posted December 08, 2014 02:39 PM            

Can you have a great synastry chart, and a horrible composite and davison, and still make it as a couple?

posted December 08, 2014 04:23 PM            

Good God. Well, outside of launching a complete MOOC on this, I'll try and break it down. There are independent universities with varying levels of degreed programmes in astrology that operate as 'majors' in the area of interpersonal astrology. You'd devote, easily, half the curriculum to synastry and composite, with the remainder to the Davison.

So, here's the quick n' dirty. (My favourite way to roll since tSATURN's leaving my 3H.)

Synastry is the nitty-gritty of the couple. The natal synastry breaks it all down to show how every little component may either work, or work against, every other component. It's 'you versus them', rather than 'us'. Comparison. (And, as you've not asked, I won't get into progressed synastry, as that's another layer.)

The Composite shows the individuals as a unit; it's rather the 'natal' of the separate entity that is the joint (or perhaps joined) energy of the two people. It's revealing in the sense that it may show things the synastry doesn't -- and often does. How you react together may vary from how you react with each other. Of course, the composite isn't unrelated to the synastry; dual aspects, and particular types of aspects will appear in the composite in certain ways. There's a definite mathematical relationship between them.

The Davison, still being a newcomer to the field, despite its creator, Ronald C Davison, having an illustrious career in pro astrology spanning decades, is relatively speculative and most opinion-driven. Rob Hand and John Townley contributed greatly to the composite's interpretation and construction; the Davison Relationship Chart is, as you'd expect, a one-man show. Its main purpose is to chart an actual natal of the composite, rather than via calculated midpoints. It's argued this gives it a more 'real world' application, and can show how the relationship might actually unfold. (Personally, my results have been mixed; I know many who swear by its accuracy, however.)

As to your questions ...

Can you have a fantastic synastry, and a bad composite and still make it as a couple? Purely in astrological terms here, I'd have to say that couples with non-binding composites may seem less 'a couple' than those with very strong composites. The relationship may be smooth, and the interaspects awesome, but there may be a stronger sense of independence in that relationship which keeps it from being totally bonded. Just my opinions here, given my work.

Can you have a terrible synastry and still make it as a couple? Well, sure. If two people are emotionally mature and dedicated to the success of the relationship, even the worst aspects can be overcome. Conversely, some of the most beautiful synastries can go completely up in flames.

You can also have an exceptional composite (take my Twin and I for example) but some extremely binding and very volatile synastry. The results of that are about as expected. We're like those two leading costars who never can quite seem to get it together, because the writers were told to keep us from getting into an actual relationship. Like they were taking point from Chris Carter, a la The X-Files. That kinda thing.

Meanwhile, I've got some pretty incendiary synastry aspects with my partner and costar, but a strong composite as well, which boasts 'a lifetime relationship with great monetary gains and contributions to be made to the world'. Thank God for emotional maturity!

Astrologically-speaking, I like the common sense test above all.

If you've got someone sharing a bad synastry featuring themselves and someone who's treating them poorly, I'd encourage the querent to take a pass on the 'relationship'.

On the contrary, if you've got an individual in a relatively secure relationship with less-than-stellar synastry, and humdrum composite, I'm going to give it my full attention and go into counselor mode, seeing what I can do to smooth some of the rougher edges.

As to Davison -- I'm still learning on that front.

posted December 08, 2014 05:38 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Aubyanne:
Hiya, Reese.

Good God. Well, outside of launching a complete MOOC on this, I'll try and break it down. There are independent universities with varying levels of degreed programmes in astrology that operate as 'majors' in the area of interpersonal astrology. You'd devote, easily, half the curriculum to synastry and composite, with the remainder to the Davison.

So, here's the quick n' dirty. (My favourite way to roll since tSATURN's leaving my 3H.)

[b]Synastry is the nitty-gritty of the couple. The natal synastry breaks it all down to show how every little component may either work, or work against, every other component. It's 'you versus them', rather than 'us'. Comparison. (And, as you've not asked, I won't get into progressed synastry, as that's another layer.)

