, even Antonin Scalia, a couple of the writers above, certainly Robert Bork, Rick Perry, even Mitt Romney (who is the most socially liberal of the batch). They are foremost their own person, following their own line of insight, their own path. It's just that their lines of thought (and especially that theme of interconnectivity) leads them to be liberals much more often.

And I really don't know whether to consider Aquarian Osama bin Laden as a conservative or a liberal in his own context - but, again, his instinct, his magic, was in understanding network and interconnectivity!

Posted: **Mon May 08, 2017 9:07 pm**

Things that stand out to me most about the writers reviewed above:

Often they inaugurate or define new movements in literary art, overflowing old boundaries, being often labelled avant garde, and figureheads of what is modern and experimental in their respective eras.

They tend to be are provocative, controversial, live outside conventional society. Many are also politically active, sometimes as extremists.

They are typically sexually libertine, bohemian, even iconoclastic; and their works often center around their sexual challenges to conventional morality. I suspect the real theme here is bursting against deep cultural restrictions, finding a topic that is most socially provocative and openly challenging it with their lives and work (and this just happens to be sex; with Ellis it was violence).

Personally, solitude and alienation marks significant stretches of their lives.

Much of their work is autobiographical. This goes far beyond Nin. However, it may be comparably true of writers in general (on this I'm unclear).

Posted: **Mon May 08, 2017 9:08 pm**

It occurs to me that the observed family orientation of Aquarius Suns may be just another expression of the underlying theme of instinctively understanding interconnectedness.

Posted: **Mon May 08, 2017 9:08 pm**

Here are some other categories of note for famous Aquarians.

U.S. PRESIDENTS
There have only been two, and they are practically archetypal, certainly demi-gods in the American pantheon. They are George Washington and Abraham Lincoln. I think we are not likely to have another unless that person is another Washington or Lincoln. I am intrigued that the mythos (more than the facts) around both of these men centers on their having an extraordinarily strong relationship to truth. Their religious views were also pretty similar, and distant from the mainstream.

OTHER POLITICIANS & POLITICAL FIGURES
These are quite active. Many are liberals, many are conservatives, and a separate study of their themes and points of view would be interesting to discern commonalities. They all seem to strike their own path, and often are figures around whom ideologies settle and center (they are Hubs, after all). Consider Sen. Edward Kennedy, Chelsea Clinton, Sen. Tim Kaine, Sen. Joseph Lieberman, Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Gov. Mitt Romney, Justice Antonin Scalia, Judge Robert Bork, Gov. Rick Perry,

PS There is significant wealth, with Bloomberg and Romney being in the profession of creating wealth. To this we can add Rupert Murdock and Steve Jobs. Three of these three acquired most of their wealth through media empires.

SEX
Besides the many who were known for other fields and challenged sexual boundaries with their lives and creations, there are several famous Aquarians known primarily for sex.

Christine Keeler, prostitute and spy at the hub of one of the most notorious espionage triangles in history.
Harriette Wilson, 18th century English courtesan, mistress of several notables.
Nancy Spungen, prostitute and stripper whose murder solidified her fame (along with her romance with Sid Vicious).
Nina Hartley, porn actress, sex educator, and anti-censorshipactivist.

Also, though known most as a brilliant publisher, I think we should include Helen Gurley Brown in this category as a social force remaking society's vision of sexuality, women, and the word, first with her book Sex & the Single Girl, and then as the driving force of Cosmopolitan for decades.

MUSIC
While a different feel than Aquarius Moon's rock royalty, Aquarius Sun is one of the two most common Sun-signs for rock musicians in the '60s, and has farther reaching music depth. Examples include Enrico Caruso, George Harrison, James Taylor, Yoko Ono, Andy Gibb, Kesha.

GERMAN ASTROLOGERS
Two radically innovative German astrologers have Aquarius Suns, and, despite the attempt of one to distance himself from the other, they are eternally linked. One is Alfred Witte, founder of Uranian Astrology. The other is Reinhold Ebertin, founder of its refined version, Cosmobiology. Much is Aquarian about both systems! (PS In my study in the '80s, I found Tropical astrologers were slightly more likely to be Capricorns and Sidereal astrologers were slightly more likely to be Aquarians, which I interpret as most astrologers wanting to be Aquarius in the system they use <vbg>. Witte and Ebertin are exceptions, even though their type of thinking is much more characteristic of Sidereal pioneers than Tropicalists.)

