Greene's Butterfly: metaphors as strange attractors
Pedantus
On Gemini:
"The butterfly brings joy and magic only if it's allowed to fly free."--Liz
Greene
Here it is my intention to show how the natal charts of astrologers
innocently bias what the astrologer chooses to express the meaning of chart
symbols: I don't think anyone is immune to the effect of their own
individuality:
Liz Greene's Butterfly: metaphors as strange attractors
Like the theoretical butterfly effect and its possible influence on
worldwide weather patterns, as described in the science of Chaos, natal
aspects seem to be infinitesimal currents on a distant psychological
continent which somehow tip a delicate balance and cause a cascading,
evolving, pattern of larger currents in our waking
consciousness/personality/persona. Natal aspects appear to be biasing
agents of sorts which influence our selection of what we will notice and
apply to for the purpose of expressing our own tailored meanings. These
lobbyists influencing our senate of sentience, seem to work best when we are
paying little or no attention to the unpublished, behind the scenes, details
of our personality's legislative committees in smoke-filled chambers. Can we
use Liz's chart to show how the butterfly metaphor became the Gemini Party's
most elect-able candidate? How does a metaphor attract our personal
allegiance and or serve our socio-political purposes?
The flitting, oscillating, unstable-looking freedom of Uranus is found here
in Gemini and is emphasized by its opposition to the Moon of mundane
personal experience and the conjunction of the so-called benifics, Venus and
Jupiter, in equivocating Libra.
http://home.stny.rr.com/pedantus/Greene_L_01.gif
Gee, I wonder why the butterfly metaphor was selected to carry the
author's meaning concerning Gemini. Was it simply calculated? Was a light
bulb inspiration? Was just too charming a pet notion? Was it generated by a
computer program?...:) LOL
Rog
Indigoat
>Date: 12/11/2002 7:35 AM Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <OhGJ9.31665$Vz2.8...@twister.nyroc.rr.com>
>
>
>On Gemini:
>"The butterfly brings joy and magic only if it's allowed to fly free."--Liz
>Greene
>
> Here it is my intention to show how the natal charts of astrologers
>innocently bias what the astrologer chooses to express the meaning of chart
>symbols: I don't think anyone is immune to the effect of their own
>individuality
Very good illustration, Rog. Sun- or Moon-Gemini people have told me flat-out,
"I'm no butterfly." But they burst into laughter at reference to the "monkey
mind."
Pedantus
"Indigoat" <indi...@aol.comnojunk> wrote in message
news:20021211114302...@mb-ma.aol.com...
So much for speak no evil...:)
Thanks,
Rog
Pedantus
"Alain Stalder" <asta...@exactphilosophy.net> wrote in message
news:astalder-C011E2...@news.bluewin.ch...
> In article <OhGJ9.31665$Vz2.8...@twister.nyroc.rr.com>,
> not a matter of taste or bias, but simply correct:
My wife once asked me, "..how did Europe get men on horses to charge water
cooled machine guns in WW1?"
"They start by teaching the critical importance of uniformly correct
penmanship." I said...:)
<snip>
>
> In that sense, the other words in the quote fit very well too:
> "brings", "joy", "magic", the word "and" when connecting them,
> "only", "allowed", "fly", "free".
I think a range of expression from; social persona, to personality, and
all they way down to unique seeming individuality, can be reflected in our
creative use of language. Too bad we have so few opportunities to actually
be creative in most cases simply due to the necessary rules and inflexible
structures of language. Its not the individual words we find Self
expression in, its the sentence structure, and the sentiments we imply by
those words which are the most telling. Real butterfly lovers,
lepidopterists, prefer their butterflies netted and pinned down!...:)
Uranus, as freedom, rings in her sentence..:) And the Libra planets lend a
friendly sounding Justice to the unpredictable journey...:)
>
> One more example: At the 2000 Astrology World Congress she gave
> a talk about the 12th house and associated "clandestine
> relationships" with it. If you detach a bit from the current
> meaning, a clandestine relationship is merely a relationship that
> is more related to the "destiny" of your "clan" (your family in
> broad sense, the background that you come from) than to your own
> personal destiny.
