Rudolf Steiner in the Waldorf School
GA 298
25 May 1923, Stuttgart
Address at the third official members’ meeting of the Independent Waldorf School Association
Ladies and gentlemen, dear friends! It is incumbent upon me to open this third official members’ meeting of this association for an independent school system, the Waldorf School Association. It gives me great satisfaction to be able to welcome you warmly in the name of the Board, and I would also like to express my pleasure in the fact that you intend to discuss with us the future fate of the Waldorf School Association. Before we embark on today’s official agenda, please allow me to preface the report from the Board with some remarks on the affairs of the Waldorf School and on the course of the Waldorf School movement as such, to the extent that you are involved in this process.
Just a short time ago, an extremely gratifying pedagogical and artistic conference1In Stuttgart, April 25-29, 1923. See Rudolf Steiner’s Pädagogik und Kunst, Pädagogik und Moral [Pedagogy and Art; Pedagogy and Morality], lectures and speeches, Dornach, 1978. took place, at which the aspirations of the Waldorf School movement (actually, of any educational movement that does justice to the demands of the present and the near future) were graphically presented to an audience that probably included all of you as well as many other interested parties. For the moment, therefore, in speaking of the current status of the Waldorf School movement, it is only necessary to point to what came to light at this pedagogical-artistic conference.
However, I would like to still allow myself the luxury of emphasizing a few things that were important for the basic tone of this gathering. We held this last conference at a time when, as I was able to make you aware, the will of the Waldorf School movement had been able to prove itself and demonstrate its spread, as was apparent from the fact that I myself had been invited to speak on the nature of this movement on the occasion of the Shakespeare festival in Stratford in 1922. As a result of this, the Waldorf School movement became known in England, and this in turn resulted in an invitation to hold the vacation lecture series in Oxford. This put me in a position to speak at some length in England on what the Waldorf School is actually trying to accomplish. These Oxford lectures then resulted in the founding of an English school association that will focus for the time being on transforming the Kings Langley School into a Waldorf School of sorts. It will also work to disseminate the idea of the Waldorf School in England. This demonstrates, however, that ideals and impulses that are inherent in the Waldorf School movement engage current interests in a very intense way. And here, too, the fact that a number of teachers from England visited the Waldorf School over a longer period of time at the beginning of this year shows how strongly this interest has taken hold in England in particular.
A further consequence of the spread of the Waldorf School idea was the course that I held in Dornach just a short time ago for a number of Swiss teachers and educators who organized it.2April 15-22, 1923. See Die pädagogische Praxis vom Gesichtspunkte geisteswissenschaftlicher Menschenerkenntnis [Pedagogical Practice from the Perspective of Spiritual Scientific Knowledge of the Human Being], eight lectures given in Dornach in 1923, GA 306, Dornach 1975. The Child’s Changing Consciousness and Waldorf Education, Anthroposophic Press, Hudson, NY, 1996. In addition to the Swiss teachers, however, seventeen Czech teachers took part in the course. At this course in particular, it was evident that in the hearts of people involved in education, it is a matter of course that something such as what is being attempted by our school movement needs to come about. In everything you heard at this course in Dornach, you could really recognize the educational professionals’ deep longing for something to enter the art of education that would aim very strongly at both spiritualizing the art of education and making it truly practical.
It is also very understandable that a quite specific feeling should have come up and been expressed by the participants in this last educational course in Switzerland. Those who experience strongly what such a course attempts to accomplish come away with a feeling of consternation; they feel overwhelmed. Now, I am only recounting what was expressed to me at the course in Dornach: Someone who was stating the view of many of the attendees said that the serious-minded among them were overwhelmed to see how little they were in a position to cope in their own souls with all the pedagogically necessary impulses that assailed them over a period of just a few days.
You can see that I then had to respond to this objection, which seemed totally justified to me. A thought such as this expresses what is present in many people today. Many people of the present day know perfectly well that some incisive intervention must take place if our system of education is to be able to meet the social demands placed on it and to extricate itself from the circumstances into which it has fallen. We really do not often take stock of how necessary an incisive reform of our educational impulses is. But if we think about it, we find that in their heart of hearts, parents and teachers are half-consciously or fully consciously convinced of the need for such incisive impulses to enter the system of education. Then people hear what we have to say. In fact, at the artistic and pedagogical conference, many people reached the point of saying, in effect, “All that needs to be done? How are we going to manage that? We get such a wealth of demands dumped on us in the course of just a few days;”—excuse me for expressing it like this, but this is a feeling I have often heard—“we come here with the best of intentions and leave feeling like a poodle that has been drenched with ideals instead of water. Our first impulse is to shake off what has been dumped on us.”
As I said, this was actually expressed frequently at the last conference in Dornach. My response was, “Yes, certainly I can see that, but you need to keep in mind that people have had a long time to get used to the educational practices that are prevalent everywhere in schools today. They grew up with them and are comfortable with them. Because people always have only a few days available to devote to progressive impulses, everything we have to say to them has to be said in a few days. Under these circumstances, it is totally understandable that people feel dumped on. However, if it is possible for the suggestions that will continue to be made to arouse interest in these issues among ever broader circles, then we will also eventually be in a position to present what we have to say at a slower place. Then people would not need to feel overwhelmed.”
This is proof that very intensive work is needed so that it will eventually be possible for us to actually set the pace that most people need, it seems, in order to grasp our ideas, rather than burdening people with them in the twinkling of an eye, as it were. I must point out that if this insight is taken as a starting point, then people would give us the opportunity to express ourselves more exactly and more slowly. So everything depends on a real interest in this issue of ours developing in ever broader circles. As things stand at the moment, the situation is very strange.
You know, we must keep in mind the inner process the Waldorf School movement has gone through in the four years of its existence. Naturally, the facts need to be weighed up in the right way. We now have around seven hundred students in the Waldorf School and nearly forty teachers. Years ago we started with fewer teachers and not even two hundred fifty students. The meaning of these two numbers—two hundred or two hundred fifty students then, and seven hundred now—is something extremely characteristic of the Waldorf School movement. They indicate not only a pedagogical and methodological, but also a complete cultural and social transformation of the Waldorf School movement, a real transformation. Depending on your taste, you can say either that it has found its feet or that it has been stood on its head; it does not matter to me. What I mean is the following: When the Waldorf School was founded, the thought among our friends was a social one. The intention was to found a comprehensive school of some sort, in accordance with the social impulses that prevailed at that time and that were surfacing in people’s social thinking and feeling in 1919. The idea of the Waldorf School was conceived on the basis of social circumstances. And now neither you nor Herr Molt will take it badly if I put forth a risky hypothesis—which is of course to be taken with the famous grain of salt—of how this transformation has taken place. I will try to express it clearly.
Assume for a moment that Herr Molt had not been an anthroposophist, but simply one of the many philanthropic factory owners of that time. This was not the case, but we may suppose that it was. On the basis of the social circumstances of the times, he would still have conceived the idea to found a school, but the Waldorf School as it is today would surely not have come about. The Waldorf School as it is today came about simply because it was born out of anthroposophy—that is, out of the circumstance that someone who was not only a philanthropic factory owner, but also Herr Molt the anthroposophist, conceived the idea and turned to anthroposophy for help with the school’s instructional methodology.
These are the cultural, historical and social factors. An idea characteristic of the times was realized with the help of anthroposophy, which was to provide the instructional methodology.
Now you see, over the course of time a transformation has taken place, and now a large percentage of the students we have today are here because of the pedagogy and methods that are cultivated in the Waldorf School. That the idea of the Waldorf School has expanded within the school itself is due to this pedagogy and these methods, so the original idea has been turned inside out. The original idea attracted the pedagogy and methodology that is used here. However, the Waldorf School is what it is today—and rightly so—because of this pedagogy and methodology. They were the main reason why parents who brought their children to us later on sought out the Waldorf School. Thus, in the course of these four years, an important development has taken place: Within the Waldorf School, a pedagogy and methodology born out of anthroposophy have come into their own.
And this pedagogy and methodology were what interested the people in England, what called forth the course in Dornach and so on. There is a specific pedagogical idea that is being realized in the Waldorf School, and that is what I have recently had to emphasize ever more strongly. The seven hundred students and the general expansion of the Waldorf School are due to the pedagogy and methodology that are practiced in the school. This is also demonstrated by frequent attempts to found schools on the example of the Waldorf School.
For me, naturally, what has become a reality here was the important thing from the very beginning. From the very beginning I conceived of the task of the Waldorf School as a purely pedagogical and methodological one, and in fact it has become apparent over time that wherever people were interested in the idea of the Waldorf School, this was because of its pedagogy and methodology.
