Dissociative (Out-of-sign) Aspects need more discussion!

[Arianna]

In my experience as someone having many in their own natal chart I find that they do not have the full affect of the aspect in question. I believe this is due to the specific qualities of each zodiac sign such as element, modality, planetary ruler, etc and the house the planet is in (I use whole sign). If out of sign aspects were normal aspects then cusps would be true which is blatantly false. There is no logical reason a 29 degree Pisces placement could conjunct a 0 degree Aries placement. I recently stumbled onto an Astro.com (well respected site) article about these aspects which claimed they have the energy of the aspect that it would have in-sign. This makes more sense than how most people would interpret these aspects but I have never heard this discussed. What is everyone’s personal findings on this topic?

Discussion

[StellaGraphia]

Some astrologers won’t do out of sign aspects, and that’s fine. I do. But just like with anything in astrology, one can never look at a square and go, oh, a square and stop there. It has to be investigated. All the details of each planet, for example:

* which planets are they exactly?
* are they benefics? malefics?
* is the chart ruler involved?
* what are their conditions in their signs? are they miserable? happy? cardinal? fixed? mutable?
* which houses are involved? are they angular? or in an aversion house?
* how close is the orb? is it applying or separating?

And part of that analysis will be if they are out of sign. A square by close orb, but in signs that are trine, will behave differently than one in signs that square. For me, the geometry, the actual degree aspects of the planets, is crucial for understanding how those planets are relating to each other and impacting their houses.

[smallbonesofcourage]

Read Sue Tompkins book Aspects in Astrology who describes out of trines as more dynamic and out of sign squares as less dynamic (if going into the trinal energy between the signs).

For a system that relies on aspects and orbs I feel this adds nuance to the interpretations.

There are also astrologers that will interpret mainly from the aspect patterns and their meaning between planets and the energy that that creates. With geometry, a tension between twp heavenly bodies should be felt wherever it happens, somehow.

Yet, yet. The best astrologers I went to didn’t look for the tightest degrees and made prioritization of significance from that. One of them pointed out an aspect between my Venus/ascendent and Saturn/uranus in the fourth as a most impacting aspect. Mind, the square’s orb is 8 degrees. She said that it is that way because the angles effect the chart and influence. So the uranus and Saturn in an angular house meant it would aspect strongly to the first house Venus. And her interpretation and prediction was very true. So, what I mean with that is that significance can be found beyond the meticulous calculations of orbs and maybe relies on other determinants entirely.

[Active_Doctor]

I think this would be impacted somewhat by the way you view cusps & whether you feel like the energies blend near cusps or flat stop. I personally like using placidus and I feel like the energies do tend to blend, so I would myself consider out of sign aspects to have relevance.

But then again I also like using certain objects in aspect that others would not. So my view on things is a bit unusual.

To each their own.