Behind the Scenes at Waldorf

by Roger Rawlings,

with assistance from Rudolf Steiner

Afterword by Debra Snell

Addendum by Pete Karaiskos

Every parent who is thinking of sending a child to a Waldorf school should first spend some time 

with the book FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER, 

which gives a behind-the-scenes look at the world of Waldorf education.

While leafing through it, ask yourself if you really want your child

to be “educated” in the sort of school the book describes.

Published by the Anthroposophic Press, FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER is long,

printed in two volumes that span more than 800 pages.

Few people would care to read the whole thing, but this isn’t necessary.

Just cruising around among its pages may tell you all you need to know about Waldorf schools.

As an aid, here is a summary of wonders I have found in FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER.

Not all of the passages are entirely awful.

(Which just goes to show how fair-minded I can be.)

Unless otherwise identified, all of the following statements were made by Rudolf Steiner,

 addressing Waldorf school teachers. I will proceed through the book front to back.

Some of the most startling statements occur near the end of the book,

but I won't move them up in the queue.

(Which just goes to show how fair-minded I can be.)

  

There has been gossip about who has been slapped at the school; teachers must maintain “school confidentiality”; treat parents as outsiders.

“I have been back only a few hours, and I have heard so much gossip about who got a slap and so forth. All of that gossip is going beyond all bounds, and I really found it very disturbing. We do not really need to concern ourselves when things seep out the cracks. We certainly have thick enough skins for that. But on the other hand, we clearly do not need to help it along. We should be quiet about how we handle things in the school, that is, we should maintain a kind of school confidentiality. We should not speak to people outside the school, except for the parents who come to us with questions, and in that case, only about their children, so that gossip has no opportunity to arise.” [p. 10 - also see p. 323 and p. 547]
 

Waldorf teachers must be unbending authority figures, never giving in to the children.

“[I]t will be very good if you can keep the children from losing their feeling for authority. That is what they need most. You can best achieve that by going into things with the children very cautiously, but under no circumstances giving in.” [pp. 14-15 - also see p. 237 and p. 391]
 

Start each day with a prayer, but don’t call it a prayer.

“We also need to speak about a prayer. I ask only one thing of you. You see, in such things everything depends upon the external appearances. Never call a verse a prayer, call it an opening verse before school. Avoid allowing anyone to hear you, as a faculty member, using the word ‘prayer.’” [p. 20 - also see pp. 38-40]

 
Denying the religious nature of Waldorf schooling has long been high on the list of Waldorf priorities — especially in the USA, when Waldorf schools attempt to receive taxpayer support.
 

Teach the kids about Atlantis, which really existed — and, as usual, disavow science.

“[W]e should not be afraid to speak about the Atlantean land with the children. We should not skip that. We can also connect all this to history. The only thing is, you will need to disavow normal geology since the Atlantean catastrophe occurred in the seventh or eighth millennium.” [p. 25 - also see p. 50]
 

Fire-breathing dragons really existed.

“A teacher: ‘But there are still the fire breathers.’

“Dr. Steiner: 'Yes, those beasts, they did breathe fire, the Archaeopteryx, for example.' 

“A teacher: ‘You mean that animals whose bones we see today in museums still breathed fire?’

“Dr. Steiner: 'Yes, all of the dinosaurs belong to the end of the Tertiary Period. Those found in the Jura [i.e., Jurassic] are actually their descendants. What I am referring to are the dinosaurs from the beginning of the Tertiary Period.'” [p. 26]

Steiner often tossed around scientific language of this sort, and usually he got away with it. In this case, the editor of the German edition spotted several scientific errors — but, presumably because criticizing Steiner would be unthinkable, he attributed them to the stenographer:

“Remarks by the German editor: In the previous paragraphs, there appear to be stenographic errors. The text is in itself contradictory, and it is not consistent with the articles mentioned and the table in Pierer’s Encyclopedia nor with Dr. Steiner’s remarks made in the following faculty meeting (Sept. 26, 1919). The error appears explainable by the fact that Dr. Steiner referred to a table that the stenographer did not have.”  [p. 27]
 

Gravity is only a word — there is no universal force of gravity.

“It would be wonderful if you could stop speaking about gravity. You can certainly achieve speaking of it only as a phenomenon. The best would be if you considered gravity only as a word.” [p. 29]

Steiner taught that gravity is a purely local phenomenon on solid planets; it is absent on liquid and gaseous planets.
 

The planets do not orbit the Sun.

“[I]t is not that the planets move around the Sun, but that these three, Mercury, Venus, and the Earth, follow the Sun, and these three, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn, precede it. Thus, [pointing at a drawing] when the Earth is here and this is the Sun, the Earth follows along. But we look at the Sun from here, and so it appears as though the Earth goes around it, whereas it is actually only following. The Earth follows the Sun.”  [pp. 30-32]

I discuss this lunatic idea in my essay “Steiner’s Blunders”.
 

Einstein’s theory of relativity is bunk.

“Einstein’s principle of relativity arose out of unreal thinking. He asked what would occur if someone began to move away at the speed of light and then returned; this and that would occur. I would ask what would happen to a clock if it were to move away with the speed of light? That is unreal thinking. It has no connection to anything. It considers only spatial relationships, something possible since Galileo. Galileo himself did not distort things so much, but by overemphasizing the theory of relativity, we can now bring up such things.” [p. 33]

 
Steiner claimed that his teachings were scientific, but actually he denied most real scientific findings. In general, he rejected any "knowledge" except for his own occult pronouncements (many of which were based on superstition and myths, as we will see).
 

Modern philosophy is “all nonsense.” 

“Anthroposophy has the same relationship to philosophy as the crown of a tree to its roots, and the difference between the root and the crown of a tree is obvious. Someone can come along and say he finds it necessary to state that there is a difference between the root and the crown, and I have nothing to say other than that. These people can’t keep any thoughts straight. Modern philosophy is all nonsense.” [p. 36]
 

Prayers written by Steiner for use by the students. Note that the second prayer includes the word “prayer.” (Waldorf schools sometimes alter this wording, to conceal their purpose.)

Note how this "verse" addresses and praises God. It is a prayer.

Another one: 

Notice that the second prayer explicitly refers to itself as a prayer.
 

Anthroposophical religious instruction.

“[I]n anthroposophical religious instruction we can certainly not use the kind of teaching that asks questions such as, Why do we find cork on a tree? with the resulting reply, So that we can make champagne corks. God created cork in order to cork bottles. This sort of idea, that something exists in nature simply because human intent exists, is poison. That is certainly something we may not develop. Therefore, don’t bring any of these silly causal ideas into nature.”  [p. 42 - also see p. 45, p. 55, pp. 75-76, pp. 84-86., pp. 303-304, p. 465, and p. 697ff]
 

Use pictures to teach students about the spiritual beings that lurk behind nature.

“[I]t is important that we develop imaginative pictures through which we can show the supersensible through nature. For example, I have often mentioned that we should speak to the children about the butterfly’s cocoon and how the butterfly comes out of the cocoon. I have said that we can explain the concept of the immortal soul to the children by saying that, although human beings die, their souls go from them like an invisible butterfly emerging from the cocoon.” [p. 43]

 
Comments reflecting how students are to be taught elements of Anthroposophical theology are scattered throughout the book.
 

Teach the kids about fate and destiny: what Steiner usually called karma.

“In the second stage, that is, the four upper grades, we need to discuss the concepts of fate and human destiny with the children. Thus, we need to give the children a picture of destiny so that they truly feel that human beings have a destiny. It is important to teach the child the difference between a simple chance occurrence and destiny. Thus, you will need to go through the concept of destiny with the children ...  If something happens to you because of some other person, that is usually a case of fulfilled karma. Even such things as the fact that we find ourselves together in this faculty at the Waldorf School are fulfilled karma.” [pp. 44-45]

 
Karma is one of the many concepts Anthroposophy borrows from other faiths. Although Anthroposophists often claim that Steiner's teachings are Christian, in fact they contain many elements that contradict Christianity.
 