The Composite shows the individuals as a unit; it's rather the 'natal' of the separate entity that is the joint (or perhaps joined) energy of the two people. It's revealing in the sense that it may show things the synastry doesn't -- and often does. How you react together may vary from how you react with each other. Of course, the composite isn't unrelated to the synastry; dual aspects, and particular types of aspects will appear in the composite in certain ways. There's a definite mathematical relationship between them.

The Davison, still being a newcomer to the field, despite its creator, Ronald C Davison, having an illustrious career in pro astrology spanning decades, is relatively speculative and most opinion-driven. Rob Hand and John Townley contributed greatly to the composite's interpretation and construction; the Davison Relationship Chart is, as you'd expect, a one-man show. Its main purpose is to chart an actual natal of the composite, rather than via calculated midpoints. It's argued this gives it a more 'real world' application, and can show how the relationship might actually unfold. (Personally, my results have been mixed; I know many who swear by its accuracy, however.)

As to your questions ...

Can you have a fantastic synastry, and a bad composite and still make it as a couple? Purely in astrological terms here, I'd have to say that couples with non-binding composites may seem less 'a couple' than those with very strong composites. The relationship may be smooth, and the interaspects awesome, but there may be a stronger sense of independence in that relationship which keeps it from being totally bonded. Just my opinions here, given my work.

Can you have a terrible synastry and still make it as a couple? Well, sure. If two people are emotionally mature and dedicated to the success of the relationship, even the worst aspects can be overcome. Conversely, some of the most beautiful synastries can go completely up in flames.

You can also have an exceptional composite (take my Twin and I for example) but some extremely binding and very volatile synastry. The results of that are about as expected. We're like those two leading costars who never can quite seem to get it together, because the writers were told to keep us from getting into an actual relationship. Like they were taking point from Chris Carter, a la The X-Files. That kinda thing.

Meanwhile, I've got some pretty incendiary synastry aspects with my partner and costar, but a strong composite as well, which boasts 'a lifetime relationship with great monetary gains and contributions to be made to the world'. Thank God for emotional maturity!

Astrologically-speaking, I like the common sense test above all.

If you've got someone sharing a bad synastry featuring themselves and someone who's treating them poorly, I'd encourage the querent to take a pass on the 'relationship'.

On the contrary, if you've got an individual in a relatively secure relationship with less-than-stellar synastry, and humdrum composite, I'm going to give it my full attention and go into counselor mode, seeing what I can't do to smooth some of the rougher edges.

As to Davison -- I'm still learning on that front.

But that's my cursory rundown.[/B]

---

this is amazing;I'm going to copy this because I honestly have been confused, especially about the Composite and Davison.

So All in All,

posted December 08, 2014 07:06 PM            

I try not to view synastry as a compatibility test, because it's really a comparison game, and MANY factors contribute. The composite, on the other hand, 'activates' whenever the two of you are together. As in, physically in the same room. And I was never such a big believer in the composite until comparing how my Twin and I operate (with whom I have the best composite ever) when we're actually sharing the same physical space.

It's a very, very real feeling when the composite activates. Almost like a switch. Flip, on. Then we're en fuego.

Another good example is certain things the composite might reveal that the synastry doesn't outright, or maybe hints at. My composite with my Guardian is that of couples in the public eye, dealing with quite a bit of scrutiny, and having a lot of markers for working in film.

Hmmmmmm.

Neither of our natals scream this, but our composite? Shouts it. So, him + me = public eye. This is how the composite can generate a direction you may not have considered, the results of which come from that relationship or connexion.

My synastry with my new development partner is okay, but the composite -- bam. Packed 2H. SUN, MOON, MERC, and so on. But, unlike my costar, he and I aren't likely to be 'in the public eye', since we won't be in front of the camera together. Though he's absolutely instrumental in helping me properly create the series and get it out there. 2H is the seat of a lot -- resources, talent, and 'building' house -- but it's below the horizon.