Document Text Contents
Page 2
113390
Page 276
254 ASTROLOGY
to do the right thing no matter what the cost. One can readily un-
derstand how this attitude may be misinterpreted by the other party
as lack of sympathy.
Venus in this sign is extraordinarily brilliant; she is the beauty
of the sparks which are struck from the sword of Mars as he goes
into battle, but she is robbed of all the importance which she has
as tenderness and graciousness. She becomes the Amazon, pano-
plied and splendid, with no trace of the Hausfrau. Baudelaire and
Swinburne both have this position, and she is buttressed by the
most formidable aspects ; yet she fails to flower with that voluptuous
graciousness that we find, for example, in Michael Angelo who has
her in Pisces. She is hard, 'brilliant, subtle, passionate, but not en-
during and not inclined to please. She attacks and she repels, but
all her operations are operations of assault and battery. She stirs
to activity and quits. In women, this position is exceptionally un-
pleasant. She may be extraordinarily attractive but, even if she
gratifies, will never satisfy. She excites and irritates, never calms
and soothes. Even in art, one perceives clearly how unsatisfactory,
from the point of view of Venus herself, so to speak, is this position
for her. When Swinburne wrote "Dolores," he was trying to paint
a picture of Venus in Libra or in Scorpio; he only succeeded in
painting a Venus in Aries type.
We see the same thing in the writing of Baudelaire and the music
of Tchaikovsky. It is always irritation without satisfaction; it is
not Isis veiled, but Isis in armor. As indicated above, this position
is very much better for men than it is for women, but it is good
even for them only where Venus is a subsidiary figure, not only in
the horoscope itself, but in the general character of the native.
Where his general pursuit in life is of the character of Venus, it is
bad, but it is not bad for such men as Lincoln and J. P. Morgan
to have Venus under arms.
It may be of great value in the horoscope of any man of the
more studious and serious sort not to have Venus flower too fully.
We find her in this position in the horoscopes of such men as Em-
erson, Alexander Graham Bell, Dr. Quackenbos and the Hon.
Stephen A. Douglas. Where, however, the native is an artist, the
limitations may be regarded as troublesome. Thus we find Palmer
Cox in art and Frank R. Stockton in literature somewhat lacking
113390
Page 276
254 ASTROLOGY
to do the right thing no matter what the cost. One can readily un-
derstand how this attitude may be misinterpreted by the other party
as lack of sympathy.
Venus in this sign is extraordinarily brilliant; she is the beauty
of the sparks which are struck from the sword of Mars as he goes
into battle, but she is robbed of all the importance which she has
as tenderness and graciousness. She becomes the Amazon, pano-
plied and splendid, with no trace of the Hausfrau. Baudelaire and
Swinburne both have this position, and she is buttressed by the
most formidable aspects ; yet she fails to flower with that voluptuous
graciousness that we find, for example, in Michael Angelo who has
her in Pisces. She is hard, 'brilliant, subtle, passionate, but not en-
during and not inclined to please. She attacks and she repels, but
all her operations are operations of assault and battery. She stirs
to activity and quits. In women, this position is exceptionally un-
pleasant. She may be extraordinarily attractive but, even if she
gratifies, will never satisfy. She excites and irritates, never calms
and soothes. Even in art, one perceives clearly how unsatisfactory,
from the point of view of Venus herself, so to speak, is this position
for her. When Swinburne wrote "Dolores," he was trying to paint
a picture of Venus in Libra or in Scorpio; he only succeeded in
painting a Venus in Aries type.
We see the same thing in the writing of Baudelaire and the music
of Tchaikovsky. It is always irritation without satisfaction; it is
not Isis veiled, but Isis in armor. As indicated above, this position
is very much better for men than it is for women, but it is good
even for them only where Venus is a subsidiary figure, not only in
the horoscope itself, but in the general character of the native.
Where his general pursuit in life is of the character of Venus, it is
bad, but it is not bad for such men as Lincoln and J. P. Morgan
to have Venus under arms.
It may be of great value in the horoscope of any man of the
more studious and serious sort not to have Venus flower too fully.
We find her in this position in the horoscopes of such men as Em-
erson, Alexander Graham Bell, Dr. Quackenbos and the Hon.
Stephen A. Douglas. Where, however, the native is an artist, the
limitations may be regarded as troublesome. Thus we find Palmer
Cox in art and Frank R. Stockton in literature somewhat lacking
