Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Comment: There are some useful hints on declinations in the first three pages
of the book (pages in the book are formatted in two columns & set in small
type, so these three are more like 10 pages in a standard book). One hint:
Progressed lunar declinations may bring changes in earnings, as noted by
Karen Christino. DeMello makes numerous references to Kt Boehrer's work,
which is both seminal and, sadly, out of print. DeMello's own conclusions are
hackneyed. Early astronauts had moon out-of-bounds with surprising
frequency, also the first three homosexual males deMello encountered. Later
astronauts, as well as other gays, did not. DeMello concludes, After all, since
early astronauts, our best & brightest, had out of bounds moons & are
thoroughly investigated, it is hardly likely that any of them was homosexual.
(pg. 2) Elsewhere he writes, While there are many homosexuals of both sexes
in mainstream Hollywood, there is no crossover between those who act in
porn and those who do not. (pg. 94) DeMello notes he has little talent for
writing, which did not stop him, or, indeed, many others, from doing exactly
that. Those with the best talent rarely find the use of that talent compelling. I
don't know - or care - if deMello is a homophobe. But he is not the brightest
bulb.
The 167 charts are in 2 sets: The first with Saturn at or around 0 degrees (+/up to 2 degrees), the second with Jupiter at 0 degrees (+/-, etc.). Since Saturn
moves slowly, what this means in practice are clusters of charts in the years
1908-09, 1921-22, 1937-38, and, 1950-52. Despite plentiful evidence to the
contrary, deMello wants to make all those with Saturn at 0 to be
homosexuals, or at least, bisexual (conclusions, pg. 257). Given that
homosexuals are, in fact, born on every day of every year, deMello's 16 year
cycle (during which, presumably, everyone is gay) is questionable at best. I
should know: There's a "deMello cluster" that's 1-2 years older than me,
people impossible for me to ignore. Despite the fact this is a book about
declination, few of deMello's chart critiques make any mention of declinations
at all. Worse, though he prints the wheel & (mostly) provides aspect grids,
none of the charts show declinations, a curious omission. He sources only
some of the birth data, which is always provided. With that caveat, get this
book for the charts. There are some interesting charts here, including
4. Example charts; Chris Everet: Millionaire tennis star; Man with a happy
childhood; Clark Gable: The king; Reverend Jim Jones: Cult leader; William
Faukner: Honored author; Karen: Unrequited love; Jim: Growing up; Odette:
War heroine; Wynn: An auto accident; Beatrice Cenci: An ancient story;
Barbara: Marriage; Frank: Marriage; Major General John Charles Fremont:
Marriage; Admiral Richard E. Byrd: Successful adventure; Ginger: National
publicity; First Lady Betty Ford: Elevated status; Etan Patz: Missing boy; A
friendship-breaking loan; Earthquake no. 1; Earthquake no. 2
Comment: The author started where everyone else has started: With a
heliocentric chart with no sun, no moon, no nodes, no houses, but with an
Earth, opposite where the sun would be in a geocentric (earth-based) chart.
And those charts were interesting. It was interesting comparing helio charts
to the geocentic versions, see all the things that changed from one to the
next, watching helio transits in the helio chart, geo transits in the geo chart.
Then one day it got to be too much to keep track of all the different points in
both of the charts. The author simply plunked down the major helio points
(Mercury, Venus, Mars) in her geocentric chart, and it was a wonderful
shortcut. But there was a new problem. She kept seeing exact aspects from
helio planets to geo planets, ie, apples that pretended to be oranges, and
vice-versa. Worse, helio transits to geo planets, and vice-versa. That couldn't
be right, could it?