Now there was a decisive interest in these various courses on the part of teachers and educators, but I must say that it has also been demonstrated in the longings of the parents. You know, the day before yesterday a number of parents from Berlin approached me again and told me that they had started small school groups in which they had offered instruction and tried to apply Waldorf School principles, but that now the government had come and would no longer allow it, so they had to send their children to the public schools. They asked whether it would not perhaps be possible to create a means of informing people by setting up a branch of the Waldorf School in Berlin. They thought that since it is still possible here, where things are administered more liberally, to not have the government intervening in the Waldorf School, it might also be possible in Berlin if a branch Waldorf School were opened.
I told them that it would not work, and that we needed to realize from this example that carrying out the idea of the Waldorf School is not possible without outreach into the broadest possible circles on behalf of the idea, which recognizes what thousands and thousands of people, or even more than that, are unconsciously wanting. These people basically want the same thing that is wanted here and simply are afraid to admit that they want it. And I still maintain that I did the right thing in issuing the challenge to found the World School Association once the model was there. I also still maintain that our task is not to get involved in all kinds of other experiments that pop up all over the place like quackery in the field of medicine, if I might put it like that—not real quackery, of course, but what is branded as quackery—but that it is more important to spread a real understanding of Waldorf education ever further and further. It must be spread ever further, and then the other thing will happen too.
You see, the Waldorf School is actually a challenge inherent in the evolution of education and in the relationship of educational evolution to the great ideas of culture and society. Perhaps it will be of interest to you if I draw your attention to how a turn-about in human feeling has occurred over a longer period of time, and how our thoughts have not caught up with it.
In March, 1792, there was an imperial chancellor in Central Europe for whom the task of educating the populace was merely a matter to be summarized as follows: “It is incumbent upon governments as a matter of course to disseminate the riches of the spirit, and in this just as in the enjoyment of man’s other social affairs it is up to governments to form a national policing agency of a sort.” This was spoken out of the feeling of concern for educational matters that was current at the end of the eighteenth century, when it was thought that the people had to receive directives from above with regard to the enjoyment of all social and human concerns, and especially with regard to administering pedagogical and methodological affairs.
And in the nineteenth century there was a person named Fröbel3Friedrich Fröbel, 1782-1852. who said already as a young man of twenty-three, “All experiments in the field of pedagogy, including those of Pestalozzi, seem to me to be something crude and merely empirical. It would be necessary to arrive at exact principles of instruction, just as natural science has exact principles.” That was what Frobel said.
These two things, the pronouncement of the imperial chancellor Rottenhahn in 1792 and the passage from the letter by young Fröbel to his friend Krause, permit us an approximate characterization of what was alive at that time. The opinion prevalent at that time, which is still prevalent and must now be overcome, was that there was no need for further ideas on issues such as education and its methods; it was a matter of course to leave such things to the state. And the other idea was the sovereignty of the natural sciences: Whoever studied them and took them as their point of departure would necessarily discover the appropriate pedagogy.
Within both the current of subordination to the state and the current of science, it has become evident that we have reached a dead end in the field of education. Of course people had the best intentions in saying that it was necessary to establish a form of state policing in the field of pedagogy. Of course they had the best in mind, but that did not prevent the development of all the things that people now feel must change.
Educators are sighing to see things change; they say that they do not know how they ought to be dealing with human beings, that they believed that the art of dealing with human beings could derive from a—I cannot call it a mishmash, since that is not how the adherents of exact science would talk, so let us call it a synthesis simply to use a different word—a synthesis of anthropology, psychology, and ethnology. More recently, psychiatry is also being included. Time has shown that what Frobel wanted is not acceptable to a deeper feeling for education. In all the people attending the courses, in the wish for a branch Waldorf School in Berlin, it was evident that people are certain that something has to happen, but when Waldorf school people talk to them about things, they are like poodles drenched with the water of ideals. It cannot work its way into their heads in a few days; nevertheless, they know that something has to happen.
We must keep clearly in mind that our efforts correspond to the desires of thousands and thousands of people, and that we must do everything we can to make the idea of the Waldorf School and all its impulses become ever more popular, so that people begin to see it as a challenge of our times. All this needs is to awaken in many people the courage to recognize and act on what they have long experienced in their heart of hearts in an indefinite way. It has still been my hope recently that this would flow into the hearts of the friends of the Waldorf School ideal who come to gatherings such as this one, because this is the most important thing we need—to have the interest spread, to have the efforts to popularize the Waldorf School spread. This is what we need.
And you know, something similar is necessary with regard to our method’s inner progress. When we founded the Waldorf School four years ago, we had eight grades. It was clearly apparent to us that we had to work out of a striving that had remained unconscious to Fröbel and his ilk, that we had to create our curricula and educational goals on the basis of a true understanding of the human being, which can only grow out of the fertile ground of anthroposophy. Then we would have a universally human school, not a school based on a particular philosophy or denomination, but a truly universally human school.
The ideal that had been hovering over people for centuries was clear to us then. Since we had to take other existing circumstances into account, we had to accept compromises, but only to a certain extent: The first three school years would have to be allowed to run their course in a way that derived its standards for instructional goals and curricula only from the teachings of human nature itself. Upon completion of grade six (at age twelve) and grade eight (at age fourteen) we would try to have the children at a point where they would be able to transfer to other schools. We wanted to create the possibility of making the Waldorf School ideal a reality for as long as possible, on the one hand, and yet still offer the children the possibility to transfer.
This is something that is actually easier to carry out with regard to the eight primary grades than it is for the expansion of the school into grades nine through twelve, which has also become necessary. To the primary school education we offer, we need to add college-preparatory and vocational high school education. People are now saying that we need to get these young ladies and gentlemen to the point where they can pass the Abiturand enter a college or university. (Although the good will is there among certain individuals to open an institution of higher learning ourselves, this is a huge illusion for the time being, and the things we cultivate must always rest on real and solid ground.)
Naturally, there are inherent difficulties in our needing to prepare the young ladies and gentlemen who graduate from this school to take the Abiturso that they will be able to attend colleges that will grant them the degrees they need in what is now called “real life.” It immediately becomes apparent that in the upper grades, it is much more difficult to cope with both the challenge of the Waldorf School ideal of deriving educational goals and curricula from human nature itself, on the one hand, and the coincidental curricula that include nothing of what human nature demands, on the other.
When these young adults are fourteen, fifteen, or sixteen years old, we would really need to be introducing them to real practical life, which means that they should understand something of what happens in real practical life. But instead of that, along comes the teacher of Greek and Latin, reproaching us for trying to incorporate real demands based on understanding the human being, for including lessons in chemical and technological subjects, in weaving and spinning—in short, in things people should know about in real life. Along comes the Latin teacher, complaining of not having enough time to prepare people for the Abitur.
This is how these unsolvable conflicts arise. On the one hand, we are trying to make the idea of the Waldorf School a reality in the best and purest way possible, and on the other hand we have to break this up with all kinds of compromises that are imposed by the fact that we are not allowed to tear the young people away from so-called real life, if you will excuse the expression. If we help them find their place in life as they should, they are rejected by so-called real life and become bohemians. (I used that word recently in the course in Switzerland and immediately had to apologize because some of the participants were from Bohemia.) The fact is, however, that we must come to the fundamental realization that we are not striving for bohemianism as an ideal, but for a really practical life, for a way of teaching and raising children that gives people a firm footing in real life. But before we can do this, an understanding of what human nature really encompasses and demands must become as widespread as possible.
Thus, we will not popularize the idea of the Waldorf School without first deciding to make understandable what I have pointed out today. In broader circles we will not popularize the idea of the Waldorf School if we speak only of abstract things, of having the children learn comfortably and through play and so on. If we present the same trivial thoughts that others also present, if we do not go into the concrete things that really lie dormant in people’s hearts, we will not succeed in popularizing the idea of the Waldorf School.
Today we are faced with the difficult task of having to do something so that in future we are not always living from hand to mouth with regard to the Waldorf School’s finances. Given the existing state of the finances, we never know whether we will be able to sustain the school for three or four months into the future; we are forced to economize with no end in sight. Of course it is true that the idea of the Waldorf School gives us such a firm footing that we can also summon the enthusiasm to go on into the unknown. On the other hand, however, responsibilities do arise. Actually, hiring each new teacher is such a responsibility that it really needs to be said for once that financing the Waldorf School, which is the point of departure of the Waldorf School movement as the first pedagogical example of how to raise and educate children according to this method, would have to rest on foundations that guarantee a certain measure of stability.
That is what I wanted to add as the necessary consequence of what I said before, so to speak. This august body would need to apply every means available to come to decisions that will make it possible to stabilize the financing of the Waldorf School at least to the extent that we know we will be able to carry the responsibility for it, and that it will never get to the point where the whole thing falls apart in a few months. We see the factors involved in taking our cause to the world in a financial sense. If this would happen, the outer framework would be there too.