We dyslexics really dislike it when people scramble words
*in tent i on ally*...:) (This one's for Bush of course..:)
>
> So, in the end, it does not matter much to me how astrologers
> get it right, as long as they do.
I can't stand astrologer's who are right, except me of course...:)
She also once mentioned that
> artists often don't want to analyze themselves, to make such
> things conscious - for fear to loose their creativity. So...
Yeah, I feel very deeply for the little cowards...and give them a copy of
Rollo May's, 'Courage to Create'.
Here's a reviewer's comments:
"[..]The discovery of the self is his most important
driver, yet he doesn't stop there. Taking that newly discovered self
and building the courage to acknowledge encounters, engagements,
epiphanies, and a usable acceptance of limits - this sounds so simple
in a review, but when May has your complete attention, more happens to
us than just learning about creativity: we learn about really
living. .... [..]"
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0393311066/ref=ase_inktomi-bkasin-20/
002-2445213-1422417
Thanks,
Rog
>
> Alain Stalder
>
Pedantus
> In article <OhGJ9.31665$Vz2.8...@twister.nyroc.rr.com>,
> "Pedantus" <pedantus@no_hotmail_spam.com> wrote:
>
> > Liz Greene's Butterfly: metaphors as strange attractors
> > Like the theoretical butterfly effect and its possible influence on
> > worldwide weather patterns, as described in the science of Chaos, natal
> > aspects seem to be infinitesimal currents on a distant psychological
> > continent which somehow tip a delicate balance and cause a cascading,
> > evolving, pattern of larger currents in our waking
>
> I think the question of how much in life is fate and how much is
> chaos/chance has quite a bit to do with Gemini/Hermes. I guess if
> the guy who came up with the illustration for chaos theory would
> have chosen, say, a fly instead of a butterfly, probably a lot
> less people would have been fascinated by it.
All that means, to me, is that a fly doesn't 'work' as a communicable
symbol for the idea.
BTW, I would check the chart of anyone coining such an image, whatever.
But, when and if a man chooses to call it the turnip effect, then we have
something to work with..:)
>
> During election night of the 2000 US presidential election,
> Mercury switched from retrograde to forward motion. In what
> followed, the word "butterfly" appeared too, namely in the famous
> "butterfly ballot". If I remember the facts correctly, that
> ballot was designed to be easier to read (it was for Palm Beach
> County, where there is apparently a larger percentage of elderly
> people than average). Since the font for typing the names of the
> candidates had to be larger and the distance between where holes
> had to be punched for choosing a candidate were fixed, they idea
> was to print the names of the candidates on alternative sides of
> the places where the holes were to be punched.
Just punching holes introduces Mars and Saturn feeling tones into the
experience, add a little Uranus and Neptune with wandering linear references
and its pretty much the same as nerve-crossing magical stunt like the sword
through the box tricks. But all this occurs in such places becuase its a
matter of the dog catcher's wife running the local elections...:)
>
> Apparently many people misunderstood the ballot, resulting in a
> significantly higher vote for Pat Buchanan than in neighbouring
> counties. In fact, the difference would have very probably been
> sufficient for a different candidate to become president. The
> counting procedures also reflect Gemini themes. I remember people
> looking at the surface of ballots in order to see if a hole was
> punched through deeply enough to see light pass through.
>
> This raises at least two questions:
>
> a) How would the world be if Al Gore had been elected ? Would
> there be such pressure on Iraq ? Would 9/11 happened ? (Not at
> all, but maybe a much bigger catastrophe sometime in the future ?
> Something similar but on another date ? etc.)
> b) Was it foreseeable for America that the election could be so
> close, that a few thousand votes in Palm Beach could have made
> the difference ?
I'm sure the party bean counters did actually did how close it would be.
Was the butterfly ballot unconsciously and
> collectively planned or was it just randomness, chance, chaos ?
Yes...:)
>
> I think nobody knows the answers, nor even knows how they
> could ever be answered...
>
> The singer Prince, who has the sun in Gemini, writes in a song
> text "There's joy in repetition".
Yeah, was it the sexual, spiritual (or chemical) sort? Kind of hard to
separate sex, drugs, and rock/pop music...:) Uranus in Leo is focal to his
natal t-square VE--UR--NE.