Any religion connected with a church (or temple, or...) is not actually religious; only Anthroposophy conveys spiritual truths.

“I also want you to understand what is really religious in an anthroposophical sense. In the sense of anthroposophy, what is religious is connected with feeling, with those feelings for the world, for the spirit, and for life that our perspective of the world can give us. The worldview itself is something for the head, but religion always arises out of the entire human being. For that reason, religion connected with a specific church is not actually religious.” [p. 45 - re. religion,  - also see p. 42, p. 55, pp. 75-76, pp. 84-86., pp. 303-304, p. 465, 615-616, and p. 697ff]

 
All religious persons should reject Anthroposophy unless they agree that their priests, pastors, ministers, imams, rabbis, etc.,  have not been telling them the truth.
 

Teach kids how human beings raise themselves to the divine.

“You should also certainly include the fact that human beings raise themselves to the divine in three stages. Thus, after you have given the children an idea of destiny, you then slowly teach them bout heredity and repeated earthly lives through stories. You can then proceed to the three stages of the divine.”  [p. 46 - also see pp. 480-481]

 
Closely related to karma, reincarnation is another of the concepts Anthroposophy borrows from other faiths.
 

More about Atlantis; also a previous lost world, Lemuria.

“Then you have the Mesozoic, which generally corresponds to Lemuria. And then the first and second levels of mammals, or the Cenozoic, that is, the Atlantean age. The Atlantean period was no more than about nine thousand years ago.” [p. 50  - also see p. 25]
 

Human beings were once made of ether.

“In very primitive times, human beings consisted almost entirely of etheric substance. They lived among other things but had as yet no density.” [p. 50]
 

Human beings were once like centaurs.

“The human being was similar to a centaur, an extremely animal-like lower body and a humanized head.” [p. 51]
 

Waldorf teachers serve the gods; they have a messianic mission to help fulfill the “divine cosmic plan.”

“Among the faculty, we must certainly carry within us the knowledge that we are not here for our own sakes, but to carry out the divine cosmic plan. We should always remember that when we do something, we are actually carrying out the intentions of the gods, that we are, in a certain sense, the means by which that streaming down from above will go out into the world. We dare not for one moment lose the feeling of the seriousness and dignity of our work.” [p. 55 - re. religion,  - also see p. 42, p. 45, pp. 75-76, pp. 84-86., pp. 303-304, p. 465, and p 697ff]

Note that Steiner speaks of “gods.” Anthroposophy is polytheistic.
 

How to punish children who steal.

“With children who steal, it is good to have them remember scenes they experienced earlier. You should have them imagine things they experienced years before, for instance, with seven-year-olds, experiences they had when they were five, or with ten-year-olds, experiences they had when they were seven. You should also have them recall experiences from two weeks before.

“Things will then become better quickly. If you do nothing, these problems will become larger and develop into kleptomania.” [pp. 68-69 - also see pp. 109-110]
 

According to Steiner, Islam is devilish, and Allah is a pale imitation of Elohim.

“A teacher asks about Allah. 

“Dr. Steiner: ‘It is difficult to describe that supersensible being.  Mohammedism is the first manifestation of Ahriman, the first Ahrimanic revelation following the Mystery of Golgotha. Mohammed’s god, Allah, Eloha, is an Ahrimanic imitation or pale reflection of the Elohim, but comprehended monotheistically. Mohammed always refers to them as a unity. The Mohammedan culture is Ahrimanic, but the Islamic attitude is Luciferic.’” [pp. 75-76 - re. religion,  - also see p. 42, p. 45, p. 55, pp. 75-76, pp. 84-86., pp. 303-304, p. 465, and p 697ff]

“Elohim” is an alternate name for Jehovah or Jahve. However, Steiner uses the word as a plural noun, referring to Jahve and “his six colleagues....” [Rudolf Steiner, THE MISSION OF THE FOLK SOULS (Rudolf Steiner Press, 2005), p. 99.]
 

Generally, there are just four types of children: Steiner on the “humours” or “temperaments.”

“A teacher explains how she conveyed the consonants in eurythmy by working with the growth of plants.

“Dr. Steiner: ‘That is very nice. The children do not differ much. You do not have many who are untalented nor many who are gifted. They are average children. Also, you have few choleric or strongly melancholic temperaments. Those children are mostly phlegmatic or sanguine. All that plays a role since you do not have all four temperaments.’” [p. 80 - also see pp. 90-91 and p. 687]

I discuss the concept of temperaments in the essay “Humouresque”.

Sunday services:

“A question is asked about who may attend the Sunday services.

“Dr. Steiner: ‘That is certainly a problem. We had never thought that anyone other than the parents would attend. Of course, having begun in one way, it is difficult to set a limit. How should we do that? Why did you admit people who are not parents at the school? If we allow K. in, there is no reason we should send other members away. Where does that begin and where does it end?  ....’”  [p. 84ff - also see pp. 303-304 and p. 465]
 

Comments about a complaining father:

 
“It would be a good idea if we could compare what is happening with the boy to what the father is complaining about. The father appears to be a rather useless complainer, always blaming things. I will talk with the boy. It seems to me that the father always complains and picks up small things that bother the boy. Then he expands them into fantasies so that the boy does things the father 
suggests.” [p. 87]

 
Other comments about specific parents are scattered throughout the book.
 

More on the so-called temperaments:

“A teacher: ‘How can we have such differing opinions about the temperament of a child?’ 

“Dr. Steiner: ‘We cannot solve that question mathematically. We can certainly not speak in that way. In judging cases that lie near a boundary, it is possible that one person has one view and another view. We do not need to mathematically resolve them. The situation is such that when we see and understand a child in one way or another, we already intend to treat it in a particular way. In the end, the manner of treating something arises from an interaction. Don’t think you should discuss it.’ 

“There is a further question about temperaments. 

“Dr. Steiner: ‘The choleric temperament becomes immediately annoyed by and angry about anything that interrupts its activity. When it is in a rhythmic experience, it becomes vexed and angry, but it will also become angry if it is involved in another experience and is disturbed. That is because rhythm inwardly connects with all of human nature. It is certainly the case that rhythm is more connected with human nature than anything else and that a strong rhythm lies at the base of cholerics, a rhythm that is usually somewhat defective. We can see that Napoleon was a choleric. In his case, the inner rhythm was compressed. With Napoleon you will find, on the one side, something that tended to grow larger than he grew. He remained a half-pint. His etheric body was larger than his physical body, and thus his organs were so compressed that all rhythmical things were shoved together and continuously disturbed one another. Since such a choleric temperament is based upon a continuous shortening of the rhythm, it lives within itself.’” [pp. 90-91 - also see pp. 801-81 and p. 687]
 

More on punishing students; causing physical pain for rule-breakers. 

“We must avoid under all circumstances giving them a punishment we cannot carry out. We may never place ourselves in a situation where we may have to relent in a disciplinary decision. If we say that a child must come earlier, then we must enforce that. We must order the child to come earlier. The girls today were in the seventh or eighth grade. We lose all control the minute we look away. We will find ourselves on a downward path and will continue to slide. With punishment, we cannot relent. It is better to let it go. Under certain circumstances, it can lead to the opposite of what we want, with the children forming a group among themselves and saying, 'Today I come late, tomorrow, you.' I don’t think that would work, because it would make us somewhat laughable. Of course, it’s just laziness. Having the children come earlier is not so good; it would be better if they stayed a quarter of an hour longer. That is something the children do not like.

