Modern astrological natal charts vs. Traditional

Minderwiz, yes, I'm assuming you'll answer this thread! And as always, I'll preface this by saying I'm purely a novice - just with a lot of questions.

And I don't intend to intensely study traditional, modern, sidereal or any kind of astrology - not intensely. I just have general questions about each and this time I'm wondering about the validity of modern astrology. Yes, I've read Minderwiz's previous posts on traditional and they are very good. I just have a more precise question.

Modern is what I (and most, I guess) start out with. I've heard on this forum and elsewhere about the traditional meanings...and wanted to know how different a chart would be if it were interpreted in the traditional way. For instance, taking Nep, Plu & Ura - say one has a heavy Neptune, and some of it is through the Pisces influence and the 12th house. I know the 12th traditionally is not the spiritual house it is in modern. But it contributes to some Neptunian influence in a modern chart, let's say. How about that same chart interpreted in the traditional way. Would Jupiter replace Neptune as an influence?

Example: Using Placidus, Whole Sign and Equal house systems, my Venus (in Taurus) is in the 12th (and Taurus is on my 12th house cusp in 2 out of the 3 house systems). Traditionally, isn't Venus associated with the 12th? How would a modern interpretation of that placement differ from a traditional one?


I hope I'm making sense...

Just what is modern astrology?

"Modern" is too big a category, perhaps, as I've seen so many significant variations in my 40 or so years at this that I would hesitate to speak for the "modern" astrologer. We can take up a few issues:

** Outer planets. Humans have evolved and grown more complex as individuals and as societies. Our astrology should also grow. How anyone can ignore the "new" additions to our solar system, to our consciousness, is hard for me to understand. I'm already looking at the Galaxy, the Galactic Center, dark holes (some of whom have demonstrable interpretive value) and -- grudgingly -- at asteroids. Remember, that I am an astrologer who strives for simplicity. Yet, I can't ignore what is out there and the emerging research on those new things.

** Signs. I've been interpreting charts for decades without using them. I can use them and sometimes do for natal charts and with medical issue. But I focus on prediction, and natal charts are only a small part of what I do. I've found signs to be useless, or almost so. What do you or anyone choose to use when talking with a client, using selected itmes out of a chapter-length text describing sign attributes? There is enough "sign meanings" to choose and pick from to suit a lot of possibilities. How can you say one thing and know that it is applicable?

** Charts. I cry when I see some astrologers treating progressions, directions, return charts as if they were natal charts. Or, confusing signs with houses, and vice-versa. Each chart type has very different uses, is based on very different conditions. One should make an effort to understand what one is doing. Charts are our tools. What will some astrologers do when they face different charting forms such as the 90 degree wheel, timelines, and graphical ephemerides? We have to know our tools!

** With all of the complexity that can be part of astrology, I feel badly about how overwhelmed new and early-studies astrologers seem to feel. I wish I could teach each of them how simple it can be. When I was three months into my astrological studies with Jeff Mayo of the Faculty of Astrological Studies in London, I discovered midpoints with the help of a local bookstore owner and astrologer. Within days I was doing complex chart studies using just three-planet combinations. All of a sudden, for me, charts of a conventional nature were simple to understand and clearly full of added complexity that were not overly substantive. Conventional practices became suspect. A fixed formula of planet-sign-house-aspect-rulership was suspect due to its rigidity and complexity. A crack had appeared in the mirror of conventional practice.

** Other areas of study which are not today mainstream astrology can make astrology fun, easy, quick and deeply revealing. Phase Relationships is one such methodology. One can scan a chart and in less than a minute know the primary drivers of that chart owner's personality and potential. Another method permits one to interpret a chart without using signs, houses, aspects, sign-degree positions, just the sequence of planets around the chart. There are so many areas of study that could be pursued. Uranian astrology, asteroids, weather, finances, medical -- all fascinating areas.

** The learning process. One has to read many books, and do very many charts. Chart interpretations should be written down. Astrological organizations are suspect, in my mind, as they often seem to be geared to entertaining those who like astrology but who don't put much effort into it. Those types of organization support small groups of astrologers who gather clients for profit and who give seminars for profit all the while doing little to teach useful methods. Study groups are probably the best approach. It only take two or more, although six or ten or more are better. There is much to gain from an intimate group who work together and support each other.