With SU-opp-SA, MO-opp-PL...I think he meant to be the Prince of
Darkness...:)
His attempt at using an unpronouncable graphic symbol for a personal
name, and the phrase 'formerly known as' is a quirky way of expressing
Saturn as the operative focus of all the above. If Gemini's have a habit of
wanting to take things to literally, I wouldn't be surprised.
>
> Alain Stalder
>
Di-a-rama
SGOJ9.33384$Vz2.9...@twister.nyroc.rr.com, "Pedantus"
<pedantus@no_hotmail_spam.com> wrote:
>> So, in the end, it does not matter much to me how astrologers
>> get it right, as long as they do.
>
> I can't stand astrologer's who are right, except me of course...:)
>
> She also once mentioned that
>> artists often don't want to analyze themselves, to make such
>> things conscious - for fear to loose their creativity. So...
>
> Yeah, I feel very deeply for the little cowards...and give them a copy of
> Rollo May's, 'Courage to Create'.
>
> Here's a reviewer's comments:
> "[..]The discovery of the self is his most important
> driver, yet he doesn't stop there. Taking that newly discovered self
> and building the courage to acknowledge encounters, engagements,
> epiphanies, and a usable acceptance of limits - this sounds so simple
> in a review, but when May has your complete attention, more happens to
> us than just learning about creativity: we learn about really
> living. .... [..]"
Hmm. Well, I'm an artist, and I don't have any trouble analyzing myself
*or* "really living". My current #1 issue--I'm just tired of the constant
barrage of rejection notices. The acceptances barely permeate through the
tough skin I've had to develop. As a result, I'm starting to suffer
burnout. Should I differentiate the "art making" from "art world"? The art
studio is a sanctuary and the art world is a cesspool.
Cheers,
Dianne
Pedantus
"Di-a-rama" <bro...@SPAM.com> wrote in message
news:BA1DFF42.1D2CC%bro...@SPAM.com...
Dianne,
Sounds awfully familiar. A friend of my wife's, in Paris, just got into
a gallery over there; he didn't know what to say when they didn't reject
him. But he managed to grouse about a few things in less than 24 hours..:)
I don't have his birth time and place yet, so I' m too much of a coward
to show you one of my comparison overlays. No, I'm not...:) You shouldn't
have any trouble seeing the emphasis of the MO/UR conjunction, and NE as the
focus of the t-square SU----NE----MO+UR.
Examples of 'figurative' paintings by CZA:
http://home.stny.rr.com/pedantus/CZA_04.gif
http://home.stny.rr.com/pedantus/CZA_03.gif
http://home.stny.rr.com/pedantus/CZA_02.gif
Chart (time?):
http://home.stny.rr.com/pedantus/CZA_01a.gif
Overlay showing a really weird, new to me, outrageous coincidence:
http://home.stny.rr.com/pedantus/CZA_01.gif
Rog
Di-a-rama
hQ5K9.35217$HA2.10...@twister.nyroc.rr.com, "Pedantus"
<pedantus@no_hotmail_spam.com> wrote:
It looks like he also has a Jup--Ven--Mars T-Square.
At any rate, it would be strange if he was born at the time and place you
used to make the chart. Regardless, the Aquarian/Uranian energy being
expressed in the overlay painting would still be appropriate, eh? Gotta
love those "lightning bolts"...
Regarding the gallery--in many cases they exploit the artists terribly.
Having gallery representation is definitely not a bed of roses.
Cheers,
Dianne
Di-a-rama
astalder-C1C88B...@news.bluewin.ch, "Alain Stalder"
<asta...@exactphilosophy.net> wrote:
> I do not want to be too pedantic
> There's joy in repetition.
Holy cow!!
There is also joy in harmony...
Cheers,
Dianne
Pedantus
"Di-a-rama" <bro...@SPAM.com> wrote in message
LOL...my reply to Alain is apparently still whirling around the internet
somewhere. If this goes through I'll re-send it.
Rog
Pedantus
"Alain Stalder" <asta...@exactphilosophy.net> wrote in message
news:astalder-C1C88B...@news.bluewin.ch...