Ladies and gentlemen, dear friends, I can assure you that the things we experience in courses such as the ones I gave at Oxford and in Switzerland, the things we experience as the longings of teachers and parents, show that the Waldorf School movement is a challenge that is deeply embedded in the evolution of our civilization. This is proved in practical terms today by what has gone before. On the other hand, our ways of working in the Waldorf School, the fact that there is actually something present in the college of teachers, gives evidence of something from which the entire Waldorf School impulse radiates. It demonstrates how a strong will is making itself felt in the world out of the purest possible enthusiasm, as may have become evident to you most clearly during the recent artistic and pedagogical conference. In these two aspects, I might say, the school stands on firm foundations. Please excuse me for asking you to consider ways in which these two pillars which I have particularly tried to characterize, the first pillar of the challenge of the times coming from parents and teachers and the second pillar of the sacred, expert and fully appropriate enthusiasm that lives in the Waldorf School, can be joined by the third pillar of stabilizing the school’s financial foundations.
It is sad to have to speak of this. However, the fact of the matter is that doing anything at the present time takes money, lots of money. We can be certain that if we find ways to awaken understanding for the impulse of the Waldorf School, we will also arrive at the necessary financial means. This is why we must find the way from the first part of what I presented to what I have so presumptuously—there is no other word for it in this case—added to it by way of conclusion.
Points of business followed.
Ansprache An Der Dritten Ordentlichen Mitgliederversammlung Des Vereins «Freie Waldorfschule»
Meine sehr verehrten Anwesenden, liebe Freunde! Es obliegt mir, die dritte ordentliche Mitgliederversammlung des Vereins für ein freies Schulwesen, des Waldorfschulvereins, hiermit zu eröffnen. Es ist mir eine tiefe Befriedigung, Sie bei dieser Gelegenheit im Namen des Vorstandes auf das herzlichste begrüßen zu können, und ich drücke Ihnen auch meine Freude darüber aus, daß Sie mit uns zusammen die weiteren Schicksale des Waldorfschulvereins beraten wollen. Bevor wir in die offizielle Tagesordnung eintreten, gestatten Sie mir, daß ich gewissermaßen als eine Art Einleitung zu dem Berichte des Gesamtvorstandes einiges voraussende über den Gang der Waldorfschul-Bewegung als solcher und über die Angelegenheiten der Waldorfschule, soweit Sie an diesem Gange beteiligt sind.
Nun liegt ja hinter uns vor ganz kurzer Zeit die so außerordentlich erfreulich verlaufene pädagogisch-künstlerische Tagung, in der ja dasjenige, was erstrebt wird mit der Waldorfschul-Bewegung, und was erstrebt werden kann überhaupt mit einer pädagogischen Bewegung, die den Anforderungen der Gegenwart und der nächsten Zukunft gerecht wird, in so anschaulicher Weise vor wahrscheinlich Sie alle und viele andere Interessenten hingetreten ist. Es braucht also zunächst, wenn über den augenblicklichen Stand der Waldorfschul-Bewegung gesprochen wird, eigentlich nur auf dasjenige hingewiesen zu werden, was bei dieser pädagogisch-künstlerischen Tagung eben zutage getreten ist.
Ich möchte mir aber doch gestatten, heute einiges vielleicht gerade als Grundton für diese Versammlung Wichtige noch zu betonen. Wir haben ja unsere letzte Versammlung hier gehabt in einem Zeitpunkte, in dem ich darauf aufmerksam machen durfte, wie das Wollen unserer Waldorfschul-Bewegung seine Bewährung und Verbreitung dadurch hat zeigen können, daß ja an mich selbst damals die Einladung herangegangen war, über das Wesen dieser Waldorfschul-Bewegung gelegentlich des Shakespeare-Festes in Stratford im Jahre 1922 zu sprechen. Und ich durfte dazumal darauf hinweisen, daß es ja ein Ergebnis des Umstandes war, daß man dazumal bekanntgeworden ist in England mit der Waldorfschul-Bewegung, und daß dann für jene Sommerzeit 1922 die Einladung für den Oxforder Ferienkurs erfolgte, durch welchen ich in die Lage versetzt worden bin, in ausführlicher Weise in England sprechen zu können über dasjenige, was die Waldorfschule eigentlich will. Und ein Ergebnis dieser Oxforder Vorträge war ja die Begründung eines englischen Schulvereins, der ins Auge faßt, zunächst die Kings LangleySchule umzuwandeln in eine Art Waldorfschule und überhaupt für die Ausbreitung des Waldorfschul-Gedankens in England zu wirken. Damit aber hat sich überhaupt gezeigt, daß die Ideen und die Impulse, welche in der Waldorfschul-Bewegung liegen, in ganz intensiver Weise das Interesse der Gegenwart in Anspruch nehmen. Und wiederum konnte man ja auch hier selber sehen, wie stark dieses Interesse gerade in England Platz gegriffen hat dadurch, daß eine Anzahl englischer Lehrer und Lehrerinnen eben die Waldorfschule durch längere Zeit hindurch besuchten im Beginne dieses Jahres.
Eine weitere Folge dann der Ausbreitung des Waldorfschul-Gedankens ist ja der Kursus, den ich erst vor ganz kurzer Zeit in Dornach selbst zu halten hatte vor einer Anzahl von schweizerischen Lehrern, Schulmännern, die den Kursus zunächst veranstaltet haben. An diesem Kursus haben aber teilgenommen außer den Schweizer Lehrern siebzehn tschechische Lehrer. Und es hat sich gerade bei diesem Kursus gezeigt, wie selbstverständlich es eigentlich den Herzen gerade pädagogischer Persönlichkeiten erscheint, daß so etwas sich vollzöge, wie es versucht wird mit unserer Schulbewegung. Man konnte bei alledem, was man hören konnte bei diesem in Dornach abgehaltenen Kursus, wirklich ersehen, wie eine tiefe Sehnsucht gerade bei den fachlichen Pädagogen vorhanden ist, irgend etwas in die pädagogische Kunst hineinzubekommen, was nach einer Vergeistigung auf der einen Seite und nach einem wirklichen Praktischwerden der pädagogischen Kunst auf der anderen Seite intensiv hinzielt.
Und es ist ja nun einmal sehr begreiflich, daß eine ganz bestimmte Empfindung, ein ganz bestimmtes Gefühl gerade von seiten pädagogischer Persönlichkeiten anläßlich dieses letzten schweizerischen Kursus zum Ausdruck gekommen ist. Das ist das, daß gerade eigentlich derjenige, dem tief am Herzen liegt, was durch einen solchen Kursus gewollt wird, daß der gerade in einer gewissen Weise bestürzt wird durch einen solchen Kursus. Ich erzähle nur, was zum Ausdruck gekommen ist: es sagte jemand anläßlich des Dornacher Kursus, der dazumal die Anschauung von vielen der Versammelten zum Ausdruck brachte, daß die Ernstgesinnten gerade bestürzt würden dadurch, daß sie sehen, wie wenig sie in der Lage sind, alles das, was im Verlaufe von wenigen Tagen an pädagogischen notwendigen Impulsen auf sie einstürmt, mit der eigenen Seele zu bewältigen.
Nun sehen Sie, ich war dann genötigt, auf diesen Einwand, der mir durchaus berechtigt erschien, auch zu antworten. Es drückt sich ja in einem solchen Gedanken sehr deutlich aus, was für viele Menschen der Gegenwart da ist. Viele Menschen der Gegenwart wissen ganz genau: Es muß etwas ganz Einschneidendes, Eingreifendes kommen, wenn unser Schulwesen seinen sozialen Anforderungen genügen und herauskommen soll aus den Zuständen, in die es einmal hineingeraten ist. Man gibt sich wirklich nicht sehr häufig Rechenschaft, wie notwendig ein einschneidendes Reformieren der Erziehungsimpulse ist. Aber wenn man nachdenkt, findet man bei Eltern, Lehrern überall im Grunde der Seele die halb oder ganz bewußte Überzeugung, daß solche einschneidende Impulse in das Unterrichtswesen hineinkommen müssen. Dann hören die Menschen dasjenige, was wir zu sagen haben, und es ist so, daß es bei der künstlerisch-pädagogischen Tagung vielen so gegangen ist, sie haben gesagt: Das alles soll nun getan werden? Wie kommen wir überhaupt zurecht damit? In ein paar Tagen ergießt sich eine solche Fülle von Forderungen über uns - ja, verzeihen Sie, daß ich es so ausdrücken muß, es ist das eine Empfindung, die ich oft gehört habe -, nun kommt man her in der besten Absicht, und geht fort wie ein mit Idealwasser ganz übergossener Pudel, der, ja - zunächst abschütteln möchte dasjenige, was sich über ihn ergossen hat.
