When I was in my Vibrational Astrology program, which went on from June 2018 through September 2020, I was expecting some alienation regarding my practice. I had done my second website, relocation-astrology.com, in late 2017. The domain relocationastrology.com (which would apparently get you more readers, I’m told) is on sale for something like $1800; when I was first building this website, it was more like $5000. I don’t feel compelled to spend that kind of money.
The Vibrational Astrology program hadn’t started yet, and I got some pushback in a workshop that he did that I first met David Cochrane in Gainesville, FL in April 2016. The pushback I got from somebody was, “You are a Scorpio ascendant. Your ascendant doesn’t change. You will always be a Scorpio Ascendant.” This was upsetting.
(It was an online friend who talked with me on the phone after I moved to Colorado, observing me, who said, “You don’t seem like a Scorpio rising to me.” She had Scorpio on the Ascendant herself, so she has some idea wherein she speaks.)
David Cochrane is a veritable genius; I told him once “You are deserving of several lifetime awards.” I’m trying to reconcile my view of relocation astrology with his; whether my own observations disagree with his views and how much. I tend to prioritize different interpretations, which I’ll get to — this is normal; as he said himself, “Each of us takes a small slice of the astrology field; it is impossible to know everything.”
I know, for example, that my focus on the degree of a sign that a planet is in and its indicated the maturity of the planet’s expression is not something that David has considered. This is a digression — I’m here to focus on relocation astrology. But it indicates that even the best among us have certain either blind spots or just areas that they choose not to cover for whatever reason. So much of this is about ‘what you choose to cover’ and why. It’s the same thing with the journalism field — if a major publication chooses not to cover a labor strike, that makes a difference in our understanding.
When we finally covered ‘relocational astrology’ as the unit about halfway through the course, I ended up learning a lot. From Astro Maps/Treasure Maps, to Local Space, to parans. His quote, the headline (which I’m recalling from memory), “It changes things, but it doesn’t change things that much,” stuck with me and still sticks with me.
We need to explain ourselves fully when we tell a client what a location will do and what it won’t do. Many of our personal characteristics do not depend on the ascendant or midheaven, because they only involve planets or the North Node and these things do not change in our birth chart no matter where we go. It’s a good idea to be very firm and clear about this.
A lot, of course, has to do with ridding ourselves of the negative. People have lived in a place so long (and still live there) without even realizing it was disservicing themselves in some profound way. This was my own life experience and I have noticed it in a number of clients. That often comes out in the Treasure Maps, but it can come out in other ways, like the planetary midpoints.
Midpoints. Parker’s Astrology does them so well, and I have personally gotten a huge amount of mileage out of them in my own life. There is the risky chance of confirmation bias, but once you’ve relocated, you can notice certain characteristics disappearing. That’s a lot harder to call confirmation bias when you see something that was there but is no longer there, and a relocation adds bricks, if you will, to the structure — the credibility — of one’s understanding of one’s experience in each location.
Getting back to “It changes things, but it doesn’t change things that much.” I have to ask myself, what in me or outside me hasn’t changed? Because a lot of things have. This move to Denver, now nearly 5 years, has been a great experiment in what in relocation astrology has changed, but what hasn’t?
I think it is congruent with the things that do not involve the ascendant and midheaven. My moon/Mercury conjunction at 2 and 1 degrees Capricorn, will augur characteristics that will not change. The low degrees point to a lack of maturity in the characteristics that these planets cover, such as emotional maturity or mental/technical maturity. This will stay with me throughout my life.
The conjunction between Moon and Mercury, of course, is very positive and powerful, and I appreciate having both of these planets in Capricorn, as the Mercury in Capricorn indicates shrewdness (among other things) and the Moon makes me more responsible and committed, etc. than I would be otherwise. None of these things change if I move to another location.
This also begs the question. I spoke briefly with another astrologer (relatively locally — it was a woman on a dating site) and she suggested that we need to try to experience people as they are without putting the filters of astrology onto them before you get to know them. It’s a fair point. And if you’re dating, you probably don’t want to do too much hocus-pocus astrology on them. This is a digression, but I have wanted to make this point, as men who are astrologers might make more of the astrology than women, at first. You don’t want to pidgeonhole somebody.
However, I have found that the astrology, and the interpretations I fall back on, rarely lie.
Because of that, I’ve concluded that a lot of what ‘doesn’t change’ does involve patterns where the ascendant and midheaven are not involve and a lot of what does, does involve the ascendant and midheaven. It’s shorthand, to be sure. If my clients didn’t find it rewarding I would be thinking about other approaches.