> In article <L50K9.38813$Vz2.10...@twister.nyroc.rr.com>,
> "Pedantus" <pedantus@no_hotmail_spam.com> wrote:
>
> > "Alain Stalder" <asta...@exactphilosophy.net> wrote in message
> > news:astalder-7C29B6...@news.bluewin.ch...
> [...]
> > > I think the question of how much in life is fate and how much is
> > > chaos/chance has quite a bit to do with Gemini/Hermes. I guess if
> > > the guy who came up with the illustration for chaos theory would
> > > have chosen, say, a fly instead of a butterfly, probably a lot
> > > less people would have been fascinated by it.
> >
> > All that means, to me, is that a fly doesn't 'work' as a communicable
> > symbol for the idea.
> > BTW, I would check the chart of anyone coining such an image, whatever.
> > But, when and if a man chooses to call it the turnip effect, then we
have
> > something to work with..:)
>
> What I wanted to say was simply that in order for such an image
> to be publicly successful, it must fit. Sure, if you are pedantic
> you can find counterexamples, but mostly this is true. So there
> is natural selection (in the sense of Darwin) that filters out
> images that correspond to the collective and unconscious
> structure of human culture. If you are pedantic, you can also
> counter that such images are often just fashionable, in other
> words mostly influenced by the time in which they are popular.
> The longer an idea rests popular, typically the more it is
> universal. (I am sure there are counterexamples here, too, if you
> are really pedantic, but mostly it is true).
>
> I am from the generation with Pluto in Virgo. It makes sense to
> be pedantic up to a point, to look into details and not to judge
> things in too broad ways, but that can also become too much like
> the princess and the pea. The more you look into details, the
> more you loose the view of the whole. (Yes, if you are pedantic,
> you can counter that analysis is required to recognize
> connections, to create the right "wholes", instead of the usual
> ones that are filled with errors). You cannot analyze every
> detail in life. This is by far impossible. I think even the most
> pedantic mind cannot counter that. Hence analysis is best applied
> selectively. Yes, I am sure there are again counterexamples, but
> mostly it is true. Moreover, the more time you invest in analysis,
> the less time remains for enjoying life - yes, I am sure there
> are again counterexamples, if you are really pedantic.
>
>
> [...]
> > > b) Was it foreseeable for America that the election could be so
> > > close, that a few thousand votes in Palm Beach could have made
> > > the difference ?
> >
> > I'm sure the party bean counters did actually did how close it would
be.
>
> I do not want to be too pedantic, but the crucial question here
> is: when ? Before or after the butterfly ballot was created ?
> I suspect that it was quite a bit after the ballot was created.
> (As far as I remember, the ballot had to be published in a
> newspaper and it had to be accepted in some formal way; such
> administrative things typically take quite some time).
>
> I was selective in choosing what to reply too. I think it would
> maybe be a bit too pedantic to criticize that I did not answer to
> all remarks, but maybe I was not pedantic enough and overlooked
> the best parts of the reply. Again, If you are really pedantic,
> you can counter that all parts are interesting, if you just
> analyze them deeply enough. So, my reply describes my personal
> bias too, but it would probably be too pedantic to limit what
> somebody replies to that, although it is certainly part of it.
>
> There's joy in repetition.
>
> Alain Stalder
>
Alain,
Pedantus is the name I give to my psyche, my personality-Rog, and its
inefficient representation of Pedantus is evidence, to me, of the
limitations and opportunities which are more or less imposed by biological
and sociological enablers and detractors of that psyche...no matter what its
specific preferences for what-goes-with-what.
Quoting Patrice Guinard, (with much affection and appreciation):
"[..] The unconscious is not the repository of repression, but rather the
field of awareness for pre-perceptive incidences. It is positively active,
independently of factual events and the ulterior transformations of mental
labor. It is in the purview of this general economy of the psyche that it
remains to achieve or not to achieve at any given moment the creation of
perceptive and apperceptive relations. [..]"
Thus, to my original point, I see Greene's choice of expression, as
represented by the unit of thought--the sentence I quoted, as being an
amalgam of individually pertinent psychical and impersonally pertinent
personality-based affinities. The noun, butterfly, must be seen as being
confined to the context of her sentence as a unit of thought.