Wie gesagt, es ist das tatäschlich gerade bei der letzten Dornacher Tagung vielfach zum Ausdruck gebracht worden. Und ich habe darauf erwidert: Ja, das ist durchaus einzusehen, aber es ist notwendig, dabei das Folgende zu bedenken. Für dasjenige, was man heute pädagogisch übt, was heute überall in den Schulen ausgeübt wird, gibt es lange Zeiten, in die sich die Menschen hineingewöhnen. Da kann man gemächlich hineinwachsen. -— Wir sind genötigt, weil die Leute uns nur immer die wenigen Tage zuwenden können, die sie für Fortschrittsimpulse zur Verfügung haben, das, was wir zu sagen haben den Leuten, immer in wenigen Tagen zu sagen. Es ist ganz begreiflich, daß sich da die Leute in dieser Weise übergossen fühlen. Aber wenn das eintreten könnte, was dennoch notwendig ist, daß immer weitere und weitere Kreise durch die Anregungen, die ja doch immer gegeben werden, immer weitere und weitere Kreise gewonnen würden, um Interesse zu schöpfen für dasjenige, worum es sich handelt, dann würden wir auch in die Lage kommen, die Dinge in langsamerem Tempo zu sagen, die wir zu sagen haben. Dann brauchten sich die Leute nicht übergossen fühlen.
Das ist ein Beweis dafür, daß in ganz intensiver Weise gearbeitet werden müßte, um uns die Möglichkeit zu bieten, eben nicht, ich möchte sagen, im Handumdrehen den Leuten lästig zu fallen mit unseren Ideen, sondern um tatsächlich das Tempo einhalten zu können, das für das Auffassen der Ideen den meisten notwendig erscheint. So daß ich darauf hinweisen muß: Wenn von dieser Einsicht ausgegangen wird, dann würde man uns Gelegenheit geben, daß wir uns irgendwie genauer aussprechen, langsamer aussprechen könnten. Es hängt also alles von dem ab, daß in immer weiteren und weiteren Kreisen ein wirkliches Interesse für unsere Sache entsteht. Denn es ist Ja einmal ganz merkwürdig, wie die Dinge eigentlich stehen.
Sehen Sie, man muß so den inneren Gang der Waldorfschul-Bewegung seit den vier Jahren, seit die Waldorfschul-Bewegung besteht, einmal ins Auge fassen. Die Tatsachen müssen ja natürlich in der richtigen Weise bewertet werden. Wir haben heute rund siebenhundert Schüler in der Waldorfschule und gegen vierzig Lehrer. Ja, wir sind ausgegangen vor Jahren von einem Status, der weniger Lehrer umfaßte und nicht zweihundertfünfzig Schüler. Nun, diese zwei Zahlen, die damalige, zweihundert oder zweihundertfünfzig Schüler, und die jetzige, siebenhundert Schüler, diese zwei Zahlen bedeuten aber innerlich etwas für die Waldorfschul-Bewegung außerordentlich Charakteristisches. Sehen Sie, sie bedeuten nämlich nicht pädagogisch-didaktisch, aber kulturell-sozial ein vollständiges Umstülpen der WaldorfschulBewegung, ein richtiges Umstülpen. Ein - ja, je nach dem Geschmack, den einer hat, kann man sagen: ein auf die Füße stellen oder ein auf den Kopf stellen; das ist mir gleichgültig. Ich meine nämlich das Folgende: Als die Waldorfschule begründet worden ist, war der Gedanke zunächst ein sozialer bei unseren Freunden. Eine Art Einheitsschule sollte begründet werden, eine Schule, die den damals herrschenden sozialen Impulsen, die 1919 ja an die Oberfläche des sozialen Denkens und sozialen Empfindens der Leute traten, entsprach. Eine solche Schule sollte begründet werden. Aus den sozialen Verhältnissen heraus war der Waldorfschul-Gedanke gedacht. Und es kann jetzt eine gewagte Hypothese sein, aber weder Herr Molt noch Sie nehmen es übel, wenn ich natürlich ist das mit dem bekannten grano salis zu nehmen -, wenn ich in einer Weise, wie man es eben klar zum Ausdruck bringen kann, sage, wie die Umstülpung sich vollzogen hat.
Nehmen Sie an, Herr Molt wäre damals nicht Anthroposoph gewesen, sondern - nicht wahr, da er es nicht gewesen ist, kann man das sagen -, sondern ein philanthropischer Fabrikdirektor, wie es viele in der damaligen Zeit gegeben hat, so würde der eben auch aus den sozialen Verhältnissen heraus einen solchen Gedanken der Begründung einer Schule gefaßt haben. Aber die Waldorfschule, wie sie heute ist, wäre sicher nicht entstanden. Die Waldorfschule, wie sie heute ist, ist lediglich dadurch entstanden, daß sie aus dem Anthroposophischen herausgeboren ist, also durch den Umstand, daß eben nicht nur ein philanthropischer Fabrikant, sondern Herr Emil Molt, der Anthroposoph, den Gedanken gefaßt hat, und daß er die Anthroposophie für die Methodik und Didaktik zu Hilfe gerufen hat.
So, nun haben wir dasjenige, was wir eigentlich als das Kulturhistorisch-Soziale anführen müssen. Wir haben dieses, daß ein Zeitgedanke verwirklicht worden ist mit Hilfe der Anthroposophie, die die Methodik und die Didaktik hergeben sollte.
Nun sehen Sie, im Laufe der Zeit hat sich eben das als Umstülpung vollzogen, daß die große Anzahl von Schülern, die wir heute haben, also diese Ausbreitung des Waldorfschul-Gedankens in der Waldorfschule selber, daß sich diese Ausbreitung doch vollzogen hat lediglich wegen der Pädagogik und Didaktik, die in der Waldorfschule gepflegt wird. So daß also die ursprüngliche Idee umgestülpt ist. Die ursprüngliche Idee zog die hier gepflegte Pädagogik und Didaktik heran. Aber die Waldorfschule ist — wie es auch richtig gewesen ist - dasjenige, was sie geworden ist, durch die Pädagogik und Didaktik geworden. Und heute suchen die Eltern, die ihre Kinder in späteren Zeiten eben hereingebracht haben, die Waldorfschule im wesentlichen eben wegen dieser Pädagogik und Didaktik auf. So daß also im Laufe dieser vier Jahre sich diese wichtige Entwickelung vollzogen hat, daß sich innerhalb der Waldorfschule die aus Anthroposophie herausgeborene Pädagogik und Didaktik zur Geltung gebracht hat.
Und diese Pädagogik und Didaktik war es nun, die in England interessiert hat, die den Kursus in Dornach hervorgerufen hat und so weiter. Es ist ein spezifisch pädagogischer Gedanke, der sich durch die Waldorfschule realisiert, und das ist auch dasjenige, was ich im Laufe der letzten Zeit immer mehr und mehr betonen mußte. Also die siebenhundert Schüler und überhaupt die Vergrößerung der Waldorfschule hat die in der Waldorfschule gepflegte Pädagogik und Didaktik gebracht. Und Bestrebungen, die heute oftmals zutage treten, Schulen zu begründen nach dem Muster der Waldorfschule, die beweisen das auch.
Sehen Sie, für mich war natürlich das, was sich da realisiert hat, von Anfang an das Gültige. Ich habe vom Anfange an die Aufgabe der Waldorfschule so gefaßt, daß ich sie als eine rein pädagogisch-didaktische angesehen habe, und im Laufe der Zeit hat sich auch durchaus herausgestellt, daß überall, wo man sich interessierte für den Waldorfschul-Gedanken, es war wegen dieser Pädagogik und Didaktik.
Nun ist das Interesse durch die verschiedenen Kurse ganz entschieden bei Lehrern, bei Pädagogen bewiesen, aber ich möchte sagen, es ist auch bewiesen in den Sehnsuchten der Eltern. Sehen Sie, vorgestern kamen gleich wieder eine Anzahl von Eltern in Berlin zu mir und sagten mir: Ja, wie machen wir das, jetzt haben wir kleine Schulgruppen gebildet, Unterricht gegeben, und versuchen dabei, die Waldorfschul-Prinzipien anzuwenden. Aber nun kommt die Regierung und läßt das nicht zu; wir müssen nun unsere Kinder in die Grundschule hineingeben. Könnte man nicht vielleicht dadurch ein Auskunftsmittel schaffen, daß hier eine Filiale der Waldorfschule gegründet würde? - Die Leute dachten, weil in der Waldorfschule das noch immer geht, daß die Regierung nicht kommt, daß da noch liberalere Handhabung vorhanden ist, so ginge es auch vielleicht in Berlin, wenn man eine Filiale der Waldorfschule errichtete.