** The feedback process. You can't learn quickly unless you get feedback. Interpreting a chart by making statements and having those statements verified is a great learning tool. Communicating skills are important. Using astro-babble is poor communication. One should speak in plain English (or what ever language they use) and avoid jargon that isn't part of everyday usage. In fact, it is best to not refer to signs, houses, planets, rulers, but to just speak plainly. If someone asks why you said something in particular, then you can use some astrological terms. The aim is not to impress another but to aid another and open a dialog. When we can place the person in the chart then it is easy to read the chart in the person.

** Finally, never hesitate to offer a view or an opinion about a chart. We all need to build confidence in our reading of a chart. The only way to do this is to boldly venture forth.

Dave

Hi Cactus (& Dave)

I'll start of by agreeing with Dave (and you thought I wouldn't?) Modern Astrology is too big a category to give a hard and fast answer, and indeed Traditional Astrology is not some monolithic whole. We tend (well I tend) to use the distinction more in terms of before Leo and the Theosophists (Traditional) and After (Modern) but in each there would be a very widespread and differential answer to your question.

Another thing that Dave and I both agree of is that the Astrological Alphabet is a curse for the beginner. Neptune = Pisces = 12th House is misleading, and any Modern Astrologer, worth their salt, will tell you that. Planets, Houses and Signs are different things and cannot be added together in some way.

I also agree with Dave (who has said this in various places) that trying to interpret one feature in a chart, divorced from the rest of the chart is to be avoided. Now for a beginner there will be a process of writing down a series of individual possibilities for each planetary placement, but there will be an attempt to try to integrate, or at least put these individual components into some sort of context.

With that caveat in mind - what could Venus in Taurus in the twelfth signify?

In your chart Venus is essentially strong in Taurus - it has the capacity to act, the twelfth placement makes it 'difficult' to act directly in your every day life - it's influence is behind the scenes, hidden from public view. That doesn't mean it's hidden from you, but it's not obvious to others, till they get to know you.

As you say Venus in some House systems is Lord 12. Even in quadrant systems where Lord 12 is more likely to be Mars, Venus has some rulership of 12 House matters, as Taurus is intercepted in the twelfth. The twelfth has rulership over institutions, prisons, hospitals, religious institutions and arguably large corporations, whose activities are 'shadowy'. Of these, hospitals are the ones that most of us come into contact with at some time in hour lives.

In quadrant systems Venus would also be Lord 6. The usual but not the only meaning of the sixth in every day life, is to do with illness and ill health issues (it also is concerned with your servants - now you might not think you have any, but it would cover any tradesman that you use - plumbers, electricians, car mechanics, etc). So Venus has some importance to health matters, especially but not exclusively in anything that requires hospital treatment. It might also indicate health problems which remain hidden for some time.

Going beyond that requires looking at the context of your chart, to try and identify HOW and WHEN such matters will be come important in your life, but one of the good things about the sixth and twelfth is that for most of us, ill health and hospitals are a comparative rarity. These Houses do not dominate our day to day lives, as the angular ones do.

OK, a few further comments on Dave's post.

I agree with him on Signs - one of the things that shocked me about traditional texts was that signs got a paragraph or two or three short paragraphs. Modern sign explanations ARE mainly useless, Element, Mode, Gender and Ruler are really all you need to know, plus directions and one or two other characteristics which you would use in horary or other specialised work.

I also agree on reading widely and doing as many charts and seeking as much feedback as you can, You will eventually settle down into a method that has a limited (compared to what is available) set of tools and procedures. You need to understand WHY you have chosen them and what their philosophical basis is. BUT start simple and work up - trying to take in every single modern, or traditional approach is going to end up confusing you - get the basics right first.

Where do I disagree with Dave - well we all know that and there's not a lot of mileage in arguing it here. I'd sum it up by saying just because something's out there doesn't make it important. If we take aspects as an example. With 7 planets thee are are a limited number of hits possible. Expand to 10 and the statistical probability increases, expand further and the hit rate increases exponentially. So if you add in Asteroids, Kuyper Belt objects, dwarves, etc -EVERY chart is laden with Hits and over a whole series of charts you can get enough hits to satisfy any theory you like. That argument is not from a traditional Astrologer, it's from Stephen Arroyo!!

There's an asteroid called Michael Palin (after the Monty Python star and now provider of many travelogues). I'm sure that one could make out a good case for asteroid Palin being important in affairs to do with long distance travel or being Very Silly. Statistics don't show meaning they only show association.

