Daisy Aldan, Anaïs Nin and Rudolf Steiner

I have to confess that, until quite recently, I had not heard of the Pulitzer-nominated poet and highly regarded translator and teacher, Daisy Aldan (1923 -2001). But when I first came across her poetry and then learned that she was an anthroposophist who had also taught at Emerson College in the UK (where I now work) I was sufficiently intrigued to want to find out more.

Paul Matthews, who teaches creative writing at Emerson College, told me that he “never met Daisy Aldan, but I did correspond with her briefly. I understand that in the late Sixties, perhaps, or early Seventies, she gave (through Francis Edmund’s invitation) a Creative Writing contribution at Emerson College. She gave me the impression that if I had not appeared on the scene in 1972 she might well have been offered a more permanent role at the College. I hope that she has forgiven me by now! I did include a poem by her in the anthology that I edited for Rudolf Steiner Press.”

daisy-aldan

Daisy Aldan in a pose from eurythmy.

It seems that Aldan’s earliest book of poems was published in 1946. This was followed by The Destruction of Cathedrals and Other Poems in 1963, with a preface by Anaïs Nin, and Seven: Seven (Poems and Photographs) in 1965. During the 1970s, Aldan published seven books of experimental and lyrical poetry. Her non-fiction and prose works are focused on the topic of poetry and consciousness. In 1979 she published the novella, A Golden Story.

Aldan edited several important poetry magazines, including Folder Magazine of Literature and Art (1953-1959) and Two Cities (co-edited with Anaïs Nin and so called because it was based in both New York and Paris), from 1961 to 1962. She also published in 1959 a book-length anthology of poetry and drawings, A New Folder: Americans- Poems and Drawings, that she considered a continuation of Folder Magazine. She also edited and published translations of works by Stephane Mallarmé, Anaïs Nin, Albert Steffen, and Rudolf Steiner. Aldan also founded Tiber Press in 1953, publishing her own work and that of poets and artists who are today household names, such as Ginsberg, Kerouac and Jackson Pollock.

Poetry has rarely made anyone rich, however, and so to support herself, Aldan worked as a teacher at New York’s High School of Art and Design, where her presence became an institution. She retired from there in 1973 to devote herself to her writing. To this day, her former students remember her in glowing terms. One of these students, Renée Magriel Roberts, wrote that:

“Having Miss Aldan as a teacher, was like having a combination of the European continent and the Greenwich Village literary scene brought into the classroom. We were fascinated, but largely unaware of the importance of the writing and the people to whom we were introduced. For example, one day she brought Anaïs Nin to our class to talk about Cities of the Interior. We were constantly exposed to the work of European and American poets, especially those of the Beat Generation whom Miss Aldan knew well, for she was not only a poet and a teacher, but also the editor of a publication called “Folders”, which included original and reproduction art works and poetry. By combining translation work (she was a gifted translator of Mallarmé, Anaïs Nin, Rudolf Steiner, and Albert Steffen), writing, teaching, and editing and promoting the work of others, Miss Aldan created a viable living for herself, and also afforded herself the luxury of not only writing luminous poetry, but of having the time to encourage others to write as well. Our classes were filled with music, experimental writing, and rich mythological studies.… The idea of the “artist-in-residence” was integrated throughout the school structure, as opposed to being like an alien from another planet surrounded by traditional classroom goings-on.

What this meant, for us students, was that we were literally surrounded by excited, working artists. It was a school that nobody ever wanted to leave, overflowing with incredible work, music, literature, an excitement that also translated into the “core” subject areas. It was a very happy school. “

 

Another student, Marc Widershien, has left this account:

 “I first heard of Daisy Aldan in 1978.  Howard Gottlieb, Curator of the then Special Collections at Boston University, had asked me to find some poets whose work would be worthy of having a home at the Twentieth Century Archives. I must have discovered her through her celebrated Folder Editions which began publication in the early 1950s. Much of her tabloid is collected by the New York Public Library, and most of her papers are housed at the Beinecke Library at Yale. Daisy published mostly avant garde writers and artists, many of whom are still known. She was one of the first publishers of Ginsberg, Frank O’Hara, John Ashbery, Rexroth, Kerouac, Jasper Johns, and de Kooning.  They were all there and none of them were known.