Ich sagte: Das geht natürlich nicht, und man muß an diesem Beispiel sehen, daß überhaupt die Durchführung des Waldorfschul-Gedankens nicht möglich ist ohne ein im weitesten Kreise Umsichgreifen des Gedankens, ein Anerkennen desjenigen, was eigentlich im Grunde genommen Tausende und aber Tausende, ja viel mehr als Tausende und aber Tausende unbewußt wollen. Die Leute wollen ja im Grunde genommen dasjenige, was hier gewollt wird, und getrauen es sich nur nicht zu gestehen, daß sie es wollen. Und ich halte noch immer fest, daß es richtig war, daß ich die Forderung nach dem Weltschulverein gestellt habe, nachdem ein Muster da ist; daß es nicht die Aufgabe ist, alle möglichen anderen Versuche zu machen, die eigentlich überall so auftauchen wie, ich möchte sagen, auf dem Gebiete der Medizin die Kurpfuscherei — natürlich nicht die wirkliche Kurpfuscherei, sondern die als Kurpfuscherei gestempelte Kurpfuscherei; daß es wichtiger ist, als diese Sache zu machen, immer weiter und weiter das Verständnis, das wirkliche reale Verständnis für die Waldorfschul-Pädagogik zu verbreiten. Immer weiter und weiter muß es verbreitet werden. Dann wird das andere schon kommen.
Denn sehen Sie, in der pädagogischen Entwickelung selber und in dem Verhältnis der pädagogischen Entwickelung zu den großen Kultur- und sozialen Gedanken liegt eigentlich die Forderung der Waldorfschule. Sehen Sie, vielleicht erscheint es Ihnen doch von einigem Interesse, wenn ich Sie so auf den Umschwung der menschlichen Empfindungen, denen die Gedanken noch nicht gefolgt sind, über einen längeren Zeitraum hin aufmerksam mache.
Im März 1792 gab es einen Reichskanzler in Mitteleuropa, der faßte die Aufgabe des Volkspädagogischen nur in die folgenden Worte zusammen: «Es obliegt den Regierungen selbstverständlich die Ausbreitung der Reichtümer des Geistes, und es haben die Regierungen für diese Ausbreitung der Reichtümer des Geistes ebenso wie für den Genuß der anderen Gesellschaftsangelegenheiten der Menschen eine Art Staatspolizei zu bilden.» Das war gesprochen aus einem um die pädagogischen Angelegenheiten besorgten Menschengemüte aus der Zeit vom Ende des 18. Jahrhunderts; in der Zeit gesprochen, wo man eben dachte: Die Menschen müssen von oben herunter Direktiven bekommen für allen Genuß von gesellschaftlichen, sozialen, menschlichen Angelegenheiten, vor allen Dingen Direktiven für die Führung des Pädagogisch-Didaktischen.
Und im 19. Jahrhundert gab es einen jungen Mann, Fröbel, der sagte schon als dreiundzwanzigjähriger junger Mensch: «Mir erscheinen eigentlich alle Versuche auf pädagogischem Gebiete, selbst der Pestalozzische nicht ausgenommen» - so sagte Fröbel -, «als etwas Rohes und bloß Empirisches. Denn notwendig wäre, daß man zu exakten Prinzipien des Unterrichtens komme, wie die Naturwissenschaft exakte Prinzipien hat.» Das sagte Fröbel.
Mit diesen zwei Dingen, mit dem Ausspruch des Reichskanzlers Rottenhahn 1792 und mit der Briefstelle des jungen Fröbel aus einem Schreiben, das er an seinen Freund Krause gerichtet hat, kann man ungefähr das charakterisieren, was damals lebte, und was heute überwunden werden muß. Denn es lebte die Meinung - und sie lebt vielfach noch und muß überwunden werden -, es lebte die Meinung: Ja, über solche Angelegenheiten, wie es die pädagogisch-didaktischen sind, macht man sich nicht weiter Ideen; das ist selbstverständlich, daß man das dem Staate überläßt. Und die andere Idee ist diese: Die Naturwissenschaften sind souverän. Wer sie studiert, wer von ihnen ausgeht, muß auch die richtige Pädagogik finden.
Innerhalb beider Strömungen, innerhalb der bevormundenden und innerhalb der naturwissenschaftlichen Strömung hat sich eben gerade auf pädagogischem Gebiete gezeigt, daß man in eine Sackgasse hineingeraten ist. Man wollte selbstverständlich das Allerallerbeste, als man sagte, es sei auch im pädagogischen Gebiet eine Art Staatspolizei zu begründen; man wollte selbstverständlich das Allerbeste, aber es ist eben alles dasjenige entstanden, wovon die Leute empfinden, daß es anders werden muß.
Die Pädagogen seufzen danach: Wir wissen eigentlich nicht, wie wir Menschen behandeln sollen; wir haben geglaubt, durch einen - wie soll ich sagen, Kuddelmuddel darf ich ja nicht sagen, es hätten auch die Anhänger der exakten Naturwissenschaft nicht so gesagt -, sagen wir, eine Synthese — damit man ein anderes Wort gebraucht -, durch eine Synthese von Anthropologie, Psychologie, Völkerkunde, neuerdings sagt man sogar Psychiatrie, müsse man dasjenige, was Menschenbehandlungskunst ist, zusammenbringen. Die Zeit hat gezeigt, daß so etwas nicht geht, wie Fröbel es wollte aus einem tiefen pädagogischen Sinn heraus. Und heute stehen die Leute so da- das hat sich bei all den Leuten gezeigt, die bei den Kursen waren, das zeigt sich aus einem solchen Wunsch wie dem nach einer Filiale der Waldorfschule in Berlin -, die Leute stehen so da, daß sie sagen: Wir wissen ganz gewiß, es muß etwas kommen. Aber wenn dann die Leute von der Waldorfschule zu uns reden über die Dinge, dann sind wir so wie ein mit Idealwasser übergossener Pudel. In ein paar Tagen geht es nicht hinein in unsere Köpfe, aber wir wissen, es muß etwas kommen.
Das ist das, was wir uns ganz klar vor Augen halten müssen: Unsere Bestrebungen entsprechen den Sehnsuchten von Tausenden und aber Tausenden von Menschen, und wir müssen alles daran setzen, den Waldorfschul-Gedanken mit allen seinen Impulsen immer populärer und populärer zu machen, so daß er etwas wird, was als eine Zeitforderung den Menschen erscheint. Dazu braucht es nämlich nicht einmal etwas anderes, als daß viele Menschen den Mut geweckt bekommen für das, was sie in den Tiefen ihrer Seele in unbestimmter Weise längst empfinden. - Das ist dasjenige, was ich immer noch neuerdings in die Gemüter der Freunde des Waldorfschul-Gedankens, die bei solchen Versammlungen erscheinen, hineinströmen lassen möchte. Denn das ist doch das allerwichtigste, was wir brauchen: Verbreitung des Interesses, Verbreitung der Bemühung um die Popularisierung der Waldorfschule. Das ist es, was wir brauchen.
Und sehen Sie, in bezug auf den inneren Fortgang unserer Methode ist auch etwas Ähnliches notwendig. Als wir vor vier Jahren die Waldorfschule begründeten, acht Schulklassen hatten, ja, da war es uns durchaus klar: Es muß aus dem heraus geschaffen werden, wonach gestrebt wird unbewußt von solchen Leuten wie Fröbel oder dergleichen; es muß geschaffen werden aus echter Menschenerkenntnis Lehrplan, Lehrziel; alles aus echter Menschenerkenntnis, wie sie sich nur auf dem Boden der Anthroposophie ergibt. Da bekommt man auch eine allgemein menschliche Schule, keine Weltanschauungsschule, keine Sektenschule, sondern wirklich eine allgemein menschliche Schule.
Was allen als Ideal vorschwebte, schon seit Jahrzehnten, das war uns damals klar: Man kann nur versuchen - weil man eben Rücksicht nehmen muß auf die übrigen Verhältnisse -, so weit den Kompromiß zu treiben, daß man sagt: für die ersten drei Schuljahre muß die Sache so verlaufen, daß da nur maßgebend ist, was die Menschennatur lehrt, für Lehrziel und Lehrplan. Mit der vollendeten sechsten Klasse (zwölftes Lebensjahr) und vollendeten achten Klasse (vierzehntes Lebensjahr) wollten wir die Kinder so weit haben, daß sie auch in eine andere Schule übertreten können. Wir wollten die Möglichkeit schaffen, auf der einen Seite durch möglichst lange Zeit den Waldorfschul-Gedanken zu verwirklichen und dennoch den Kindern die Möglichkeit bieten, überzutreten.