“Have you tried that to see if it works? If a child comes ten minutes late, having him or her stand for a half hour. If they have to stand three times as long, they will certainly think about every minute. Let them stand there uncomfortably. Your boy rubs the back of his head on the wall and amuses himself with all kinds of things. I think that in such cases, when there is some punishment connected with the misbehavior, you can be particularly effective if you allow them to stand in some uncomfortable place. The older children will then be careful that they do not come too late. We could also buy a number of little sheds, and then they will not come too late as a group. They may even get some cramps in their legs. We could have the sheds built in the shop class.” [pp. 109-110 - also see pp. 68-69]

 
Knitting develops good teeth.

“The following was also noted. 

“Bad teeth, the cause lies in the soul/spirit.
 
“Connection between eurythmy and the formation of teeth. 

“Handwork. Knitting develops good teeth.” [p. 112 - cf. p. 262]

This is one of the weirdest ideas to be found in FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER, which is full of weird ideas. But there it is.
 

Only materialists think with the brain [re. brains, also see p. 249 and pp. 667-668]; the spiritual goals of Anthroposophy are outlined.

“When people are as blinded by materialistic thoughts as they became during the nineteenth century and right into the present, the physical body becomes a copy of the spirit and soul living in materialistic impulses. In that case, it is not incorrect to say that the brain thinks. It is then, in fact, correct. By being firmly enmeshed in materialism, we have people who not only think poorly about the body, soul, and spirit, but people who think materially and feel materially. What that means is that materialism causes the human being to become a thinking automaton, that the human being then becomes something that thinks, feels, and wills physically. The task of Anthroposophy is not simply to replace a false view of the world with a correct one. That is a purely theoretical requirement. The nature of Anthroposophy is to strive not only toward another idea, but toward other deeds, namely, to tear the spirit and soul from the physical body. The task is to raise the spirit-soul into the realm of the spiritual, so that the human being is no longer a thinking and feeling automaton.”  The passage continues ... it’s worth studying. “Such things as the pedagogy of the Waldorf School can arise from a recognition that humanity must turn toward spiritual activity, and not simply from a change in theory. We should work out of that spirit.

Waldorf teachers must be uncompromising Anthroposophists. Waldorf teachers know they are wrong is anyone outside Anthroposophy approves of what they are doing.

“As teachers in the Waldorf School, you will need to find your way more deeply into the insight of the spirit and to find a way of putting all compromises aside. It will be impossible for us to avoid all kinds of people from outside the school who want to have a voice in school matters. As long as we do not give up any of the necessary perspective we must have in our feelings, then any concurrence from other pedagogical streams concerning what happens in the Waldorf School will cause us to be sad rather than happy. When those people working in modern pedagogy praise us, we must think there is something wrong with what we are doing. We do not need to immediately throw out anyone who praises us, but we do need to be clear that we should carefully consider that we may not be doing something properly if those working in today’s educational system praise us. That must be our basic conviction.” [p. 118 - also see pp. 494-495]
 

Reincarnation; people had lives before this one; most other religions foolishly deny what Anthroposophy teaches.

“A living comprehension will lead you to see the pre-existence of the soul, to see what the human being experienced before birth, to see that human life in the physical world is a continuation of previous experiences. Traditional religions strongly oppose preexistence, which can make a human being selfless. They strongly oppose those things that do not strive toward a murky and numbing uncomprehending belief, but toward knowledge and the clear light of comprehension. [p. 119 - also see p. 184]

 
Note that Steiner here essentially concedes that Anthroposophy is a religion: He contrasts it to "traditional religions."
 

The Waldorf School Association was created, in part, in hopes of getting money from a cigarette company.

“We formed the Waldorf School Association as a local group, to an extent under the assumption that the stockholders of the Waldorf-Astoria Company would be impressed and would provide some money.” [p. 137]
 

Steiner addresses the head of the Waldorf-Astoria cigarette company about his trust in Anthroposophy.

“What we have here as a question of confidence is your trust in Anthroposophy, and what we have now arose from that.” [p. 167]

 
Waldorf schools take their name from the cigarette factory.
 

Teaching older students about reincarnation.

“For the seventh, eighth, and ninth grade independent religious instruction we could move into a freer form and give a theoretical explanation about such things as life before birth and after death, and all the consequences of a life before birth. We could give them examples. We could show them how to look at the major cultural connections and about the mission of the human being on Earth. You need only to look at Goethe or Jean Paul to see it. You can show everywhere that their capacities come from a life before birth.” [p. 184 - also see p. 119]
 

The “world of colors”; and fairy tales.

“The main thing now is that we awaken an inner feeling for color in the children, an experience of the world of colors, so that the children receive a feeling for the life in the world of colors through experiencing fairy tales.” [p. 200]

Steiner taught that spiritual beings enter the physical realm through colors. He also taught that all fairy tales are fundamentally true. He singled out Puss in Boots as an example. [Rudolf Steiner, ON THE MYSTERY DRAMAS (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1983), p. 93.]

Another complaining parent; use irony to interest a child in eurythmy:

“A teacher: ‘The mother complains that I am stressing the child.’
 
“Dr. Steiner: ‘I don’t think that it would be so easy to work with the mother. She is a kind of society woman....’ 
 
“A eurythmy teacher:’ I cannot awaken R.F.’s interest in eurythmy.’
 
“Dr. Steiner: ‘Be ironic with him. He was in a parochial school.’ [p. 211]
 

A special class for “weak-minded children”:

“She is intellectually weak. We need a class for weak-minded children so that we can take care of them systematically. These children would gain a great deal if we did not have them learn to read and write, but instead learn things that require a certain kind of thinking. They need basic tasks like putting a number of marbles in a series of nine containers so that every third container has one white and two red marbles.” [p. 227]
 

Strictness ; preparing the school to be evaluated:

“Dr. Steiner: ‘This is something peculiar. Miss Lang could always keep them quiet, so there is something hidden here.’
 
“A teacher: ‘She was very strict.’
 
“Dr. Steiner: ‘I would like to call your attention to the fact that there is something important for us in this situation. Miss Lang was a credentialed teacher in Württemberg. When we are evaluated, they will tend to use the strict discipline taught in Württemberg.’” [p. 237  - also see pp. 14-15, p. 279, and p. 391.]
 

An abnormal boy whose brain is too small.

“B.R. is not quite normal. He should receive particular help in the afternoon. That is difficult with some of your children. His brain is too small. You need only look at him. He is smaller than he should be. We should try to counteract that characteristic. It is not possible for him to completely pay attention. You should call upon him more often and discuss things with him in the corridor or on the street so that he has to think while he listens. His mother is just like him.” [p. 249]

 
Other comments about specific children are scattered throughout the book.
 

A medical inspector says Waldorf students have bad teeth:

“Dr. Steiner reads a letter from the medical inspector who, among other things, mentions that the children at the Waldorf School have bad teeth. 

“Dr. Steiner: ‘That is just a bluff. That is something that could be determined only by investigating the situation. That is simply stupid.’” [p. 262 - cf. p. 112

 
(Apparently the knitting hasn't helped. But Waldorf students usually do a lot of knitting anyway.)
 

Preparing students so the school can pass a school inspection:

“Be careful when a school inspector comes that he does not leave with his questions unanswered. He may ask questions in such a way that the children cannot answer them. We should work so that the children can handle even the most surprising questions.”  [p. 279 - also see p. 237]
 

Whether there should be a special Sunday service for teachers only:

“A teacher: ‘The faculty would like a special Sunday Service for teachers only.’

“Dr. Steiner: ‘We already discussed something like that. I would have to know if there is an extensive need for it ... A service is either simply a question of form, in which case you could do it together, or it is a ritual act, and you have to look more seriously at it. In that case, you can have no secret enemies ... A sacrament is esoteric. It is one of the most esoteric things you can imagine. What you said is connected with the fact that you cannot decide upon a ritual democratically.’”  [pp. 303-304 - also see pp. 84-86 and p. 465]
 

Esoteric studies; it is wrong to reveal too much to the public; and cliques may form:

“A question is asked about esoteric studies. 