At the time I made her acquaintance she was a proponent of Anthroposophy, an offshoot of Theosophy, founded by the Austrian Rudolph (sic) Steiner who was also the founder of the Waldorf schools.  The school originated with classes for employees at the Waldorf Astoria cigarette factory in Stuttgart, Germany. The schools are headquartered in Dornach, Switzerland, but have satellites all over Europe; but, there are many in America such as Pine Hill and High Moving in Wilton, New Hampshire.

Daisy loved Eurythmy which is a form of dance where speech is made visible through dance, a discipline developed by Jacques Dalcroze at the turn of the 20th Century; but of course, the Anthroposophists would never admit their debt to Jacques Dalcroze and the American-born dancer Isadora Duncan.  Steiner was an occultist. It was exciting material for a poet with spiritual aspirations, and that is what I find characteristic about Daisy Aldan’s work—along with her mastery of modern diction. She explored a super reality not only through her work but through her own personal development. But she was thoroughly grounded as well, and highly practical. Her poems, though, reflect her taste not only in Anthroposophy, but French Surrealism.  She was very interested, for example, in the secret society of the Cathars, who were Gnostics of the 12th Century, later persecuted by the Catholic Church, and finally exterminated through the machinations of the Spanish Inquisition. They were an affront to political power just as Aldan was through her free thinking which manifested very early in her relationships with people such as Anaïs Nin.

Daisy also was an innovator in the translating of French poetry. Her translations of Mallarme are outstanding, and only her version of Un Coup de Des is truly successful. Mallarme’s poem was symphonic in nature. She said that “Mallarme wanted it done on music sheets because it was structured like a symphony.” She tackled a number of writers, including Albert Steffen, the Swiss poet, Edith Sodegran and others. She knew many of the French surrealists. She was an actress, a poet, short story writer, critic, and a constant innovator.

For nearly 14 years, she was my friend and sometime confidante. I have reviewed some her books such as Day of the Wounded Eagle, A Golden Story, Climb Mount Parnassus and Behold, Between High Tides and others. She was unlike any American poet I had read. There was a European tradition in her work, but also the secret traditions of Gnosticism and the Jewish Kabbalah which abounded in her work. She would often write to me from Dornach, and describe her need to do Eurythmy as a way of getting in touch with her adytum.”

 

In 1959, Aldan had become friends with Anaïs Nin, who at that time was a struggling novelist with a small but dedicated following. Nin noted in her diary, “Daisy is a magnificent poet, of the highest quality, yet she has to publish her poetry herself. Her teacher’s salary goes into that.”

anais_nin

Anais Nin in the 1970s

Daisy Aldan and Anaïs Nin worked together on several projects, including a 1960 reading of “Un Coup De Dés” at the Maison Française in New York, where Nin read the poem in French, and Aldan read her translation into English. This reading was recorded and subsequently broadcast on radio. Aldan was also one of Nin’s New York friends who helped her keep her “trapeze life” (her bicoastal relationships with Rupert Pole and Hugh Guiler) from being discovered by her two lovers. She would take calls from Rupert Pole (whom Nin had told she was staying with Aldan) and explained that Anaïs “had just stepped out” and would have her return the call. She then referred to a card index upon which Nin’s schedule was written, call her with Rupert’s message, and Nin would then call him back, never missing a beat. According to Aldan, she was just one of many who helped Nin in this very complicated process.

Anaïs Nin seems to have regretted Steiner’s influence on Aldan:

“Daisy Aldan’s interest in Rudolf Steiner alienated us. She sees everything through his eyes. God is back again in her poetry – an abstraction. It has removed her from human life and psychology. I feel as if in the presence of a Catholic dogmatist: every thought controlled by a theory. She translates a bad (Swiss) poet, Albert Steffen”

From The Diaries of Anaïs Nin, Vol. 7 (1966-1974)

 

And, according to an entry in the Encyclopedia of New York School Poets, M L Rosenthal, in an article in the New York Times Book Review, “compared Aldan to e.e. cummings for ‘combining daring technique with sentimental conception’. The latter quality evolved into a spiritualism (sic) informed by Aldan’s study of Rudolf Steiner, with the consequence that her later work failed to engage the avant-garde audience that she had originally attracted.”