Throughout the Tradition the emphasis was on light and it's transmission and reflection - nothing happens without 'light' but this is not just the 'light' of scientific wavelengths it is the light of the 'soul' for want of a better word.

To end on a pessimistic note, unlike Dave I don't see any Human evolution over the last 100 years, or even over the last 2,500. Yes life is more complex technologically, but Modern Man is, if anything more capable of acts of gross evil, than Babylonian Man. I desparately wish it wasn't so. Beliefs in Mankind's progress to a New Age ignore what mankind is doing now and has been doing for quite some time. Do we need the outer Planets and the other bodies? That's for you to decide as you work through your studies.

A comment on SIGNS

I have been thinking, off and on, about astrological signs for some time, but not in terms of their typical text book lengthy delineations. I've been thinking about them in terms of just their basic, very basic, attributes --- similar to the approach that Minderwiz takes. Part of this revisitation was based on reading one of the books in my modest library of Vedic-Joytish books. I can't find the reference that first comes to mind, but one book, "Light on Life" by Hart deFouw and Robert Svoboda is considered to currently be the best book for western astrologers to read as they self-introduce themselves to Eastern Astrology.

As I see it, this school of astrology uses signs very differently in some respects. First, it seems that they strongly see a sign in terms of its Triplicity and Quadriplicity meanings ---- C-F-M and F-E-A-W. As an example, Taurus would embue Venus with a degree of tenacity and possesiveness so as to assure stability in Venus-related issues. The sign meaning of Taurus would only go that far. No multiple paragraphs of meanings or possible meanings, no chapter-long statements.

Now, if one were to interpret the chart to serve other purposes, such as where Venus would feel more comfortable, then Taurus would be associated with a field or meadow, the south and east side of a house, the ground level of a building. Along these lines, simple but compartmentalized statements can be applied and used when that type of view is appropriate to the chart reading and questions. Likewise, if a medical question arose, then only that part of the body and disease-problem areas would be noted. It would seem that the astrologer could construct a table of one-or-two-word statements for each sign and each house for each sign and for each planet. This would do away with textbooks. And simplicity of learning and understanding for new students of astrology would be greatly enhanced.

Of course, once we move beyond those basic parameters, Vedic-Joytish astrology appears to become very complex and rule-based. This strikes one as being similar to the medieval aphorisms --- those rigid rules of past times that claimed to be cast-in-concrete meanings, and which are recognized as being mostly irrelevant in modern times.

Yet, if we compare the seemingly rule-based cyclic approach of Vedic-Joytish astrology to the multi-faceted astrology of western-modern astrology, we have to ask in all fairness which is better, which is worse?

This is why my approach is to try everything and keep only that which works close to 100% of the time. We are better off with only a few highly dependable tools than a lot of sort-of-works-some-of-the-time tools.

Dave

Dave & Minderwiz, thank you.

I am focusing only on my family's natal charts. So I'm not into any other type of chart interpretation (horary, mundane...).

As my chart and my family's finally started to make sense as I learned the modern way (very slowly!), I suddenly found myself remembering the things I've read about traditional astrology (and I know I have very limited knowledge about it except the major differences - no outer planets, therefore planetary rulers are different; different emphasis on ways of interpretation, like diurnal/nocturnal, not much emphasis on signs...)

I started to wonder if I should stop clumping the planet/sign/house together the way lots of people do, especially with the outers. My example used Neptune/Pisces/12th because in Placidus I have 3 planets plus North Node in the 12th and have been told that the 12th "adds extra Pisces/Neptune." (whatever) To go further, those planets change to the 1st house in Whole Signs, so then I supposedly have "more of an Aries influence."

Right now I feel the need to investigate this so that there is no conflict in my mind. (I know I shouldn't take ONE part of my chart and analyze it, but I can't help it - is my Mars in Gemini responsible for my intense need for gathering info on this traditional/modern conflict resolution? hehehe)

Basically, I am wondering why the modern way of interpreting a chart actually makes sense for my chart and my family's. Someone briefly reviewed my chart and nailed it; describing how I was, difficulties...

So if people really resonate with a modern natal chart interpretation, would the same chart done in a traditional interp yield similar information? I guess it would depend on the chart. For instance, the use of the houses combined with the signs in a modern interp may tell someone that their 8th house means this and that, Pluto blah blah...BUT in a traditional interp, maybe the same characteristic might be found in a different way.