Deconstructing sentences in search of socially-defined, or "universal"
meanings, does little to respect the presence of an individual psyche and
its
role as author. And, 'It'--the psyche, does apparently author the
personality, as its
interface: apparently psyches cannot communicate with each other in a way
that is conceivable to the consciousness of the personality. Like the
author
of a novel--one never committed to print for want of time limitations, the
psyche probably encounters 'characters' in its personality that seem to take
over the scenes in temporal 'real life' experience. And, it must use
the nouns like Gemini and butterfly in an acceptable social context to
achieve the
communication of any intended connotation and or a denotation, etc.. It
remains my
contention that the *specific* inclusion the various nouns we find in her
sentence; "The butterfly brings joy and magic only if it's allowed to fly
free." confirms the presence of a psyche which is better associated with the
natal planets in aspects as 'motives' or 'motifs', which thremselves exist
for no other
reason that to signal the presence of an individual psyche/soul, which
probably has a Self-styled organization which finds expression as best it
can using any opportunity afforded to "It". Anyone who denies this
convoluted possibility due to some socio-political agenda immediately incurs
the wrath of Pedantus Pugnacious...:) (--a phenotype no doubt)
Thanks
Rog
(PS probably been reading way to much Nabokov and Updike...:)
Di-a-rama
<what...@alt.not> wrote:
> Making money as an artist (or most kinds of self-employment) is really
> (at least) two jobs. One is the actual creation process. The other is
> marketing. Successful selling- enrolling interest in one's work- is an
> art in itself.
Heh--you'd think a 7th house Gemini could handle that...
Seriously, tho, you're preaching to the choir on this one. But in a way, if
you look at the whole process as an integrated business approach, it does
not need to be dichotomous at all. The "product" is only one part of the
larger whole. The question should really be, does the "artist" have the
ability to handle all the hats he/she must wear to bring the product to
market successfully.
>
> I think many artistic-types (Neptune/Pisces/12th house placements?
> Venus/Taurus/Libra also probably plays a big part) are turned off to
> it because it requires precisely the kind of borderline 'lying and
> conning' (personal dishonesty) many artists work at great length to
> eliminate. (The same Neptune/etc indications also describe someone who
> could be good at selling their dream/s.)
I take a bit of exception to the "lying and conning" part. We're not
talking about snake oil, here. If anything, the honesty is almost *too*
brutal and needs to be softened in order to allow people to visualize this
artwork in their homes. There is another side, too--the collector has a
great deal of self-esteem attached to the art acquisition. Perhaps this
goes back to a Taurus or Capricorn "earth" function, the Taurus being the
one that loves beautiful things and the Capricorn liking the prestige art
collecting can provide.
>
> IOW, you only highlight the positive aspects (the car looks *great*,
> doesn't it?) and soft-pedaling the negative ones (we won't talk about
> the worn out tires, etc etc). I also think there's a middle ground.
>
> The truth is, successful people either do great marketing, or they
> have someone do it for them. Hire an agent; pay percentage on sales,
> or some such. If your product is worth something, then it's worth
> something!
The art gallery *is* an agent. The only difference is that they have a bit
of retail real-estate attached.
Cheers,
Dianne
Di-a-rama
<what...@alt.not> wrote:
> Di-a-rama writes:
>
>> On 12/12/02 1:39 PM, in article 3df8fe53.143189185@bogus, "CFA"
>> <what...@alt.not> wrote:
>>
>>> Making money as an artist (or most kinds of self-employment) is really
>>> (at least) two jobs. One is the actual creation process. The other is
>>> marketing. Successful selling- enrolling interest in one's work- is an
>>> art in itself.
>>
>> Heh--you'd think a 7th house Gemini could handle that...
>
> Lots of other factors involved, too.
Hmm. Well, my attempt at light hearted banter really fell flat there...
>
>> Seriously, tho, you're preaching to the choir on this one. But in a way, if
>> you look at the whole process as an integrated business approach, it does
>> not need to be dichotomous at all. The "product" is only one part of the
>> larger whole. The question should really be, does the "artist" have the
>> ability to handle all the hats he/she must wear to bring the product to
>> market successfully.
>
> Not as often as necessary, it would seem.