Is it the case that an interest in metaphysics necessarily leads to a diminution of one’s poetical abilities? Or is it perhaps that those who know you, but who cannot follow the evolution of your spiritual development, rather than engaging with or trying to understand your new direction, resort instead to deploring this apparent softening of your brain?

Stanley Kunitz, when he was Poet Laureate of the United States, said of Aldan: “The world that engages her imagination lies beyond the ‘merely temporal and physical.’ Like Mallarmé, to whom she has devoted much of her primary and influential work as a translator, her poems evoke an interior landscape of dream and reverie, from which she ‘wakes to the miraculous.’”

I will finish with a poem Daisy Aldan wrote about Rudolf Steiner:

Y o u   r a d i a n c e…

For Rudolf Steiner

You radiance in wind,

concentrically weaving in and out of window frames

in concrete and steel skeleton structures, whirl

 

toward my ruined orbit.

Help me to sprout coral branches of light

antennae of the Eternal, through the prison

 

of my skull. Lead my

resurrected INsight toward that mercurial

Sun-abyss where Archangels are holding council;

 

let me know those plans they’re

concocting for us down here. Let the eyes in your

photograph pasted to my wall, transmute to mine,

 

balance between Here and There.

Sweep, golden-angel-winged, into my monotonous

opacity, and spark that luminous

 

region near my heart

which, you say, moves to understand the stars,

that I may perceive Man’s spidery ties

 

to constellations:

And let my footsteps glide in tranquil three-time

pace, during the earthly sun-period of my brain;

 

for they are restless

as a broken radiator; and I am angry,

and gossip about my friends, and write popular songs.

 

Let the squealing tones

of my voice deepen, and my tongue learn the folly

of useless chatter. Make me wise to choose

 

to shun the Trap of Fame

whose prize is a great hunk of putrefacted cheese:

For I sniff at the plastic lures of the senses

 

and forget it is enough

for God to mouthe my name. Let Promethean fire

fill me, though chained to a rock; symmetry not entice,

 

nor the rectangles of Albers*.

Beholding, let me face the blind of back alleys:

And guide the words I write to join your beacon to the Gods!

 

(*a reference to the work of German-American artist-educator Josef Albers.)

44 Comments

Filed under Anais Nin, Anthroposophy, Daisy Aldan, Rudolf Steiner

44 responses to “Daisy Aldan, Anaïs Nin and Rudolf Steiner

  1. wooffles

    Thanks so much Jeremy! That’s a jewel of a poem

    Liked by 1 person

    • Thanks Wooffles – I agree that it’s a really fine poem. But what is it about the subject matter that makes Anais Nin and others who don’t share Aldan’s interest in anthroposophy to feel “alienated” and conclude that her poetry has become “removed from human life and psychology”?

      Like

      • wooffles

        The guru-ish edge to it, maybe?
        “Let the eyes in your
        photograph pasted to my wall, transmute to mine,

        balance between Here and There…”

        Like

  2. Jeremy points to a very real problem when he says,

    But what is it about the subject matter that makes Anais Nin and others who don’t share Aldan’s interest in anthroposophy to feel “alienated” and conclude that her poetry has become “removed from human life and psychology”?

    What is it in one person’s consciousness that cannot allow the truth to enter? What is alienation but the Abyss in modern parlance? After all, the truth lies beyond the threshold, beyond the Abyss. Beyond our consciousness. Or at least, our material – that is to say, intellectual – consciousness. A consciousness that understands the lands beyond the threshold only in terms of the things Rudolf Steiner said.

    I was discussing colour with a gentleman, and in his response to me, said that you can form the colour green by mixing yellow and blue.

    Which is true.

    In as far as the material world is concerned, at least. Which only shows that he, like so many, are alienated from the things Rudolf Steiner wanted to convey to our earth.