“Dr. Steiner: ‘That is very difficult to do. Until now, I have always had to avoid them. As you know, I gave a number of such studies years ago [Steiner is referring to books he published early in his occult career], but I had to stop because people misused them. Esotericism was simply taken out into the world and distorted. In that regard, nothing in our esoteric movement has ever been as damaging as that. All other esoteric study, even in less than honorable situations, was held intimately. That was the practice over a long period of time. Cliques have become part of the Anthroposophical Society and they have set themselves above everything else, unfortunately, also above what is esoteric.’” [p. 305]
 

A mother who is the personification of a lie; a father who is superficial and trivial:

“Now he is growing up with a mother who is the personification of a lie. She is one of those people who falls down with a heart attack, but on the soft carpet, not next to it. She is completely untrue. She is a woman who always wanted to bring Anthroposophy to her husband, a very superficial and trivial person.” [p. 321]
 

How to slap children:

“The language teacher says something about boxing children’s ears.
 
“Dr. Steiner: ‘If you give them a slap, you should do it the way Dr. Schubert does.’ 

“Dr. Schubert: ‘Did somebody complain?’ 

“Dr. Steiner: ‘No, you are always slapping them.’
 
“Dr. Schubert: ‘When did I do that?’ 

“Dr. Steiner: ‘Well, I mean astral slapping. There are physical slaps and astral slaps. It doesn’t matter which one you give, but you cannot slap a child sentimentally.’” [p. 323 - also see p. 10 and p. 547]

An “astral” slap would consist of psychological and/or spiritual punishment. It would not hurt the body, but it could do serious damage nonetheless. Consider what it would be like to have a teacher who “always” slaps the students, astrally or otherwise.
 

Teachers and students worry about the quality of Waldorf education.

“A teacher: ‘The question has arisen as to whether the Waldorf School provides enough factual material. The students in the ninth grade made a comparison and saw that they do not know enough.’” [p. 332]
 
“A teacher: ‘In many of the subjects, the children do not learn enough to enter the eleventh grade. Many ninth graders are still at the very beginning in English.’” [p. 333 - also see pp. 408-409, p. 688, 712, and p. 725]
 

Shakespeare’s characters are real and alive in the spirit realm.

“When you make Shakespearean characters living in that sense, you can raise them into the supersensible world where they remain living. Of course, they do not do in the higher worlds what they do on the physical plane, but they remain alive, nevertheless, and they act there. “ [p. 336]
 

Don’t justify or explain yourself to the students:

“Surely you did not justify yourselves to the students?  ... The children will be caught in delusions of grandeur.  ... You cannot justify your views of the students to the students. That is absolutely out of the question.” [p. 391 - also see pp. 14-15 and p. 237]
 

Teach little children Anthroposophy by putting it in a form they can grasp.

“The problem you have is that you have not always followed the directive to bring what you know anthroposophically into a form you can present to little children. You have lectured the children about anthroposophy when you told them about your subject. You did not transform anthroposophy into a child’s level.” [pp. 402-403]

 
Despite often denying it, Steiner wanted Waldorf schools to promote Anthroposophy among the students — including the youngest.
 

Creating progress reports, as requested by a mother, is “just nonsense”:

“Progress reports? Giving in to someone like Mrs. X. (a mother who had written a letter to the faculty) is just nonsense ... As far as I am concerned, the reports could be phrased so that what the children are like is apparent only from the comments about their deportment, but that would only make things worse.” [p. 408]
 

How to combat reports that Waldorf provides a poor education:

“Concerning the parent meeting, you could do that [i.e., have one], but without me. They might say things I could not counter, if I hear something I cannot defend. The things I say here, I could not say to the parents. We need to clear the air, and the teachers must take control of the school again. You do not need to talk about the things not going well ... The two places that could be dangerous for us lie in the following. The one is that people could claim he [a student] could do less than is possible with a calculator. To that, we can say that our goal is to develop the concept of numbers differently. We do not think that is possible with such young children. We will have to go into this business with calculators. The other thing that is dangerous for us is his poor dictation. There, we can simply say that dictation is not really a part of the second grade in our school. The situation is quite tempting for someone with a modern pedagogical understanding. That is how we can most easily be attacked.” [pp. 408-409 - also see pp. 332-333, p. 688, 712, and p. 725]
 

Standard textbooks are generally no good; maybe Waldorf teachers can create their own.

“It would be a good idea if the Waldorf teachers would work on creating decent textbooks that reflect our pedagogical principles. I would not like to see the current textbooks in the classroom. It would be somewhat destructive to put such reading books in the classes. There are, of course, collections that are really not too bad. One such collection is by a Mr. Richter. It is a collection of sagas. It is neither trivial nor beyond the children’s grasp. Even in Grimm’s fairy tales, you always have to be selective, as there are some that are not appropriate for [our] school.” [p. 440]

 
Standard textbooks contain real knowledge about the real world — precisely what Steiner rejected.
 

The little boy R.R.; and E.T.:

 
“You also have that boy in the yellow jacket, E.T. That is a medical problem. He could certainly do the ‘A, E, I exercise.’ Also, he should eat some eggs that are not completely cooked. He needs to develop protein strength. In many cases, it is possible to know what we need to do to heal something. People cannot say something untrue about us if what we say needs to be done cannot be done. We need to take up a collection so the boy can have two eggs a day, at least four times in a week. He would need eight eggs. The Cologne News costs twenty-five marks, but it does not have the same nutritional value.”  [p. 456 - also see p. 625]
 

More on Sunday services; the sacraments.

“A teacher: ‘Should Miss R. and Mr. W. hold the services?’ 

“Dr. Steiner: ‘They should both celebrate the sacraments. That is an obvious condition for the independent religious instruction.

“‘I would like to say something more. Experience has shown that 
the Independent Religious Instruction consists not only in what we teach during religion class, not only what we teach through feeling, but that a certain relationship needs to develop between the religion teacher and the student. You can develop that through the celebration of a sacrament. If someone else does the service, then, for the student who receives the sacrament from someone else, a large part of the intangibles necessary for teaching religion are missing between the students and the religion teacher. The reverse is also true. If someone gives the sacrament without teaching religion, that person falls into a difficult position that can hardly be justified. It is easier to justify teaching religion without leading a service than it is to justify leading a service without teaching religion. Through the service, we bring religious instruction out of empty theory. It is based upon a relationship between the religion teacher and the students. As I have said in connection with the sacrament, you should decide.’”  [p. 465    - also see pp. 84-86 and pp. 303-304]
 

The human ear contains a metamorphosed intestine.

“You need to understand the small bones within the ear, the hammer, stirrup, the oval window, the anvil, as small limbs, as arms or legs that touch the eardrum. A sense of touch enters the  understanding of tone. The spiral, which is filled with liquid, is a metamorphosed intestine of the ear. A feeling for tone lives in it.” [p. 469]
 

The study of religion, literature, and history: 

“In teaching religion and history, what is important is how you present things. What is important is how things are treated in one case and then in another. In teaching religion, three stages need to be emphasized ...  In teaching literature and history, you need to draw the children’s attention to how one stage arises from an earlier one and then continues on to a later stage. You could show how it was proper that common people in the ninth and tenth centuries followed the priests in complete dullness.” [pp. 480-481 - also see p. 46] 

Steiner taught that humans are involved in a spiritual evolutionary process, moving through distinct stages. He also taught that religion has been necessary in human evolution — as when people blindly followed priests — but it will become unnecessary because of his own teachings, which he claimed were scientific. He called his doctrines "spiritual science."