Das ist etwas, was sich eigentlich für die acht Volksschulklassen leichter durchführen läßt als für jene Erweiterung, die auch als eine Notwendigkeit sich herausgestellt hat, für jene Erweiterung, die sich durch die neunte, zehnte, elfte, zwölfte Klasse ergeben hat, wo Gymnasial- und Realschulbildung angesetzt wird an die Volksschul- und Bürgerschul-Bildung. Wo ja, jetzt sagt man die jungen Damen, jungen Herren so weit gebracht werden müssen, daß sie ihr Abiturium ablegen müssen und in eine Hochschule kommen können. Wenn auch bei einzelnen Menschen der gute Wille hervorgetreten ist, eine Hochschule zu begründen, so sind das vorläufig noch Riesenillusionen; die Dinge, die wir pflegen, sollten immer auf einen ganz realen Boden aufgestellt werden.
Nun, die Schwierigkeiten, die liegen natürlich darin, daß wir schon genötigt sind, die jungen Damen und jungen Herren so zu entlassen, daß sie das Abiturium machen können, um dann eine Hochschule besuchen zu können, aus der heraus sie eben Zeugnisse bekommen für dasjenige, was man heute das praktische Leben nennt, um eben in dieses Leben eintreten zu können. Da stellt sich sofort bei diesen höheren Klassen heraus, wieviel schwieriger es ist, zurecht zu kommen mit der idealen Waldorfschul-Forderung, den Lehrplan, das Lehrziel von der Menschennatur abzulesen, auf der anderen Seite den Zufallslehrplänen gerecht zu werden, die gar nichts von dem haben, was eben die Menschennatur fordert.
Wenn das vierzehnte, fünfzehnte, sechzehnte Jahr erreicht ist, dann müßte man die jungen Damen und jungen Herren einführen in das wirkliche praktische Leben, das heißt, sie sollten etwas verstehen von dem, was nun im wirklichen praktischen Leben geschieht. Statt dessen kommt der Lehrer des Lateinischen und des Griechischen, wirft einem an den Kopf, wenn man die realen Forderungen aus Menschenerkenntnis realisieren will, wenn da Schulstunden sind in chemisch-technologischen Dingen, in Weberei, in Spinnerei, kurz Dingen, die man im Leben kennen soll - dann kommt der Lateinlehrer und sagt: Dann habe ich nur so viel Lateinstunden, daß ich nichts vorbereiten kann für das Abiiturium.
Und so kommen dann jene unlöslichen Konflikte heraus dadurch, daß man auf der einen Seite immer bestrebt ist, in der reinsten, schönsten Weise den Waldorfschul-Gedanken zu verwirklichen, auf der anderen Seite ihn zu unterbrechen durch alle möglichen Kompromisse, die naturgemäß gegeben sind dadurch, daß man den jungen Menschen eben aus dem, verzeihen Sie, sogenannten praktischen Leben nicht herausreißen darf. Nicht wahr, wir stellen ihn zwar in das Leben so hinein, wie er hineingestellt sein sollte, aber das sogenannte praktische Leben stößt ihn dann zurück, und er wird zum Bohemien. - Das Wort habe ich auch neulich beim schweizerischen Kursus gebraucht und gleich entschuldigen müssen, weil da Anwesende aus Böhmen waren. - Aber es ist schon so, daß wirklich das durchgreifend eingesehen werden muß, daß wir nicht nach dem Ideal der Boheme hinstreben, sondern nach einem wirklich praktischen Leben, nach einem solchen Erziehen und Unterrichten, das die Menschen wirklich ins praktische Leben hineinstellt. Aber da muß erst im weitesten Umfange ein Verstehen desjenigen, was nun das menschliche Wesen eigentlich enthält und fordert, eintreten.
Und so wird man nicht den Waldorfschul-Gedanken populär machen, ohne daß man sich entschließt, dasjenige verständlich zu machen, was ich heute andeutete. In weiten Kreisen wird man nicht den Waldorfschul-Gedanken populär machen, wenn man nur in abstrakten Dingen redet, daß die Kinder bequem unterrichtet werden, daß das Lernen spielend geschieht und so weiter. Wenn man mit allen diesen trivialen Gedanken kommt, mit denen alle anderen auch auftreten, wenn man nicht eingeht auf die konkreten Dinge, die nun eben wirklich in den Herzen der Menschen unbewußt liegen, so wird man den WaldorfschulGedanken nicht populär machen.
Und wir stehen heute vor der schweren Aufgabe, daß wir eben genötigt sind, irgend etwas zu tun, damit wir in der Zukunft nicht in bezug auf das Finanzielle der Waldorfschule von der Hand in den Mund leben. Man weiß niemals aus den vorhandenen Finanzen, ob man die Waldorfschule drei bis vier Monate wird halten können; man ist immerfort angewiesen, ins Unbestimmte hinein zu wirtschaften. Nun, gewiß, der Waldorfschul-Gedanke ist etwas, worauf man so fest stehen kann, daßß man schon den Enthusiasmus auch aufbringt, ins Unbestimmte hinein zu wollen. Aber auf der anderen Seite treten Verantwortlichkeiten zutage, und eigentlich ist die Anstellung eines jeden neuen Lehrers eine solche Verantwortlichkeit, so daß es schon einmal ausgesprochen werden muß: Es müßte die ganze Finanzierung der Waldorfschule als des Ausgangspunktes der Waldorfschul-Bewegung, als des ersten pädagogischen Beispieles, wie man in dieser Methode erzieht und unterrichtet, es müßte die finanzielle Fundierung der Waldorfschule doch auf solche Grundlagen gestützt werden, die eine gewisse Stabilität garantieren.
Das ist dasjenige, was ich Ihnen, ich möchte sagen, als eine notwendige Konsequenz aus dem eben Dargelegten heraus noch sagen möchte. Es müßte alles aufgewendet werden von der verehrten Versammlung, was aufgewendet werden kann, um zu Entschlüssen zu kommen, die eine Stabilisierung der Waldorfschul-Finanzierung so möglich machen, daß man eben weiß: Man kann die Verantwortung tragen, es kann nicht so weit kommen, daß nach ein paar Monaten die ganze Sache reißt. Man sieht, wo die Faktoren sind, die die Sache finanziell in die Welt führen wollen. Dann würde auch der äußere Rahmen da sein. Denn dessen kann ich Sie versichern, meine sehr verehrten Anwesenden und liebe Freunde: Die Dinge, die man erlebt bei Kursen, die gehalten werden, bei meinem Oxforder und meinem Schweizer Kursus, das, was man erlebt als die Sehnsuchten der Lehrer und auch der Eltern, das zeigt, daß die Waldorfschul-Bewegung etwas ist, was tief in unserer Zivilisationsentwickelung als Forderung sitzt. Das ist heute praktisch erwiesen durch alles das, was vorgegangen ist. Auf der anderen Seite zeigt die Art und Weise, wie in der Waldorfschule gearbeitet wird, wie in der Waldorfschule tatsächlich im Lehrerkollegium etwas enthalten ist, etwas, wovon ausstrahlt der ganze Waldorfschul-Impuls, wie da aus dem reinsten Enthusiasmus doch eben ein starkes Wollen sich in die Welt setzt, wie es Ihnen vielleicht hat am besten zutage treten können bei der letzten künstlerisch-pädagogischen Tagung. Nach diesen zwei Seiten hin steht die Sache, ich möchte sagen, auf gesunder Basis. Verzeihen Sie, wenn ich Sie bitte, etws zu beraten darüber, wie zu diesen zwei Säulen, die ich besonders charakterisieren wollte, zu dieser ersten Säule: Zeitforderung von seiten der Eltern und Lehrer, auf der anderen Seite dasjenige, was als ein heiliger, sachgemäßer und fachgemäßer Enthusiasmus in der Waldorfschule lebt, etwas zu beraten darüber, wie die dritte Säule hinzugefügt werden könnte: die Stabilisierung des finanziellen Fundamentes.
Es ist ja traurig, daß man auch über das sprechen muß. Allein, es ist schon einmal so in der Gegenwart, daß zu allem Geld, viel Geld nötig ist. Und es ist sicher, wenn man die Wege findet, Verständnis für den Waldorfschul-Impuls hervorzurufen, dann kommt man auch zu den nötigen finanziellen Mitteln. Es ist darum schon so, daß man den Weg finden muß von dem ersten Teil desjenigen, was ich eben auseinandergesetzt habe, zu dem, was ich in aller Unbescheidenheit - so muß es schon in diesem Falle genannt werden - am Schlusse dieser Auseinandersetzungen als Forderung hinsetzte.
Anschließend folgten die geschäftlichen Verhandlungen.
Address at the Third Ordinary General Meeting of the Association for a Free Waldorf School
Ladies and gentlemen, dear friends! It is my pleasure to open the third regular general meeting of the Association for a Free School System, the Waldorf School Association. On behalf of the board, I am deeply gratified to welcome you on this occasion, and I would also like to express my delight that you are willing to join us in discussing the future of the Waldorf School Association. Before we move on to the official agenda, allow me to give you a brief introduction to the report of the entire board of directors by saying a few words about the progress of the Waldorf school movement as such and about the affairs of the Waldorf school, insofar as you are involved in this progress.
