The New Astrologer

by Martin Seymour-Smith

Book Overview

No Synopsis Available.

• Format: Hardcover
• Language: English
• ISBN: 0020819404
• ISBN13: 9780020819400
• Release Date: January 1983
• Publisher: Scribner Book Company
• Length: 320 Pages
• Weight: 1.58 lbs.
• Dimensions: 0.8" x 7.5" x 9.9"

Customer Reviews

A Classic Textbook of Astrology

I give _The New Astrologer_ five stars not because it is flawless but because it is so important to the literature of astrology. The author is quirky, and the book suffers slightly from his occasional quirks, but it fills in missing insights into the study of astrology better than most books ever written on the topic. His insights are keen and deeply thoughtful. His explanations of the rudiments of the craft are among the very best.

Excellent celestial mechanics, but what does it mean...?

This was one of the first astrology books I read, and it remains one of the best. But let me qualify that statement: This book is excellent on the mechanics of astrology. For example, it has a fine beginning section on astronomy of the Solar System that is very relevant to astrological calculations. It also has the best (and about the only) discussion of alternate House systems I have ever read. And it gives a thorough (if brief) overview of various aspects and their interpretation, taking a harmonics approach (1/2, 1/3, 1/4, 1/7 etc). It is also excellent on new trends in astrology, having discussions of Ebertin's system of midpoints, Gauqeulin's statistical studies, and Addey's system of Harmonic Astrology. The downside is that it is absolutely awful on chart interpretation. First, the author is British and, as an American, I did not know most of the English persons were that the author discussed. Secondly, they are almost all, without exception, extremely unsavory characters: mass-murderers, duplicitious spies, crooked politicians, and various criminals and other scum-bags from the lowest levels of the human condition. One can only marvel at the negativity of his choice of personages. He also trashed Jung, which did not offend me but it did clue me in right away to his very different approach to the meaning of astrology. He is very mechanical/statistical, not psychological/intuitive. If you bear this in mind, you can learn a great deal about the construction and analysis of natal charts. For interpretation, however, you'll need to look elsewhere.