Students should accept whatever the teachers say, without judgment or discussion; direct questions can be answered; religion teachers should have special authority.

“It is important that the youth of our Waldorf School talk less about questions of world perspective. The situation is that we need to create a mood, namely, that the teacher has something to say that the children should neither judge nor discuss. That is necessary, otherwise it will become trivial. An actual discussion lowers the content. Things should remain with simply asking questions. The  children even in the tenth and eleventh grades should know that they can ask everything and receive an answer. For questions of religion and worldview, we need to maintain that longer. The religion teacher needs to retain a position of authority even after puberty.” [p. 494 - also see p. 118]
 

Anthroposophy suffuses the curriculum — it is “in the school.” 

“The older students often mentioned that we emphasize that the Waldorf School is not to be an anthroposophical school. That is one of the questions we need to handle very seriously. You need to make the children aware that they are receiving the objective truth, and if this occasionally appears anthroposophical, it is not anthroposophy that is at fault. Things are that way because anthroposophy has something to say about objective truth. It is the material that causes what is said to be anthroposophical. We certainly may not go to the other extreme, where people would say that anthroposophy may not be brought into the school. Anthroposophy will be in the school when it is objectively justified, that is, when it is called for by the material itself.” [p. 495 - also see p. 118 and 494]

Because of Anthroposophy’s supreme importance, “the material” will almost always justify including Anthroposophy is every class.
 

Painful committee deliberations:

“If we had only the proposal of the committee, we would need only to agree to or reject that proposal. Now we have two proposals, and we will have to have a debate about them. If there is another proposal, it should also be made. We created this preliminary committee with a great deal of pain. We believe it made its proposal only after mature consideration. Taking our trust in them into account, we now need to either verify or reject the proposal. The question is whether someone has something to say that is germane to the proposal. Is there perhaps a third proposal? Now the question is whether there is something to be added or whether a third proposal will be made.” [p. 517]

There’s no escaping some problems. Waldorf schools may be no more bureaucratic than other schools; but they may be no less so.
 

Sugar, parents, and art:

“There are parents who overfeed their young children with all kinds of candy and so forth. When such children come to school, from the perspective of the soul and spirit, and thus also physically, they are concerned only with themselves. They sit and brood when they do not feel enough sugar in their organism. They become nervous and irritated when they have not had enough sugar ... If a child shows too little capacity for synthetic imagining, that is, for constructive imagining where the child cannot properly picture things, if he or she is a little barbarian in art, something common in today’s children, that is a symptom that the metabolic-limb system is not in order. You must, therefore, provide assistance in the other direction, in the area of sugar.” [p. 535]
 

Don’t overestimate the value of intellect; use material means on children, since everything material is imbued with spirit; the gods (plural):

“People today have too little respect for material measures, and they overestimate abstract intellectual measures. We can attempt to correct that modern, but incorrect, perspective, by attempting to show that the divine powers have used their spirit for the Earth in order to fulfill everything materially. Godly powers allow it to be warm in summer and cold in winter. Those are spiritual activities accomplished by divine powers through material means. Were the gods to attempt to achieve through human education, through an intellectual or moral instruction, what they can achieve by having human beings sweat in the summer and freeze in the winter, then they would be incorrect. You should never underestimate the effects of material means upon children. You should always keep them in mind.” [p. 536]
 

Slapping the students doesn’t really improve discipline.

“There may be teachers in the Waldorf School who slap the children, and so forth. That is something I would like to take care of in private discussions. I have heard it said that the Waldorf teachers hit the children, and we have discussed that often. The fact is, you cannot improve discipline by hitting the children, that only worsens things. That is something you must take into account. Perhaps no one wants to say anything about this, but my question is whether that is simply a story that has been spread like so many other lies, or have children, in fact, been slapped in the Waldorf School? If that has occurred, it could ruin a great deal.”  [p. 547 - also see p. 10 and p. 547]

Steiner’s statement, here, contradicts other statements where he acknowledged reports about slapping and even told the teachers how to do it best. And note that Steiner’s chief concern (as was so often the case) is for the school’s reputation.

Teaching the students French won’t damage the German empire. (I'm sure this is a load off all our minds.)

“Whether or not our students learned French would make little difference in the cultural status of the German empire. In contrast, a major cultural deed could occur if people overcame all the things connected with the false valuing of French in Middle Europe....”[p. 556]
 

On the other hand, the French are committing the “brutality” of bringing blacks to Europe; the French are decadent and their language corrupts the soul:

“What keeps  the French language going is the furor, the blood, of the French. The language is actually dead, but the corpse continues to be spoken. This is something that is most apparent in French nineteenth-century poetry. The use of the French language quite certainly corrupts the soul. The soul acquires nothing more than the possibility of clichés. Those who enthusiastically speak French transfer that to other languages. The French are also ruining what maintains their dead language, namely, their blood. The French are committing the terrible brutality of moving black people to Europe, but it works, in an even worse way, back on France. It has an enormous affect on the blood and the race and contributes considerably toward French decadence. The French as a race are reverting.”[pp. 558-559]

This is one of the very few statements made by Steiner that some Anthroposophists find shameful. The editors attached an apology/defense: 

“Any reader who has read thus far in these transcripts will know how direct and spontaneous they are; but even a prepared reader may be surprised by this session. All along we have struggled, as publishers, with the issue of whether to let the record stand intact or whether to edit it, never more so than in the case of the present conference. After much soul searching and discussion, we have felt that we would better serve by letting the document stand exactly as it is published in German ...  Interpretation, like communication, is never a simple matter. It is especially difficult when the issues touch deep into the things that are the most important to us. Without openness, faith, and trust, however, neither true communication nor interpretation is possible. For the sake of these — and readers to come — we leave this passage unedited.”

Childhood games, including military and warlike games, played artistically:

“‘I certainly do not want to imply that the old games are very good simply because they come from older times. They need to be replaced. Blind Man’s Bluff or such things are the right thing. Or, A-Tisket, A-Tasket....’

“A teacher asks about marching and singing.
 
“Dr. Steiner: ‘These military or war-like games can be done in a healthy way if they are done artistically. What was done where I grew up was pure nonsense.’” [p. 579]

 
(The image of singing, marching German children, engaged in "military or war-like games," may give some people pause.)
 

Hitting people with a sledgehammer, but not negatively:

“I would also like to mention that in the future [during conferences or lectures] we must avoid emphasizing the negative and critical aspects too strongly. The first mention [i.e., the first negative statement] will not have much influence because the people who heard it will soon forget it unless opposition was lying dormant in their souls. That negative aspect existed in even the best lectures [at our recent conference], and is something we must significantly reduce. I am certainly not against hitting people with a sledgehammer, but we should avoid being negative.” [p. 589]
 

Islands and continents are not attached to the Earth: They float in the sea:

“[A]an island like Great Britain swims in the sea and is held fast by the forces of the stars. In actuality, such islands do not sit directly upon a foundation; they swim and are held fast from outside.”  [p. 607  - also see p. 618]
 

But shh! Don’t tell such things to students — when the kids go on to college, they will spill the beans:

“We cannot tell them to the students because they would then need to tell them to their professors in the examinations, and we would acquire a terrible name. Nevertheless, that is actually what we should achieve in geography.” [p. 608]
 

The Apocrypha  — heretical teachings that contradict the Bible — are “more correct than the Gospels”; but the kids aren't ready for the Apocrypha yet.

 
“The children are not yet mature enough to go through the Apocrypha. The Apocrypha contains many things that are more correct than what is written in the Gospels. I have always extended the Gospels by what we can verify from the Apocrypha. Sometimes there are strong conflicts. When they take up the Gospels, the children must grasp them. It is difficult to explain the contradictions, so if they took up the Apocrypha nothing would make sense anymore. I would simply study the Gospels.”  [pp. 615-616 - also see p. 45] 

You can find some of Steiner’s “extensions” and “corrections” of the Gospels in the book THE FIFTH GOSPEL (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1995).
 

