15 comments on “The Gift of the Magi

  1. Oh yeah, Magi Astrology. I forgot about that marketing gimmick a while ago.

    One of the things that always cracked me up about their system was the names that they give to things in order to make them sound more important or glitzy or something, like a person’s “Cinderella period.” lol.

    • I think it sounds magical. 🙂

      Wish I knew when my Cinderella time was so I could get some glass slippers ordered in advance.

  2. I think of all of the times I have cringed when a Scientist denounces Astrology, knowing full well they had not spent the time to study or have produced unbiased methodology to back up their claims…. so in that vein I must say, I have not studied Magi enough to give a blanket thumbs down. I do believe that if this group of Astrologers feel they have unearthed a new method that more information should be readily available so others can reproduce their statistical information that they claim as the basis of their study. It actually would seem a given they would want to share, but as pointed out above, monetary compensation is the only way to get the nessessary access.

    Not willing to throw the baby out with the bathwater, I am sure there is some legitimate use of the linkages and such and it would be nice to work with this as an overlay with charts and see if patterns emerge.

    Guess in a nutshell I am saying, the claims are bold, the statistics questionable, the dismissal of the centuries of studies and brilliant break throughs such as the work of the Arabic Astrologers…., not being able to apply Magi to Astrocartography, Horary, or Decumbature, or ect…. Magi Astrology is incomplete. On a Pallas induce pattern seeking moment, did anyone else notice the areas that Magi cover are Relationship and Financial? People pay for those.

    • Well, the problem with the Magi system is…it works. But it only works because they aren’t doing anything different or special. They use transits and synastry charts without houses and then look for Trines and Squares. If it’s got more Trines, it’s good, if it’s got more Squares, it’s bad.

      That’s not new.

      • One of the things that they do that is kind of new-ish is they place a lot more systematic emphasis on latitude and declination than most traditional forms of astrology typically do. I’m not really familiar with what sort of unique interpretations they ascribe to this though, so I can’t really even say how developed this aspect of the system is.

        As a side note, I’m not even sure that it is proper for me to be referring to ‘their system’ and such. It seems like it is just one guy who branded his own particular approach basically, right? And then certified some other astrologers in it. Maybe it would be more accurate to refer to ‘that one guys’ approach’, or what have you. Like ‘Frawley’s approach/system’.

  3. I´ve currently got Chiron Jupiter and Neptune “the super dooper romance planets” square my natal Sun (and sextile Moon). I can say that I did meet someone really special when they conjoined in early 2009.

    We´ve got some Chiron Venus between us. I´ve written all of my best songs about her, I love her, I´m in a romantic cindarella and the prince meltdown, she´s kind of a cindarella. Though she doesn´t have evil sisters, just one who is pretty sweet, and who she is sweet towards, (her sister has learning disability).

    All I can say about it is that the Magi have contributed something to fill my astrological obsession. I´m not sure about their take on Juno though, but then I´ve got Chiron pretty much dominating my chart. And what the Magi have to say about Chiron is spot on.

    I think it´s a different kind of astrology for a different kind of person. And I like it to a certain extent. Though obviously any one with a desire to know the future will check the Solar Eclipses, house rulerships, dignities, receptions progressions etc. etc. until it bleeds out of their ears.

    I defend the Magi, and if I could order their stuff cheap I would. The Asteroids are Fair Game. Though clearly have no dignity, rulership or even “association” with any particular sign.

    • p.s. about the disclaimer:

      I´m gonna put a disclaimer on my blog stating that “All of the information herein contained in this blog is fact, it is proven rational thought and it is 100% correct even if it appears to be contrary.”

      The Astrologers of old never used the word “might” or “could”. Have some fucking balls Magi. : )

  4. I remember coming acorss their site a few months back. But like wintersprite, I have to say I didn’t really study their stuff. Too busy learning the basics to branch off like that.

    I was rather taken by their Juno-Chiron thing. But gotta get more facts from charts on that one. Speaking for Juno, though, my husband’s Juno cojuncts my ASC by an orb of one.

  5. Honestly, Magi gives me the heebie-jeebies. I don’t like their system, and whenever I read their stuff it just comes off as kind of crazy and way too dogmatic.

  6. My wife and I have Chiron bi-quintile (144 degrees). I don’t know of any other software that would display this angle.

    • http://www.astro.com/astrology/in_aspect_e.htm online Astrodienst includes them on the option to see the pdf of a chart… (top left hand of the chart page)

      Some Astrologers readily use them as do other programs like SolarFire and Matrix. I think the biggest problem that is seen with the Magi is that they use obscure aspects to force their premise and that only on cherry picked charts. Astrology has existed for thousands of years and we can all agree, it worked. Many of us therefor shy away from looking at “new” aspects and named space dust, because the traditional planet still work Now that is not to say the new ones don’t influence, but are not necessary to do a reading. This time is exciting for knowledge and sharing information. I do hope that studies are compiled and research continued for hundreds of years on the newer diversions. I also hope the Magi will be more open and sharing of their findings, for I am sure there are nuggets of wisdom found in their work and databases.

      • Before you even get into that you have to first tackle the question on whether or not you can even really take statistical studies on astrology. Statistics can’t be as all encompassing as astrology would demand it to be, and you can’t just take simple things like “Let’s see how many musicians have the Moon in a water sign”, because astrology doesn’t work that way.

        It’s impossible to say “The Moon here gives this result” and dig into horoscopes to find it, because there will always be mitigating factors in a chart, and statistical research won’t take well to that kind of flexibility.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s