God, I feel I'm making no sense at all. Basically, my question was inspired because recently I was reading a bunch of opinions on the 12th house and I had remembered - actually I believe it was Minderwiz!! - a comment on the traditional view of the 12th is not as cozy-spiritual-nicey nice as the modern meaning...

I must say that I do resonate with my chart, though I've never had it looked at in depth by someone who studies traditional astrology. So I don't know if a traditional interp would give different insights. Now I'm starting to see it as silly when people talk about "a stellium in the 2nd house" or "influences of all the water houses, 4th, 8th, and 12th." I will drive myself nuts...and all of you as well, hehehe.

Cactus said:

I started to wonder if I should stop clumping the planet/sign/house together the way lots of people do, especially with the outers. My example used Neptune/Pisces/12th because in Placidus I have 3 planets plus North Node in the 12th and have been told that the 12th "adds extra Pisces/Neptune." (whatever) To go further, those planets change to the 1st house in Whole Signs, so then I supposedly have "more of an Aries influence."

Click to expand...

I think both Dave and I would both say the 12th/Pisces/Neptune view is rubbish. And I know a great many good Modern Astrologers who would agree - it's one of those devices that is supposed to help new students learn and actually sends them in the wrong direction.

Cactus said:

Right now I feel the need to investigate this so that there is no conflict in my mind. (I know I shouldn't take ONE part of my chart and analyze it, but I can't help it - is my Mars in Gemini responsible for my intense need for gathering info on this traditional/modern conflict resolution? hehehe)

Click to expand...

As a beginner you WILL look at features one at a time, and try to make sense of them. There's nothing wrong with that but as long as you realise that you can't make final judgements on single features in isolation, it can be a constructive way forward.

Cactus said:

Basically, I am wondering why the modern way of interpreting a chart actually makes sense for my chart and my family's. Someone briefly reviewed my chart and nailed it; describing how I was, difficulties...

So if people really resonate with a modern natal chart interpretation, would the same chart done in a traditional interp yield similar information? I guess it would depend on the chart. For instance, the use of the houses combined with the signs in a modern interp may tell someone that their 8th house means this and that, Pluto blah blah...BUT in a traditional interp, maybe the same characteristic might be found in a different way

God, I feel I'm making no sense at all. Basically, my question was inspired because recently I was reading a bunch of opinions on the 12th house and I had remembered - actually I believe it was Minderwiz!! - a comment on the traditional view of the 12th is not as cozy-spiritual-nicey nice as the modern meaning...

I must say that I do resonate with my chart, though I've never had it looked at in depth by someone who studies traditional astrology. So I don't know if a traditional interp would give different insights. Now I'm starting to see it as silly when people talk about "a stellium in the 2nd house" or "influences of all the water houses, 4th, 8th, and 12th." I will drive myself nuts...and all of you as well, hehehe.

Click to expand...

Well as you say, you haven't been to a traditional Astrologer for a comparable reading

From the times Dave and I have been commenting on a natal chart I don't think we've come up with serious differences in interpretation, though the emphasis has often been a bit different, but then I would hazard a guess that you might get that from ANY two Astrologers. I'm not trying to say that the modern approach is entirely bogus - far from it. BUT I do think a lot of it is based on misunderstanding or sheer ignorance of the origins of Astrology, the Houses (especially) and Sign meanings. There are though quite a lot of Modern Astrologers who I strongly admire and respect and Dave is one of them. One can develop Astrological ideas and practices but they need to be based on a sound understanding of WHY things are the way they are. Making the twelfth the House of Spiritual things because it corresponds to the twelfth Sign and re-defining Pisces to fit the description of Neptune as a 'Spiritual' planet shows a gross lack of knowledge of the development of House meanings. Obviously the same applies to Pluto=Scorpio=8th House, but one of my New Year's resolutions is not to talk about Pluto unless severely provoked LOL.

On the other hand Mid-points which Dave uses a lot have strong roots in Astrology. The idea that the distance between two planets projected onto another planet or point has meaning, goes back to Hellenistic times. It might not have been done the same way but the method has it's roots there.

The same can be said of the synodic relationship between two planets. The tradition tends to only use Sun/Moon, Sun/planets, Jupiter/Saturn but there's no reason why it cannot be applied to other pairs.