The Waldorf teachers are confused by the floating islands, so Steiner repeats the truth: 

“The continents swim and do not sit upon anything. They are held in position upon the Earth by the constellations. When the constellations change, the continents change, also.” [p. 618]
 

A teacher asks about curative eurythmy. Steiner’s lucid answer:

“We should maintain the principle of not hacking off some part of [the] main lesson and tacking it on somewhere else.” [p. 625]
 

How to cure tuberculosis in the intestines and pancreas; large heads and small: 

“‘For cases of tuberculosis in the intestines and the pancreas, put the juice from half a lemon in a glass of water and use that in a compress to wrap their abdomen at night. Give them also the tuberculosis remedies one and two [described by Steiner elsewhere]. As far as possible, they should eat only warm things without any animal fat, for instance, warm eggs, warm drinks, particularly warm lemonade, but, if possible, everything should be warm.’ 

“The school doctor: ‘It is difficult to differentiate between large- and small-headed children.’ [?!]
 
“Dr. Steiner: ‘You will need to go more thoroughly into the reality of it. So many things are hidden. It sometimes happens that these things appear later with one child or another.’”  [p. 633]

 
Besides laying down some extremely bizarre educational directives, Steiner also lectured on medicine — to be precise, he promoted quack medicine.
 

Some people are “not human”; some are “filled with a sort of natural demon”; some Waldorf students are not really human -- but “We cannot, however, create a school for demons”:

“That little girl L.K. in the first grade must have something really very wrong inside. There is not much we can do. Such cases are increasing in which children are born with a human form, but are not really human beings in relation to their highest I [the spiritual ego, a human’s spiritual self]; instead, they are filled with beings that do not belong to the human class. Quite a number of people have been born since the nineties [i.e., the 1890s]without an I, that is, they are not reincarnated, but are human forms filled with a sort of natural demon. There are quite a large number of older people going around who are actually not human beings, but are only natural; they are human beings only in regard to their form. We cannot, however, create a school for demons.” [p. 649] 

I discuss this passage, and other remarks made in the same meeting, in my essay “Secrets”.
 

The dawning intellect in teenagers leads to rowdy behavior.

“[S]omething we could expect at this age is present in the boys, namely very strongly developed intellectual forces. These intellectual forces become apparent at puberty. Particularly with boys, this often arises as a certain subconscious desire to exercise their intellectual strength. It is natural that, when left to themselves, boys see rowdy behavior as the only possibility of expressing those intellectual forces.” [p. 652] 

In Steiner’s view, intellect is almost always suspect.
 

Waldorf teachers shouldn’t make their classes too  Anthroposophical, lest visitors catch on.

“The other problem is that you are often too anthroposophical, like Mr. X. Yesterday, I was sitting on pins and needles worrying that the visitors would think the history class was too religious. We should not allow the history class to be too religiously oriented. That is why we have a religion class. The visitors seem to have been very well-meaning people. Nevertheless, had they noticed that, they could easily have categorized the Waldorf School as being too anthroposophical and of bringing that into the classroom.” [p. 655]

Note that Steiner associates Anthroposophy with religion. Note, also, that he does not tell Waldorf teachers to keep Anthroposophy out of the classroom. He just tells them to tone it down a bit.
 

How to teach the students about the zodiac.

“In discussing the zodiac, you should begin with the mammals, represented by Leo; then birds, Virgo; reptiles, Libra; amphibians, Scorpio; fish, Sagittarius; articulates, Capricorn; worms, Aquarius. Then continue on the other side, where you have the protists, Cancer; corals, Gemini; echinoderms, Taurus; ascidians, Aries; mollusks, Pisces. You should realize that the zodiac arose at a time when the names and classifications were very different. In the Hebrew language, there is no word for fish, so it is quite reasonable that you would not find fish mentioned in the story of creation. They were seen as birds that lived in water. Thus, the zodiac is divided in this way, into seven and five parts for day and night.”[pp. 659-660]

Steiner included much astrological lore in his doctrines, as well as using horoscopes.

By the way, the Hebrew word for fish (yes, there is such a word in Hebrew) is “dag.” Steiner always felt free to make weird, untrue assertions.

 
Oh, and by the way: Genesis 1:26: "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth."

 
The editors try to cover Steiner for these bloopers, but without much success:

 
“In the Hebrew story of creation, there is no actual word for fish. It is circumscribed in Genesis 1:20. 'Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life,' whereas, immediately following, the word fowl is used. Also, Leviticus 11:9, 'These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters: whatsoever hath fins and scales in the waters, in the seas, and in the rivers, them shall ye eat.' In general, the word dag appears for 'fish,' whereas thanninîm, translated as 'whales,' are mythological sea creatures.”  [p. 660]

 
Anthroposophists really should learn, at least occasionally, to cut their losses. Genesis 1:20 does not refer to fish, but Genesis 1:26 does.
 

Some animals correspond to the human head, some to the middle part of the human being (and the head), and some to the human limbs (and the head):

“The first group are the animals related to the head, namely, the protists, sponges, echinoderms, and ascidians. The second group are the rhythmic animals, the mollusks, worms, articulates, and fish — that is, the middle part of the human being and the head. The third group are the animals of 
the limbs, so you can see how each aspect is added. Thus, we have the limbs, the rhythmic system, and the head.”  [p. 660]

Make of that what you will.
 

Waldorf teachers need not abide by the wishes of students' parents — especially concerning kids with odd brains: 

“A teacher asks about B.B. in the eighth grade. 

“Dr. Steiner: ‘Such people exist, and your task is not simply to rid yourself of them, but to really work with them. I do not believe we should try to influence them. What the mother wants to do is another thing ... There are clumps of fat between the various parts of his brain, so that he cannot bring them together.’” [pp. 667-668
 

More on the humours or temperaments, and their limitations:

“In my lecture today, I mentioned that we need to find our way past the temperaments. The goal of my lecture was to show how to come to an inner understanding that lies beyond people’s temperaments. I would like to hear about how these misunderstandings due to temperaments arose.”  [P. 687 - also see pp. 80-81 and pp. 90-91]

Steiner was almost incapable of admitting his own errors. The “misunderstandings” probably arose from Steiner’s own discussions of students’ temperaments. Go back to p. 80, for example, where Steiner refers to “all four temperaments.”
 

“A teacher: ‘Which subjects should we drop in the twelfth grade so that we can prepare the students for their final examinations?’

“Dr. Steiner: ‘Sadly, technology and shop, as well as gymnastics and singing. We cannot drop eurythmy or drawing. Religion will have to be limited to one hour, but in the morning. The twelfth grade will take religion for one hour with the eleventh grade.’” [p. 688 - also see pp. 332-333, pp. 408-409, 712, and 725]

The efforts to prepare the students didn’t work out well, as we will see. Also, Steiner disavowed any intention to really prepare Waldorf students to such exams.
 

The Waldorf School should be closely tied to the Anthroposophical Society, but not openly, formally; the ploys that have misled people about the real nature of the Waldorf School should not be tossed away; Anthroposophy is a religion.

