The Astrological Alphabet

This system was developed by Zip Dobyns, and it's main premise was to develop a way for astrology students to understand repeated themes in the chart. The numerical division is quite simple. The first sign/house of the zodiac and ruling planet all relate to letter 1. So, Aries, the first house and Mars represent one in the astrological alphabet. The 5th house, Leo and the Sun are all connected to the letter 5. Now, the author specifically states in her work that sign, house and planet are not the "same" and this is a method used to understand the 12 basic drives in the personality.
The system has been highly criticised by the traditional branch of astrology, as they have a disdain for such methods. However, I was left baffled by one critic of the Zip Alphabet, he made it publicly known that the Astrological Alphabet has caused great harm to astrology. In his view, houses do not = signs, signs do not = planets. However, if he actucally read Zip's work she clearly says they are not the "same". Nonetheless, this particular critic, praised the late Charles Carter in every single book review. I own four books written by Charles Carter and he has excellent ideas worth exploring in astrology, and I also noted that his observations on sign and house, are almost identical to Dobyn's. Here is an extract from his website regarding this debate:

I shall deal chiefly with Leo rising and Sun in Leo, but I mention that some of the most Leo people I know have heavy stresses on the 5th house and next to nothing in the sign. It used to be said that sign was character and the house the field in which it is expressed, but frankly this is wrong. It is, in my view, a major mistake. The lady who interviewed me on television recently struck me as one of the most Leo persons imaginable. But her natus showed nothing but Neptune in that sign: however, she had Sun, Venus, Jupiter and Mercury in the 5th, with Mars close to the cusp. You may imagine that Mercury conjunction Jupiter, with Capricorn rising, and with this satellitium in the 5th, made her one of the most self-confident persons imaginable. She insisted on announcing me as "President Emeritus of the Astrological Lodge of the Theosophical Society"although she didn't know what "Emeritus" means and also asked me what "theosophical" signified. She said the title sounded so fine! If that isn't Leo, I don't know what is!

Usually if you have read an author well you have a good sense of what take they have on astrology. Here Carter was agreeing with the exact same system that Dobyn's uses. I assumed that the reviewer had read Carter's work in detail, but perhaps not.

Here is a PDF from the late Zipporah Dobyns, and I encourage people to make up their own minds. In one lecture by Liz Greene, a student in the seminar questioned her on the use of sign = house in her highly acclaimed work on "Saturn a New Look at an Old Devil". In this case, she emphasises the house placement of Saturn has the greatest impact. Modern astrologers can be just as vicious, and they often say the "traditionals" are stuck in a time warp, and life hasn't evolved, and they disregard the newly discovered planets. The Moderns are accused of not knowing the history of astrology, and of sprinkling sugar all over astrological interpretations. Moderns are also told they don't have a realistic view of life/art of astrology. The mythical battle between the old and new (Saturn-Uranus) reenacts itself daily in the astrological communities, and it can get pretty ugly at times. Uranus' discovery shook the traditional system, and the ancient astrologers cling to old methods out of security and what works. Modern astrologers promote new planets and new consciousness in the world. Chronus/Saturn and the traditional branch of astrology are still trying to castrate Modern astrologers (Uranus).