So yes, you probably would get different insights from a Traditional approach, as you would from a Vedic Approach or from a Uranian approach.

Venus, 12th house, Pisces.

Cactus, since you have an interest in really understanding this combination, I can offer you these observations and opinions.

* VENUS:
** Outwardly -- pleasant attitude and/or appearance, affable,sociable, gravitates towards opportunities to achieve balance.
** Inwardly -- Liking for pleasing colors and clothes, feeling in love and sensing a relatedness with surroundings.
** Circumstances -- harmony is one's surroundings, acquisition of pleasing things.

* 12th HOUSE:
Empathetic view of world as opposed to the 1st house's willfulness and attitude. One's private sense of what could be changed for oneself or for others, resulting often in offering support and services to others, being sunny and outgoing to others while harboring a need to change and prepare for changes within oneself. Having or developing personal ideals.

* PISCES:
Mutable-water translates to changeable emotions and sensitivities. Exhibiting indecisiveness or continuing commitment.

You also noted Neptune relative to Pisces.
* NEPTUNE:
** Outwardly -- Deceitfulness, using illusion, personal ideals that may not be a consensus of other's ideals, seeking entertainment and fantasy.
** Inwardly -- disappointment as well as being hopeful, a fairy-tale view of situations.
** Circumstances -- Among crowds, ill or sick people, caught up in deceit of others or within one's own lies.

I hope these help. Dave

Minderwiz and Dave, thanks once again!

Dave, yes, the reason I chose my Venus in the 12th as an example is because it was the only planet in the 12th that's constant throughout the 3 main houses I look at (Placidus, Whole, Equal). And because the 12th description is one in particular that differs depending on either traditional or modern astrology.

So that's my interest, really. Even though I have very slowly learned to interpret (in a very basic sense) my chart and then my family members' charts, I will ALWAYS have a very hard time seeing how my chart plays out in terms of houses. If anything, going by the very basic planets in signs, I actually relate to my Gemini Sun, Mercury, Mars and Ascendant. It really fits me. And so does my Moon in Pisces. Also my Venus in Taurus - all of these (cookbook descriptions and also some insights from non-cookbook sources) actually describe me - outside AND inside.

The only HOUSE in combination with a planet (cookbook definition) that is actually true for me is my Jupiter in the 4th. Cookbooks say it's a lucky placement for real estate/home life was good, big family, well-to-do, considerable help from parents/ big house, comfortable home situation especially in later in life....

That really fits me exactly. BUT. All of these planets and signs that I relate to can come perhaps from ASPECTS, right? If you take away the signs (and the one house I seem to relate to), maybe those same characteristics can be found in the aspects (or midpoints or phase relationships which Dave mentioned and that are wayyyy beyond what I feel like learning about, hehehe).

So basically, somehow the almost-cookbook information I got from modern astrology seems to really fit me. That's all I know. But you both make a good point in many of your wonderful and insightful posts on this forum - that you should research astrology back to the very beginning and REALLY understand your craft in order to properly understand how astrology has changed and why, and to therefore teach it in a more meaningful way.

I have, I admit, a superficial interest - it's very on-the-surface. I know that if I continue to have questions about my chart, I need to actually HAVE IT READ by a professional (whether a traditional or modern one) who has studied medieval/Hellenistic/traditional astrological roots.

I must admit that learning from you two has proved to be so enlightening, and if it weren't for your posts to inspire my thinking to deeper depths, I'd still be spinning my wheels like a hamster, trying to grasp things that I don't have the energy to learn.

My initial thought was not to respond to Dave's post, largely because much of it I would have said myself. However as you asked about the difference between Tradition and Modern, I think some observation would help.

Dave gives you a 'classic' modern diescription there, apart from down playing the sign characteristic - You can profitable use those to how far they add meaning and colour to your interpretations.

Do I disagree with anything there?

He's been a bit kind to Venus - his description applies to dignified Venus, and is spot on for you For others there is the possibility of debilitated Venus - licentious, over indulgence in passions, extravagance,, greed, infidelity, gambling, drunkeness, living a life of indulgence. Indeed Venereal disease is appropriately named. Now the bad things here don't necessarily all occur in the lives of those with a debilitated Venus - I've got one! But I can certainly see extravagance, over concentration on material things and other things which are not safe to talk about on a family website LOL.