"Formally, the Waldorf School is not an anthroposophical institution; rather, it is an independent creation based upon the foundations of anthroposophical pedagogy. In the way it meets the public, as well as the way it meets legal institutions, it is not an anthroposophical institution, but a school based upon anthroposophical pedagogy." [p. 698]

"[I]f the school suddenly became an [openly] anthroposophical school, that would upset both the official authorities and the public." [p. 703] 

"[W]e have to remember that an institution like the Independent Waldorf School with its anthroposophical character, has goals that, of course, coincide with anthroposophical desires. At the moment, though, if that connection were made official, people would break the Waldorf School's neck." [p. 705]

"When the school was founded, we placed great value upon creating an institution independent of the Anthroposophical Society. Logically, that corresponds quite well with having the various religious communities and the Anthroposophical Society provide religious instruction, so that the Society provides religious instruction just as other religious groups do." [p. 706]

Notice that the Anthroposophical Society is one of a number of “religious groups.” Anthroposophy is a religion, and despite the formal separation between the “Independent” Waldorf School and the Anthroposophical Society, Anthroposophy is found throughout the school. I discuss these passages in detail in my essay “Secrets”. [Re. religion  - also see p. 42, p. 45, p. 55, pp. 75-76, pp. 84-86., pp. 303-304, and p. 465]

Lenin, Woodrow Wilson, and their lord, the demon Ahriman:

“We need to be clear that Ahrimanic forces [i.e., demonic forces associated with Ahriman]are increasingly breaking in upon historical events. Two leading personalities, Wilson and Lenin, died from the same illness, both from paralysis, which means that both offered an opening for Ahrimanic forces.” [p. 700]

Steiner was a German nationalist. He was deeply annoyed with both America and Russia, which had fought against Germany in World War I. See my essay “Steiner and the Warlord”. 
 

The Waldorf School will not prepare students for their final exams; but should we tell the students and parents this?

“‘The question of final examinations is purely a question of opportunity. It is a question of whether we dare tell those who come to us that we will not prepare them for the final examination at all, that it is a private decision of the student whether to take the final examination or not....’

“A teacher asks whether it would be better to have the students take a thirteenth school year at another school and take their examinations there. Should a note be sent to the parents with that suggestion? 

“Dr. Steiner: ‘You can do all that, but our students cannot avoid having to take an entrance examination. The question is only whether they will fail the entrance examination or the final examination.’” [p. 712]

The exams in question were administered by educational authorities outside Waldorf. The point of sending Waldorf students to another school for “13th grade” would be to compensate for the deficiencies in Waldorf schooling.
 

Waldorf students who took the final exams did badly: 

“We should have no illusions: The results gave a very unfavorable impression of our school to people outside. We succeeded in bringing only five of the nine students who took the test through, and they just barely succeeded.” [p. 725 - also see pp. 332-333, pp. 408-409, p. 688, and p. 712]
 

Special problems with the children of Anthroposophists:

 
“I have to admit it is, in a certain sense, very strange that it is particularly the children of anthroposophists who develop so poorly in the Waldorf School. The children who were expelled some time ago were also children of anthroposophists." [p. 782]

Children of Anthroposophists may have very good reasons to rebel against their parents and against the Waldorf schools to which they have been consigned.
 

Now that we are at the end of the book, let’s have our own little exam. Decide what you think about the following:

“The Egyptian astral body was well developed and could, under certain circumstances, observe the etheric body well. Egyptians could see the astral areas of the etheric body particularly well, that is, the Sun, Moon, and stars. That is expressed in the Book of the Dead, in the clear view of life following death. The Persians belong to the same group as the Caldeans.” [p. 789]

If you have any misgivings about this quotation, you may want to reconsider sending a child to a school where such statements are honored as truth.

 
Children who attend Waldorf schools often receive their "educations" in the type of occultist atmosphere we've seen in FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER. Is this what you want for your children?

 
Among the startling things we've seen is Steiner's rejection of real knowledge — science and scholarship — and his rejection of the Biblical Gospels. Steiner placed his reliance, instead, of his own "clairvoyant" visions and on such things as ancient superstitions, myths, and fairy tales. He stood knowledge on it's head and then knocked it over.

 
Dear parents: FInd another, better school for your children.

— Roger Rawlings

---

---

Yet the schools can seem attractive,

and indeed many of the teachers

are lovely people with the best of intentions.

Painting by a Waldorf student.

---

Most children enjoy fairy tales.

But perhaps no other schools place greater

emphasis on such stories than Waldorf schools do.

Such stories sensitize students to the possible

existence of supernatural beings.

Steiner insisted that creatures such as goblins really exist.

This drawing is by a Waldorf student. 

Waldorf-style wet-on-wet watercolor painting.

All student art

courtesy of PLANS [http://waldorfcritics.org/]

Humours have often been associated with the zodiac.

Belief in humours, like belief in astrological powers,

is maintained by many Waldorf teachers.

[http://www.fromoldbooks.org/]

AFTERWORD

---

Steiner placed great importance on body shapes and colors.

Here's one almost entertaining example:

"Once I knew a man who had quite an unusual forehead. A Greek forehead is different. In Greek statues we find foreheads that slope backwards. This man actually had a pronounced bulge, and his forebrain was actually pushed out. I am convinced that this man, whose brain was pushed forward so much, possessed a particularly well-formed abdomen and never suffered from diarrhea or constipation ... [H]is powerful, protruding forehead never permitted disorders of the abdomen. You can see from this that a man's forehead is related in a remarkable way to his abdomen."  — Rudolf Steiner, 

FROM COMETS TO COCAINE (Rudolf Steiner Press, 2000), pp. 150-151.

[R.R., 2009 - my sketch based on p. 150.]

---

APPENDIX

Many Waldorf schools are hierarchical organizations consisting of concentric rings. Members of the inner rings know a good deal more about Steiner's doctrines and Waldorf's purposes than those in the outer rings; and of course members of the inner rings usually have far more power within a Waldorf school. The following description will not apply to absolutely every Waldorf school, but it will be accurate for many:

Floating above the center is Rudolf Steiner (or his doctrines as comprehended by each school's flesh-and-blood leaders).

Beneath Steiner is either a single Great Leader or a small, tight band of co-leaders. A single leader would stand at the center of all the circles; a band of co-leaders would constitute the innermost ring at a school.

The leader or co-leaders are central to a ring that, in some schools, may be termed the "college of teachers" (the Anthroposophists on the staff who study Steiner intensively and instruct one another, and perhaps others, about his doctrines). There may be sub-rings within the college, rippling outward from the central leadership with its real or claimed extensive knowledge of Anthroposophy to other devoted followers of Steiner who are farther removed from the absolute center of wisdom and control.

Beyond the college of teachers, there may be several rings of faculty, but for simplicity I'll suggest that there basically two. The inner of these is a circle of aspiring Anthroposophists (faculty who are in sympathy with Anthroposophy, to one degree or another, and who are either moving toward full commitment or who may take that step eventually — and who are either in the "college" or awaiting admission). Outside this circle is a circle of uncommitted, more-or-less uninformed, and perhaps disaffected teachers (people who took the job with no real knowledge of, or particular sympathy with, the school's spiritualistic agenda, and/or others who have become alienated and may be looking for the exits).

Outside the circles of teachers are similar circles of students. Some students (especially ones who started in the school in the earliest grades) may be deeply, emotionally, and even to some degree intellectually committed to the school and its underlying philosophy (even though this philosophy has usually not been spelled out for them in so many words). [3] Then there are kids who might go either way — those who are moving toward acceptance of Waldorfish views, and, outside those, kids who are unlikely to do so. A very slim outer ring of students may consist of rebels (whose removal from the school may be imminent).

Outside the circles of students are similar circles of parents. As a rule, many parents know less about Anthroposophy than students do (even though the students' "knowledge" may be largely unconscious), simply because the parents have not undergone the conditioning their kids undergo within the school. But here the overall scheme, circles within circles, may break down. Again, I'll have to oversimplify what can be an extremely complex series of relationships. Some parents may be devoted Anthroposophists who sent their kids to Waldorf precisely because they want an Anthroposophical education for them. Some of these may double as faculty members or staff, and some may be enthusiastic volunteers, helping with various school activities. In the ring outside these, other parents may be deeply committed to the school at an emotional level without knowing much about the spiritualism behind the school —  and again some of these may be faculty, staff, or volunteers. In many schools, the largest group of parents may consist of people who like the school just fine but have neither knowledge of Anthroposophy nor any deep commitment to the school — many of these may have chosen Waldorf not for what it is but for what it is not, e.g., it is not a huge, chaotic public school. Parents in the outer ring(s) may be more or less completely in the dark as to the real objectives of Waldorf education. There is usually no outermost ring or parents, that is rebels — such parents usually take their kids out of the school ASAP and disappear from view. (Cases where the rebels stick around, however, do sometimes occur, and these cases can become extremely messy.)