Yes. I see my artist friends struggle with this. One has a husband who's a
VP of marketing. He says, and I think he's partially right, that some
artists don't really want to sell their work. The "business" aspect is
dirty in some way, or they feel too personally involved in the work to see
it as a marketable commodity. ( From my perspective, this would be in line
with Venus and Libra especially--only wanting to deal with pleasant things &
people.) But there is also a conception that sales is sneaky and conniving,
as you've commented on more than once. It is true that most people hold
this opinion on a deep level, not just artists.
>
>>> I think many artistic-types (Neptune/Pisces/12th house placements?
>>> Venus/Taurus/Libra also probably plays a big part) are turned off to
>>> it because it requires precisely the kind of borderline 'lying and
>>> conning' (personal dishonesty) many artists work at great length to
>>> eliminate. (The same Neptune/etc indications also describe someone who
>>> could be good at selling their dream/s.)
>>
>> I take a bit of exception to the "lying and conning" part. We're not
>> talking about snake oil, here. If anything, the honesty is almost *too*
>> brutal and needs to be softened in order to allow people to visualize this
>> artwork in their homes.
>
> Which is a form of lying, actually. But some of the qualities that
> indicate some artistic ability (mainly Neptune/Pisces/12th house
> indicators) also describe a rather loose connection to objectivity
> (exaggeration, distortion, etc). Sometimes it appears to be
> consciously driven, sometimes not.
Well, in marketing communications, the "message" and how it is
encoded/decoded is *the* key component to communicating to the potential
customer. Different types of people hear things differently. If there is a
product that suits the needs of several different types (or "target markets"
as they are called), then the message may need to be altered in order for
the different groups to pay attention. To me this is not lying, but rather
an attempt to reach people with a message they can understand and relate to.
But back to the lying and conning--it takes two really. The message sender
and the message recipient. To me, sales is governed by Mercury/Gemini which
also encompasses teaching and communication. In a way, there is very little
distinction in the activity other than its forum. When teaching, we are
communicating/selling ideas. When in sales, we are communicating/teaching
about a product. The notion that we can blindly ascribe a certain
personality type to "sales" is equal to blindly assigning sun sign traits
(as was already discussed at length here).
>
>> There is another side, too--the collector has a
>> great deal of self-esteem attached to the art acquisition. Perhaps this
>> goes back to a Taurus or Capricorn "earth" function, the Taurus being the
>> one that loves beautiful things and the Capricorn liking the prestige art
>> collecting can provide.
>
> Or Leo (adding to one's image, etc).
Yes--we probably could go through the whole zodiac and see which self-esteem
buttons get pushed when collecting art...
>
>>> IOW, you only highlight the positive aspects (the car looks *great*,
>>> doesn't it?) and soft-pedaling the negative ones (we won't talk about
>>> the worn out tires, etc etc). I also think there's a middle ground.
>>>
>>> The truth is, successful people either do great marketing, or they
>>> have someone do it for them. Hire an agent; pay percentage on sales,
>>> or some such. If your product is worth something, then it's worth
>>> something!
>>
>> The art gallery *is* an agent. The only difference is that they have a bit
>> of retail real-estate attached.
>
> Though they might not be as good an advocate as a 'real' agent.
I'm afraid I have to disagree here. The gallery is a "real" agent. The
gallery is nothing without the people, and there are usually several
individuals in any given gallery who have the depth & breadth of knowledge
in their field to represent artists. Perhaps the thing that is confusing is
that there are several different kinds of galleries and among those
different kinds, there are different levels of "reach". For example, there
are non-profits and museums (which don't usually act as agents), and of
those, there are ones of local, regional, national and international status.
The type of galleries that represent artists (commercial galleries) also
have the same levels. If the gallery is a smaller scale one, it is usually
more of a consignment agreement and point of distribution rather than a true
agent/artist relationship. However, some do help the artist make
connections to other venues which may increase the artist's prestige and by
extension their salability.
Cheers,
Dianne
>
>> Cheers,
>> Dianne
>
> Ken
Di-a-rama
<what...@alt.not> wrote:
> I was primarily referring to any Neptune/Pisces/12th house indications
> in connection with the dual roles of artist/promoter. Just the word
> "promoter" conjures up some negative connotations. Some promoters
> purposely manipulate others to their own end. My feeling was this does
> contribute some to reluctance an artist might have about selling their
> work (wanting to stay in integrity to the point of underselling or not
> selling at all, for instance).