MISC. ACTORS
Draw your own conclusions and share them: Cybil Shepherd, Drew Barrymore, Elizabeth Taylor, Tea Leoni, Gates McFadden, John Travolta

MISC. OUTLIERS
Several names to spark your attention, and draw your own conclusions: Jimmy Hoffa, L. Ron Hubbard, Osama bin Ladin, Patricia Hearst, Steve Jobs.

Posted: **Mon May 08, 2017 9:09 pm**

jamescondor wrote:Number 1 thing I notice, which is well documented, is Innovation

Actors.
Joseph Gordon Levitt and Bruce Willis are so similar that they played each other in "Looper". John Travolta. Chuck Norris. They are cool dudes. Then you have Drew Barrymore comic and cute, Ellen Page is like sort a like a young boy. Laura Prepon is like a big boy. Jessica Biel, Carrie Underwood are hot but most of the woman I know of I'd consider not hot, but sexy in a non typical female way. That's about all I remember as actors.
Musicians- David Gilmour and John Frusciante are actually very beautiful guitarists. George Harrison was good at times but I wouldn't consider great. The Beatles are great collectively but each were average musicians relatively. GH would be better at atmospheric music, like organic, soundscapes, not 'Rock n Roll'. Kurt Cobain, innovator. Not a great guitar player but the way he played, he owned it! And his message-innovator. Johnny Cash-Innovator
Michael Jordan-nuff said! INNOVATOR.

Posted: **Mon May 08, 2017 9:09 pm**

TheScales_BothWays wrote:So as I was reading the "Mercury" section in Wikipedia's article, "Planets in Astrology," I stumbled upon a really intriguing statement:
Wikipedia wrote:Mercury (☿) is the ruling planet of Gemini and Virgo and is exalted in Virgo or Aquarius.
It caught me off guard—I didn't know that Tropicalists have considered a different sign for Mercury's exaltation!

I immediately then went to Aquarius' astrological Wikipedia page, and found the same:
Wikipedia wrote:Zodiac symbol: Water-bearer
Duration (tropical, western): January 19 – February 18 (2017, UT1)[1]
Constellation: Aquarius
Zodiac element: Air
Zodiac quality: Fixed
Sign ruler: Saturn (ancient), Uranus (modern)
Detriment: Sun
Exaltation: Mercury
...
Jim, (and others, if you guys may ) would you find this association of Mercury to Aquarius to be accurate?
Aquarius is indeed well-known for being scientific, analytic, interested in investigation and at times impersonal and unaffected, which some may sound Mercurial, but those traits may be Uranian too, no?
Though it would be interesting if Aquarius is Mercury's exaltation after all.

Otherwise, I'd say this is all crap since I know and observe nothing significantly (if not noticeably) Mercurial about Sidereal Capricorn.

Posted: **Mon May 08, 2017 9:09 pm**

I can't argue with a similarity of Mercury to Aquarius, but see no reason to alter the standard dignities. There are simply planets that have certain compatibilities with signs without being definitive. Mars in Leo might be another one, for example. Other astrological traditions have technical terms for non-ruler non-exalted planets compatible in a sign, e.g., "friends."

I even argued for Mercury's exaltation in Aquarius once. I couldn't stand the idea that Mercury was exalted in a sign it ruled, like it got cheated! (I was young and this was a bit too hyper on my part <g>). SO I got really excited when I found the description of an ancient Egyptian coffin-lid text that listed the planets in exactly the same sequence as the exaltations (a millennium before the Hypsomatic Year) except Mercury was between Mars and Venus. Gosh, I thought, if these are really exaltation sequences that means Mercury's exaltation falls between Capricorn and Pisces, right? Eureka! Proof!!!!!!

As I said, I was young, hyper, and a bit too obsessive on the point.

We can certainly accept that Mercury is quite comfortable in Aquarius without saying Aquarius is of the nature of Mercury. Remember that adopting it would also mean that Leo would be Mercury's Fall, and Leo is not at all in-mercurial.