Now notice, that's a minor difference in emphasis - We agree on Venus for you, I just ask you to be aware of debilitated Venus if you intend looking at other peoples (family) charts.

Pisces - Good description - I'd probably add that it's a female sign and has some overtones of Jupiter. It's also a Winter sign so it also has overtones of the Phlegmatic temperament. An ability to adapt and change, following reflection - it's perhaps a bit more passive and a bit more adaptive than other Water signs, but it's also colder

Twelfth House - private and secret yes, hidden yes. But it is the House of the Bad Spirit (daemon) , it's limitations, tribulations and afflictions, of things that cannot be done, or done only with great difficulty and sadness. Now all of those things CAN actually be used in a positive way - we ALL experience them and learn and grow from them. If we don't suffer, we can't empathise with others (to that extent Dave's right) Without these challenges we are shallow and untested. The twelfth might not be a 'good place' but without it we are incomplete, very few of us reach adulthood without a twelfth House experience.

The difference between Traditional and Modern is not black and white (except in certain restricted areas) it is more emphasis and stress. In the above we are probably furthest apart in our descriptions of the twelfth.

The obvious difference, Traditional doesn't use Neptune, Modern does. I'm not going into the argument about outer planets here - that will be something that you deal with yourself but you might note that debilitated Venus has a lot in common with Dave's description of Neptune . The other not quite so obvious difference is that the tradition does not serve as a delivery mechanism for Jungian Psychology. There is psychology but it is the handmaiden of Astrology, not its Mistress.

I want to stress that this is NOT a matter of right and wrong Astrology, it's a matter of how we use and emphasise particular features of the method and approach. Your own temperament will give some indication of which approach resonates with you, though please make sure you have a sound rationale for selecting your methods.

Cactus said:

BUT. All of these planets and signs that I relate to can come perhaps from ASPECTS, right? If you take away the signs (and the one house I seem to relate to), maybe those same characteristics can be found in the aspects (or midpoints or phase relationships which Dave mentioned and that are wayyyy beyond what I feel like learning about, hehehe).

So basically, somehow the almost-cookbook information I got from modern astrology seems to really fit me. That's all I know. But you both make a good point in many of your wonderful and insightful posts on this forum - that you should research astrology back to the very beginning and REALLY understand your craft in order to properly understand how astrology has changed and why, and to therefore teach it in a more meaningful way.

I have, I admit, a superficial interest - it's very on-the-surface. I know that if I continue to have questions about my chart, I need to actually HAVE IT READ by a professional (whether a traditional or modern one) who has studied medieval/Hellenistic/traditional astrological roots.

I must admit that learning from you two has proved to be so enlightening, and if it weren't for your posts to inspire my thinking to deeper depths, I'd still be spinning my wheels like a hamster, trying to grasp things that I don't have the energy to learn.

Click to expand...

Your post crossed with mine, so I better address it, and I hope Dave will add his views as well.

I think you need to have a hierarchy of methods here, so that you can discriminate between Astrological features. I will tell you my approach and I hope Dave will add his.

As I go through the steps of analysis, I start with Planet in Sign - it's essential dignity. I then move on to Planet in House - the most important accidental dignity, and I'll also look at other accidental dignities, e.g. your Mars is Combust - Mars again is a behind the scenes influence despite being in the first and conjunct the Ascendant - it's influence is not seen because the Sun outshines it; But the influence is there, nevertheless. I'll look at the phase relation to the Sun, including Retrograde motion and speed. Now for me, such phase relationships modify the planet's expression but would not for example make Mars, into Venus, or Jupiter into Saturn.

Then I'll look at aspects. Aspects modify what exists, they do not replace or change things out of all recognition. They are one way that two or more planets interact, one may dominate the aspect and in that case it's influence is more likely to prevail but you are looking at HOW the factors you have identified actually will manifest.

I don't use midpoints but I do use the Lots or Parts. These are secondary to the planets, they add additional information but like aspects they do not create fundamental change. Incidentally with the Lots/Parts its the ruler that matters not the sign as such and not really aspects from other planets.

If you like, Planets, Signs and Houses show the skeleton, Aspects, Lots, phase relationships (traditional ones) and Lots/Parts can add valuable flesh to that skeleton but they cannot remake the skeleton into something totally different.

Given your desire to keep things simple, go by Planet, Sign (in so far as it affects essential dignity) and House. Then add in aspects but remember these only modify and link planets, how the interact is the next stage up.