We have just recently had the extremely enjoyable educational and artistic conference, in which what is being strived for with the Waldorf school movement and what can be achieved with an educational movement that meets the demands of the present and the near future, was presented in such a vivid way to all of you and many other interested parties. So when talking about the current state of the Waldorf school movement, it is really only necessary to point out what has just come to light at this educational and artistic conference.
However, I would like to take the liberty of emphasizing a few things today that are perhaps important as a basic tone for this meeting. We held our last meeting here at a time when I was able to point out how the will of our Waldorf school movement had proven itself and spread, as I myself had been invited to speak about the nature of this Waldorf school movement on the occasion of the Shakespeare Festival in Stratford in 1922. And I was able to point out at that time that this was a result of the fact that the Waldorf school movement had become known in England at that time, and that the invitation to the Oxford summer course was then extended for the summer of 1922, which enabled me to speak in detail in England about what the Waldorf school actually aims to achieve. One result of these Oxford lectures was the founding of an English school association, which initially planned to convert the Kings Langley School into a kind of Waldorf school and to work for the spread of the Waldorf school idea in England. This has shown that the ideas and impulses behind the Waldorf school movement are attracting a great deal of interest at present. And here, too, we could see for ourselves how strong this interest is in England, as a number of English teachers visited the Waldorf school for an extended period at the beginning of this year.
Another consequence of the spread of the Waldorf school idea is the course that I recently had the opportunity to hold in Dornach itself for a number of Swiss teachers and school administrators who initially organized the course. In addition to the Swiss teachers, seventeen Czech teachers also took part in this course. And it was precisely during this course that it became clear how natural it seems to the hearts of educational personalities that something like what is being attempted with our school movement should take place. From everything that could be heard at this course held in Dornach, it was really possible to see how there is a deep longing, especially among professional educators, to incorporate something into the art of education that intensively aims at spiritualization on the one hand and a real practical application of the art of education on the other.
And it is very understandable that a very specific feeling, a very specific emotion, was expressed by educational personalities in particular during this last Swiss course. This is that precisely those who care deeply about what such a course aims to achieve are, in a certain way, dismayed by such a course. I am only recounting what was expressed: During the Dornach course, someone said something that expressed the view of many of those gathered there, namely that those who are serious-minded are particularly dismayed when they see how little they are able to cope with all the necessary pedagogical impulses that come rushing at them in the course of a few days.
Now you see, I was then compelled to respond to this objection, which seemed entirely justified to me. Such a thought expresses very clearly what many people today are thinking. Many people today know very well that something radical and drastic must happen if our school system is to meet its social requirements and emerge from the situation it has got itself into. People do not often realize how necessary a radical reform of educational impulses is. But when you think about it, you find that parents and teachers everywhere have a half-conscious or fully conscious conviction that such radical impulses must be introduced into the education system. Then people hear what we have to say, and it is true that many at the artistic-pedagogical conference reacted by saying: Is all this to be done now? How are we going to manage it? In a few days, such a flood of demands will be poured upon us—yes, forgive me for putting it this way, but it is a feeling I have often heard expressed—now one comes here with the best of intentions and leaves like a poodle doused with idealistic water, which, yes, wants to shake off what has been poured over it.
As I said, this was indeed expressed many times at the last Dornach conference. And I replied: Yes, that is quite understandable, but it is necessary to consider the following. For what is practiced in education today, what is practiced everywhere in schools today, there are long periods of time in which people have to get used to it. They can grow into it gradually. — We are compelled, because people can only devote the few days they have available for progress impulses to us, to always say what we have to say to people in a few days. It is quite understandable that people feel overwhelmed in this way. But if what is nevertheless necessary could happen, that more and more circles would be won over by the stimuli that are always given, in order to arouse interest in what is at stake, then we would also be in a position to say the things we have to say at a slower pace. Then people would not need to feel overwhelmed.
This is proof that we would have to work very intensively to give us the opportunity not, I would say, to annoy people with our ideas in the blink of an eye, but to actually be able to maintain the pace that seems necessary for most people to grasp the ideas. So I must point out that if this insight is taken as a starting point, then we would be given the opportunity to express ourselves more precisely, more slowly. So it all depends on a real interest in our cause developing in ever wider circles. For it is indeed very strange how things actually stand.
You see, one must consider the internal development of the Waldorf school movement over the four years since it came into existence. The facts must, of course, be evaluated in the right way. Today we have around seven hundred students in the Waldorf school and about forty teachers. Yes, years ago we started with fewer teachers and fewer than two hundred and fifty pupils. Now, these two figures, the former two hundred or two hundred and fifty pupils and the current seven hundred pupils, mean something intrinsically very characteristic for the Waldorf school movement. You see, they do not mean a complete reversal of the Waldorf school movement in educational and didactic terms, but in cultural and social terms, a real reversal. Depending on one's taste, one could say: turning it on its feet or turning it upside down; that is indifferent to me. What I mean is this: when the Waldorf school was founded, the idea was initially a social one among our friends. A kind of unified school was to be established, a school that corresponded to the social impulses prevailing at the time, which came to the surface of people's social thinking and social sensibilities in 1919. Such a school was to be established. The Waldorf school idea was conceived out of social circumstances. And it may now be a bold hypothesis, but neither Mr. Molt nor you will take offense if I say – naturally, this is to be taken with the usual grain of salt – if I say, in a way that can be clearly expressed, how the reversal took place.
Suppose Mr. Molt had not been an anthroposophist at the time, but – since he was not, one can say – a philanthropic factory director, as there were many at the time. He would also have conceived the idea of founding a school based on social conditions. But the Waldorf School as it is today would certainly not have come into being. The Waldorf school as it is today came into being solely because it was born out of anthroposophy, that is, because it was not just a philanthropic factory owner, but Mr. Emil Molt, the anthroposophist, who conceived the idea and who called on anthroposophy for help with methodology and didactics.
So now we have what we must actually refer to as the cultural-historical-social aspect. We have this, that an idea of the times has been realized with the help of anthroposophy, which was to provide the methodology and didactics.
Now you see, over time, a reversal has taken place, in that the large number of students we have today, that is, this spread of the Waldorf school idea in the Waldorf school itself, has taken place solely because of the pedagogy and didactics cultivated in the Waldorf school. So the original idea has been turned upside down. The original idea drew on the pedagogy and didactics cultivated here. But the Waldorf school has become what it is today through pedagogy and didactics, as was right and proper. And today, parents who have brought their children into the schools in later years are essentially seeking out Waldorf schools because of these pedagogical and didactic methods. So, over the course of these four years, this important development has taken place, whereby the pedagogical and didactic methods born out of anthroposophy have come to the fore within Waldorf schools.
And it was this pedagogy and didactics that aroused interest in England, that gave rise to the course in Dornach, and so on. It is a specifically pedagogical idea that is realized through the Waldorf school, and that is also what I have had to emphasize more and more in recent times. So the seven hundred pupils and the expansion of the Waldorf school in general have brought about the pedagogy and didactics cultivated in the Waldorf school. And the efforts that are often seen today to establish schools based on the Waldorf school model also prove this.
You see, for me, of course, what has been realized there was valid from the very beginning. From the outset, I understood the task of the Waldorf school to be purely pedagogical and didactic, and over time it has become clear that wherever people were interested in the Waldorf school concept, it was because of this pedagogy and didactics.
Now, interest has been clearly demonstrated by teachers and educators through the various courses, but I would like to say that it has also been demonstrated in the aspirations of parents. You see, the day before yesterday, a number of parents came to me in Berlin and said: Yes, how do we do this? We have formed small school groups, given lessons, and are trying to apply the Waldorf school principles. But now the government is coming and not allowing it; we now have to send our children to elementary school. Couldn't we perhaps create a means of information by founding a branch of the Waldorf school here? The people thought that because it is still possible at the Waldorf school, because the government doesn't interfere, because there is a more liberal approach there, it might also be possible in Berlin if a branch of the Waldorf school were established.
I said: Of course that is not possible, and one must see from this example that the implementation of the Waldorf school idea is not possible at all without the idea spreading widely, without recognition of what thousands and thousands, indeed far more than thousands and thousands, unconsciously want. People basically want what is wanted here, but they don't dare admit that they want it. And I still maintain that it was right for me to call for the World School Association, now that a model exists; that it is not the task to make all kinds of other attempts, which actually arise everywhere, as I might say, in the field of medicine, quackery — not real quackery, of course, but quackery labeled as such; that it is more important to continue spreading understanding, real understanding of Waldorf education, than to do this other thing. It must be spread further and further. Then the other thing will come.