Posted: **Mon May 08, 2017 9:10 pm**

TheScales_BothWays wrote:Thank you for your informative reply Jim. It was also amusing to read your anecdote.

Jim Eshelman wrote:We can certainly accept that Mercury is quite comfortable in Aquarius without saying Aquarius is of the nature of Mercury.
Yeah, totally.

Jim Eshelman wrote:Remember that adopting it would also mean that Leo would be Mercury's Fall, and Leo is not at all in-mercurial.
Point!

Posted: **Mon May 08, 2017 9:10 pm**

I haven't done more than 20% of what I wanted to get done on Aquarius this month - I'm rewriting each of the standardized interpretations as we go and, so far, I've just logged more notes to keep vetting - but I can come back to that even as we move on, of course. I'll get the new month's thread ready to start in a few days. If you have any final contributions you want to make on Aquarius, I encourage you to share them before we move - just to clear the pipes of whatever is boiling around. (I find it interesting that folks had far more to throw in on Capricorns than on Aquarians, and, from what I can read between the lines, everybody knows more Caps than Aquarians.)

Posted: **Mon May 08, 2017 9:11 pm**

Danica wrote:This is what I've been able to notice about my group of 16 personally known Solar Aquarians:

- There's a prominent stability about them, about the way/manner in which they invest their energy.
- This stands for 11 of them (so about 75%): each has an area of interest of a non-common type, that sets them apart from what is usual/normal in their social surrounding (mysticism, magick, philosophy, mountaineering, life-couching technologies, shamanism and stuff like that).

Posted: **Mon May 08, 2017 9:12 pm**

FlorencedeZ. wrote:I struggle with this Sun sign. I find it hard to pin down.
On one hand you've got personalities like Erdogan and the late Dutch politician Pim Fortuyn (19 feb 1948, 00.15, Velsen, the Netherlands) who stirred things up and then there are the true helpers and philanthropes who seem quite the opposite.
Regards,
Flo

Posted: **Mon May 08, 2017 9:12 pm**

TheScales_BothWays wrote:Yes, on one hand we have a great Renaissance figure, Galileo Galilei and on the other we have an extremist, conservative terrorist leader Osama Bin Laden.

Perhaps they both just represent variants of Aquarius' need to be out of convention?

Posted: **Mon May 08, 2017 9:13 pm**

Danica wrote:At least we can say they are a diverse bunch, so variety is one of the characteristics

Posted: **Sat May 20, 2017 6:51 pm**

I have just significantly restructured and updated the Sun in Aquarius interpretation for the site, including writing the four-line summary that I'm adding for each sign.

SUMMARY: Scientific, analytic, inventive, pragmatic, non-dogmatic. Unconventional, pro-vocative, controversial. Broad interests. Ignores race, class, rank. Truthful, altru-istic, helping. Understands people. Solitude, alienation, undemonstrative. Haughty, unapologetic, but rarely pretentious. May not understand time.

Solunars by Aldebaran Sidereal Academy

Sun in Aquarius - sign project

Sun in Aquarius - sign project

Re: Sun in Aquarius - sign project

Re: Sun in Aquarius - sign project

Re: Sun in Aquarius - sign project

Re: Sun in Aquarius - sign project

Re: Sun in Aquarius - sign project

Re: Sun in Aquarius - sign project

Re: Sun in Aquarius - sign project

Re: Sun in Aquarius - sign project

Re: Sun in Aquarius - sign project

Re: Sun in Aquarius - sign project

Re: Sun in Aquarius - sign project

Re: Sun in Aquarius - sign project

Re: Sun in Aquarius - sign project

Re: Sun in Aquarius - sign project

Re: Sun in Aquarius - sign project

Re: Sun in Aquarius - sign project

Re: Sun in Aquarius - sign project

Re: Sun in Aquarius - sign project

Re: Sun in Aquarius - sign project

Re: Sun in Aquarius - sign project

Re: Sun in Aquarius - sign project

Re: Sun in Aquarius - sign project

Re: Sun in Aquarius - sign project

Re: Sun in Aquarius - sign project