Figuring out where to place the staff in this schema is tricky. Some staff may double as faculty members, some may be parents, and some may be both. Some of the staff may know, to one degree or another, what Waldorf is all about, and some may be entirely uninformed (these may be people who took a job at Waldorf just because they were looking for work, and they may have been hired only because the school could not fill particular positions from within the more faithful circles). My old Waldorf found a perfect solution for some support staff positions: Most of the janitors, for instance, spoke no English, so they couldn't know much about the school, which meant they could not carry much information about the school to the outside world.

— Roger Rawlings

◊◊◊◊

ENDNOTES

[1] After writing this essay, I returned to the quotation on p. 115 in order to answer a series of questions posed on the waldorf-critics discussion site (the question is at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/message/11008 and my answer is at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/message/11010 .) I will repeat my answer here, although it goes over some of the ground we have already covered.

—- In waldorf-critics@yahoogroups.com, maura kwaten <maurakwaten@...> wrote:

> [W]hy isn't the [Waldorf] curriculum flexible?

Anthroposophists tend to view Steiner as a sort of Moses. Moses came down from the mountain with the Ten Commandments chiseled in stone. Anthroposophists think Steiner passed along similarly eternal, unquestionable spiritual guidance. (Steiner left open the possibility that future clairvoyants would see even more deeply into spiritual matters than he did, so Anthroposophists have a little leeway, they can attempt to make their own spiritual "discoveries." But only in this sense do they consider Steiner's teachings at all questionable.)

> Is the driving force to push Anthroposophy rather than educate well?

Bingo. The point of Waldorf schooling is spiritual training, not education per se. Anthroposophy is meant to be the salvation of humanity. Waldorf schools are supposed to share this goal and work out of it — i.e., out of a grounding in Anthroposophy:

“The task of Anthroposophy is not simply to replace a false view of the world with a correct one. That is a purely theoretical requirement. The nature of Anthroposophy is to strive not only toward another idea, but toward other deeds, namely, to tear the spirit and soul from the physical body [i.e., free humanity from mere material existence — ultimately, to make humans entirely spiritual beings]. The task is to raise the spirit-soul into the realm of the spiritual, so that the human being is no longer a thinking and feeling automaton [materialists, such as people who disagree with Steiner, are mere flesh-and-bone robots, automatons] ... [H]uman beings are in danger of losing their spirit-soul. What exists today in the physical [realm] as an impression of the spirit-soul, exists because so many people think that way, because the spirit-soul is asleep [i.e., the impression of the spirit-soul in the wide world today is warped, because it comes from people who think like automatons — people who are spiritually comatose]. The human being is thus in danger of drifting into the Ahrimanic world [the realm ruled by a demonic enemy of human evolution], in which case the spirit-soul will evaporate into the cosmos. We live in a time when people face the danger of losing their souls to materialistic impulses. This is a very serious matter. We now stand confronted with that fact. That fact is actually the secret that will become increasingly apparent, and out of which we [Waldorf teachers] can act fruitfully. Such things as the pedagogy of the Waldorf School can arise from a recognition that humanity must turn toward spiritual activity, and not simply from a change in theory. We should work out of that spirit.” [FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER, p. 115.]

In sum, Waldorf teachers try to turn the students away from the real world and toward "spiritual activity," which for them means Anthroposophy. Steiner's followers "do" Anthroposophy, and the spiritual activities they "do" are the ones Steiner prescribed. And this is what they want the children to learn to do.

> Is the curriculum that Steiner invented completely linked to Anthroposophy so that by not teaching about ancient India and Egypt in a certain way at a certain time would mean not reaching the child's soul in a specific way ?

Yes. Steiner said that children repeat (or "recapitulate") in their own lives the evolution humanity as a whole has gone through. Thus, certain things are taught in each grade because the children at that age are at a certain stage of human evolutionary development. Changing the curriculum of any grade would be wrong because it would mean teaching kids stuff at the wrong age. So the Steiner curriculum is set in stone because human evolution has occurred as Steiner (and, essentially, only Steiner) has described it.

Here's a thumbnail description (from a guy who happened to be one of my teachers, long ago): “There’s a proper time and method for particular subjects to be taught. The child recapitulates the cultural epochs of humankind ... Above all, human beings are spiritual as well as physical beings.” [TAMARACK TALK, tamarackwaldorf.org] Cultural epochs are the phases of our recent evolution. (This quote seems to have disappeared from the Tamarack site after I began publicizing and analyzing it.)

As you can see, the Waldorf approach to *everything* is rooted in Anthroposophy, and the goals of the teachers are Anthroposophical goals (although the schools need to disguise this fact to save themselves from attack):  “[W]e have to remember that an institution like the Independent Waldorf School with its anthroposophical character, has goals that, of course, coincide with anthroposophical desires. At the moment, though, if that connection were made official, people would break the Waldorf School’s neck.” [FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER, p. 705.]

[2] Many festivals are celebrated at Waldorf schools. They are attractive events, with students often wearing costumes associated with various historical periods. But there is more to Waldorf festivals than meets the eye. The festivals often have religious/Anthroposophic meaning — see Rudolf Steiner, THE FESTIVALS AND THEIR MEANING (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1998). Generally, these events reflect heretical semi-Christian beliefs, often pagan at root and pointing toward Steiner's conception of future human evolution. Steiner's animistic doctrine — that the Earth and indeed the entire cosmos are living, breathing entities — is also often present. “In the celebration of festivals man and nature can come together in a higher nature, a higher humanity. Individuals can come together, united in a common striving for the truly, the universally human. Through living with the festivals and seasons we can learn to sense the pulse and breath of the cosmos.” [Philip Wharton, "Festivals, Seeds of Renewal," in WALDORF EDUCATION: A Family Guide (Michaelmas Press, 1995), edited by Pamela Johnson Fenner and Karen L. Rivers, p. 144.] Some of these ideas may seem superficially attractive, but they run contrary to orthodox religious teachings, and they have no basis in science. They are Anthroposophical doctrines; the festivals are Anthroposophical celebrations.

At some Waldorf schools, festivals are also used as a sort of window dressing — they impress many parents, some of whom may be enlisted to help planning and staging the events; and they may also serve as recruitment tools, attracting new families to the schools. Debra Snell adds this note to her Afterword, above: "Festivals/celebrations are huge events. Parents work very hard, under close supervision of the faculty, of course. No detail is too small and it took many hands to pull off events where cameras or video taping was forbidden. Parents were encouraged to bring other potential families to these events. Even the public-funded Waldorf schools here celebrate festivals with parents and other family members. Michaelmas, Advent Spiral, May Faire, St Martin, etc."

[3] At least one Waldorf school has set up a "College of Students" for especially "worthy" students, with deeply troubling results: "While not accredited to teach years 11 and 12, the school regularly invites its more promising students - the 'culturally worthy' - to stay on as 'colleagues' ... Called the College of Students, the practice has led to an unusual level of fraternisation between students and teachers. In 2006 a female teacher was dismissed, allegedly for inappropriate contact with two male year 12 students. That same year, a male teacher resigned, reportedly after a physical altercation with a student." [Tim Elliott, "No Class Act", BRISBANE TIMES.COM.AU, July 11, 2009. http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/national/no-class-act-20090710-dg2v.html?page=-1]