Ah. I get it now. Although I think Gemini/Mercury could potentially wear
the many hats needed. It can be a conflict though, that is true. Even if
it were possible to do it all, it might be better for the artist to separate
from that function (better for his/her image as well as sanity!). However,
the artist *is* expected to provide background information on who they are
and why they created the artwork. The gallery or agent then uses that info
to weave a story that the prospective client can relate to.
One thing that the Pisces/Neptune/12th house also reminds me of--being a
victim. I have known many artists who are bitter because they have not
received recognition for their gift to the world. In fact, they are usually
insular and don't try to get their work shown or sold, so they are typically
the root of that particular problem. Self-victimized, really, rather than
being a victim of an uncaring audience.
>
> Word of mouth works, and it's a powerful, if slower, way to promote
> self.
>
There are also many other ways--it was the subject of a class I just took
(Integrated Marketing Communications). PR is the big winner in the mix,
though, especially if you can get the media to pick up your story. :)
>
> Mainly I was thinking about a gallery who has the 'rights' to promote
> several artists... at that point, it would seem their commitment to
> various people might collide or be split, setting up a certain amount
> of competition. An exclusive agent wouldn't necessarily run into that.
>
Hmm. Well, I don't know of many "talent" agents who represent only one
artist, either. It would have to be one *hot* artist to manage a living
trust or some such...
Cheers,
Dianne
CFA
>On 12/17/02 3:13 PM, in article 3dffac15.8372799@bogus, "CFA"
><what...@alt.not> wrote:
>
>> I was primarily referring to any Neptune/Pisces/12th house indications
>> in connection with the dual roles of artist/promoter. Just the word
>> "promoter" conjures up some negative connotations. Some promoters
>> purposely manipulate others to their own end. My feeling was this does
>> contribute some to reluctance an artist might have about selling their
>> work (wanting to stay in integrity to the point of underselling or not
>> selling at all, for instance).
>
>Ah. I get it now. Although I think Gemini/Mercury could potentially wear
>the many hats needed.
Or not focus enough on anything to completion... or some of both. Me
in Ge can be sort of like Mars in Aries to me. Too much of a good
thing.
> It can be a conflict though, that is true. Even if
>it were possible to do it all, it might be better for the artist to separate
>from that function (better for his/her image as well as sanity!).
Seems like that would depend on other factors. As a Scorpio, I'm
usually interested in attempting it on my own first. But I definitely
know people who just are mostly right brain.
>However,
>the artist *is* expected to provide background information on who they are
>and why they created the artwork.
Well, I think you just gotta have a *few* social skills :-)
>The gallery or agent then uses that info
>to weave a story that the prospective client can relate to.
Might as well let the pros do their job.
>One thing that the Pisces/Neptune/12th house also reminds me of--being a
>victim. I have known many artists who are bitter because they have not
>received recognition for their gift to the world. In fact, they are usually
>insular and don't try to get their work shown or sold, so they are typically
>the root of that particular problem. Self-victimized, really, rather than
>being a victim of an uncaring audience.
Exactamundo. Serious whining.
>> Word of mouth works, and it's a powerful, if slower, way to promote
>> self.
>>
>
>There are also many other ways--it was the subject of a class I just took
>(Integrated Marketing Communications). PR is the big winner in the mix,
>though, especially if you can get the media to pick up your story. :)
We keep looking for a good promoter. Hard to find people in the
metaphysical area who are there for the sales opportunities.
Counter-intuitive in some ways.
>> Mainly I was thinking about a gallery who has the 'rights' to promote
>> several artists... at that point, it would seem their commitment to
>> various people might collide or be split, setting up a certain amount
>> of competition. An exclusive agent wouldn't necessarily run into that.
>>
>
>Hmm. Well, I don't know of many "talent" agents who represent only one
>artist, either. It would have to be one *hot* artist to manage a living
>trust or some such...
Hmm. I wasn't thinking the agent wouldn't have other clients. The
agent arrangement just seemed a better potential advantage.
>Cheers,
>Dianne
==
ken
c•f•a•a•t•a•l•t•d•o•t•n•e•t