For you see, the demand of the Waldorf school actually lies in pedagogical development itself and in the relationship of pedagogical development to the great cultural and social ideas. You see, it may be of some interest to you if I draw your attention to the shift in human sensibilities, which thoughts have not yet followed, over a longer period of time.
In March 1792, there was an imperial chancellor in Central Europe who summed up the task of public education in the following words: “It is, of course, the responsibility of governments to spread the riches of the spirit, and governments must form a kind of state police for this dissemination of the riches of the spirit, just as they do for the enjoyment of other social matters of human beings.” This was spoken from a mind concerned with educational matters at the end of the 18th century, spoken at a time when people thought that people had to receive directives from above for all enjoyment of social and human affairs, above all directives for the conduct of education and teaching.
And in the 19th century, there was a young man, Fröbel, who said as a young man of twenty-three: “To me, all attempts in the field of education, even those of Pestalozzi,” said Fröbel, “seem crude and merely empirical. For it would be necessary to arrive at exact principles of teaching, just as natural science has exact principles.” That is what Fröbel said.
These two things, the statement by Reich Chancellor Rottenhahn in 1792 and the passage from a letter written by the young Fröbel to his friend Krause, roughly characterize what was prevalent at that time and what must be overcome today. For the opinion prevailed—and in many cases still prevails and must be overcome—that Yes, one does not concern oneself with matters such as those relating to pedagogy and didactics; it goes without saying that one leaves that to the state. And the other idea is this: the natural sciences are sovereign. Those who study them, who start from them, must also find the right pedagogy.
Within both currents, within the paternalistic and within the scientific currents, it has become apparent, particularly in the field of education, that we have reached an impasse. Of course, they wanted the very best when they said that a kind of state police force should also be established in the field of education; of course, they wanted the very best, but what has emerged is precisely what people feel must be changed.
Educators sigh: We don't really know how to treat people; we believed that through a—how shall I put it, I can't say a muddle, even the followers of the exact sciences would not have said that—let's say a synthesis, to use another word, through a synthesis of anthropology, psychology, ethnology, and recently even psychiatry, we would be able to bring together the art of treating people. Time has shown that this is not possible, as Fröbel wanted it to be out of a deep pedagogical sense. And today people stand there — this has been evident in all the people who attended the courses, it is evident in a desire such as that for a branch of the Waldorf School in Berlin — people stand there and say: We know for sure that something must come. But when the people from the Waldorf school talk to us about these things, we are like a poodle doused with ideal water. It doesn't sink into our heads in a few days, but we know that something must come.
This is what we must keep clearly in mind: our aspirations correspond to the longings of thousands and thousands of people, and we must do everything we can to make the Waldorf school idea, with all its impulses, more and more popular, so that it becomes something that people see as a demand of the times. All that is needed is for many people to find the courage to express what they have long felt in the depths of their souls in an indefinable way. That is what I would like to instill in the minds of the friends of the Waldorf school concept who attend such gatherings. For that is the most important thing we need: spreading interest, spreading the effort to popularize Waldorf schools. That is what we need.
And you see, something similar is also necessary with regard to the inner progress of our method. When we founded the Waldorf school four years ago and had eight school classes, it was quite clear to us: What Fröbel and others like him unconsciously strove for must be created from this; the curriculum and teaching objectives must be created from a genuine understanding of human nature, as can only be gained on the basis of anthroposophy. This will result in a universal human school, not a school based on a particular worldview or sect, but truly a universal human school. What everyone had in mind as an ideal for decades was clear to us at that time: one can only try — because one must take other circumstances into account — to compromise as far as possible.
What everyone had in mind as an ideal for decades was clear to us at the time: one can only try — because one has to take other circumstances into account — to push the compromise so far that one says: for the first three years of school, the only thing that should be decisive for teaching objectives and curriculum is what human nature teaches. By the end of sixth grade (age 12) and eighth grade (age 14), we wanted the children to have progressed to the point where they could transfer to another school. We wanted to create the possibility of realizing the Waldorf school concept for as long as possible, while still offering the children the opportunity to transfer.
This is something that is actually easier to implement for the eight elementary school grades than for the extension that has also proven to be a necessity, for the extension that has resulted from the ninth, tenth, eleventh, and twelfth grades, where high school and secondary school education is added to elementary school and civic school education. Nowadays, it is said that young ladies and gentlemen must be educated to such an extent that they can take their Abitur exams and go on to university. Even if some individuals have shown the good will to establish a university, these are still huge illusions for the time being; the things we cultivate should always be based on very real foundations.
Well, the difficulties, of course, lie in the fact that we are already compelled to send young ladies and gentlemen out into the world so that they can pass their high school graduation exams and then attend a university, from which they will receive certificates for what is today called practical life, in order to be able to enter into this life. In these higher grades, it immediately becomes apparent how much more difficult it is to cope with the ideal Waldorf school requirement of reading the curriculum and the teaching objectives from human nature, while at the same time doing justice to the random curricula that have nothing to do with what human nature demands.
When the fourteenth, fifteenth, and sixteenth years are reached, young ladies and gentlemen should be introduced to real practical life, that is, they should understand something of what happens in real practical life. Instead, the Latin and Greek teacher comes along and throws it in your face when you want to realize the real demands of human knowledge, when there are school lessons in chemical-technological subjects, in weaving, in spinning, in short, things that one should know in life—then the Latin teacher comes along and says: Then I only have so many Latin lessons that I can't prepare anything for the Abitur.
And so these insoluble conflicts arise from the fact that, on the one hand, we always strive to realize the Waldorf school idea in the purest, most beautiful way, and on the other hand, we interrupt it with all kinds of compromises that are naturally given by the fact that we cannot tear young people away from, forgive me, so-called practical life. It is true that we place them in life as they should be placed, but so-called practical life then pushes them back, and they become bohemians. I used this word recently during a course in Switzerland and had to apologize immediately because there were people from Bohemia present. But it is true that we must thoroughly understand that we are not striving for the ideal of bohemianism, but for a truly practical life, for an education and teaching that really places people in practical life. But first there must be a broad understanding of what human nature actually contains and demands.
And so the Waldorf school idea will not become popular unless we decide to make understandable what I have indicated today. The Waldorf school idea will not become popular in wide circles if we only talk in abstract terms about children being taught comfortably, learning through play, and so on. If you come up with all these trivial ideas that everyone else is talking about, if you don't address the concrete things that really lie unconsciously in people's hearts, you will not make the Waldorf school idea popular.
And today we are faced with the difficult task of having to do something so that in the future we will not have to live from hand to mouth in terms of the finances of the Waldorf school. With the available finances, one never knows whether one will be able to keep the Waldorf school going for three to four months; one is constantly forced to manage in the face of uncertainty. Now, of course, the Waldorf school idea is something you can stand so firmly behind that you can muster the enthusiasm to venture into the unknown. But on the other hand, responsibilities come to light, and actually, the hiring of every new teacher is such a responsibility that it must be said: The entire financing of the Waldorf school as the starting point of the Waldorf school movement, as the first pedagogical example of how to educate and teach using this method, the financial foundation of the Waldorf school must be based on principles that guarantee a certain stability.
That is what I would like to say to you, I would like to say, as a necessary consequence of what I have just explained. Everything that can be done must be done by this esteemed assembly to reach decisions that will stabilize the financing of Waldorf schools in such a way that we know: we can bear the responsibility; it cannot come to the point where the whole thing collapses after a few months. We can see where the factors are that will bring the project to fruition financially. Then the external framework would also be in place. For I can assure you, my dear friends and esteemed attendees: The things you experience in the courses that are held, in my Oxford and Swiss courses, what you experience as the longings of the teachers and also of the parents, shows that the Waldorf school movement is something that is deeply rooted in the development of our civilization as a demand. This has been proven in practice today by everything that has happened. On the other hand, the way in which Waldorf schools work, the way in which the teaching staff at Waldorf schools embody something that radiates the whole Waldorf school impulse, the way in which pure enthusiasm gives rise to a strong will to make a difference in the world, as you may have seen most clearly at the last artistic-pedagogical conference. With these two sides, I would say that the matter stands on a healthy basis. Please forgive me if I ask you to consider something about these two columns that I wanted to characterize in particular, about this first column: the demands of parents and teachers on the one hand, and on the other hand, what lives as a sacred, appropriate, and professional enthusiasm in the Waldorf school, I would like to offer some advice on how the third column could be added: the stabilization of the financial foundation.
It is sad that we have to talk about this. But the fact is that in the present day, everything requires money, a lot of money. And it is certain that if we find ways to generate understanding for the Waldorf school impulse, then we will also obtain the necessary financial resources. It is therefore necessary to find a way from the first part of what I have just discussed to what I, in all immodesty — for that is what it must be called in this case — set as a requirement at the end of these discussions.
This was followed by business negotiations.