    Much as in the way the poem quoted in Jeremy’s post speaks of

    and spark that luminous

    region near my heart

    which, you say, moves to understand the stars,

    that I may perceive Man’s spidery ties

    to constellations

    What are these ties to a person who can only perceive colour as pigment? What about light itself? I bang on about this frequently enough, yet few I meet grasp the essence of what I say, leave alone understand it within themselves. Which can be recognized by the person speaking without confusing themselves and without needing to quote. Well, of course, the problem is that we can’t see our own confusions…

    … unless we fess up to our own shortcomings, accept a few nasty truths about ourselves. It is the nasty things that are truthful which we notice first, nice things that are truthful go largely unheeded. The point I want to raise is that I have accepted truths about myself that had real barbs rather than a limp word: for there are those on this blog who are allowed to call me a fraud and still remain within the letter of Jeremy’s Moderation policy. These barbed thoughts were by Rudolf Steiner no less, speaking about one of my past incarnations that still has me puzzled, and was a thought that found the gaps in my armour of self-acceptance only to tear at the tenderness inside. Isn’t it nicer to have this from someone you can question… who is still alive? Because that way you can find out what was intended. It’s far harder to do when a person has been in their grave for ninety years and more.

    But that’s what conversation is all about, and why it is so important. It’s also why so few are willing to truly converse.

    It is in this way that one can begin to comprehend oneself, and thereby lay a stepping-stone in the torrent of the Abyss. Because we cannot comprehend what the constellations might have to say to us if we dwell on mixing pigments to make the colour green.

    “The belief that the sun spreads light in the manner described in physics, that the light passes through the world’s spaces and falls upon the earth, is one of the worst superstitions. After death we realize this, for when we grow aware of the fact that we have abandoned our etheric, we know that the light of the sun, which exists here, in physical life, only exists in that sphere which belongs to the earth.”

    What then must we all learn – as I have learned – of ourselves that is painful? It is one thing to speak of it, it is quite another to accept the truthful things that are said by others and let them become part of one’s life. For that is what I am trying to do with Steiner’s words to me.

    Comment 1 of 4.

    Like

    • Gemma quotes:

      “The belief that the sun spreads light in the manner described in physics, that the light passes through the world’s spaces and falls upon the earth, is one of the worst superstitions. After death we realize this, for when we grow aware of the fact that we have abandoned our etheric, we know that the light of the sun, which exists here, in physical life, only exists in that sphere which belongs to the earth.”

      http://www.usno.navy.mil/USNO/tours-events/sky-this-week/images_skyweek/TacSatWide_Moon_chestersmall.jpg/image_large

      “Think of how greatly our responsibility is increased when we realize: If here on the earth there were no soul capable of being with enthusiasm for true and genuine morality, for the spiritual moral order in general, nothing could be contributed towards the progress of our world, towards a new creation; our world would be led towards its death.

      “This force of light that is on the earth, http://www.rsarchive.org/Lectures/GA202/English/AP1958/Diag.php?bridge7.gif+VII rays out into the universe. This is, to begin with, imperceptible to ordinary vision; we do not perceive how human moral impulses in man ray out from the earth into the universe. If a grievous age were to dawn over the earth, an age when millions and millions of men would perish through lack of spirituality — spirituality conceived of here as including the moral, which indeed it does — if there were only a dozen men filled with moral enthusiasm, the earth would still ray out a spiritual, sun-like force! This force rays out only to a certain distance. At this point it mirrors itself, as it were, in itself, so that here, http://www.rsarchive.org/Lectures/GA202/English/AP1958/Diag.php?bridge8.gif+VIII there arises the reflection of what radiates from man. And in every epoch the initiates regarded this reflection as the sun. For as I have so often said, there is nothing physical here. Where ordinary astronomy speaks of the existence of an incandescent globe of gas, there is merely the reflection of a spiritual reality in physical appearance.”

      The Moral as the Source of World-Creative Power, 18 December 1920

      Like

    • Gemma wrote,

      “I was discussing colour with a gentleman, and in his response to me, said that you can form the colour green by mixing yellow and blue. Which is true in as far as the material world is concerned, at least. Which only shows that he, like so many, are alienated from the things Rudolf Steiner wanted to convey to our earth.”
      […]
      “Because we cannot comprehend what the constellations might have to say to us if we dwell on mixing pigments to make the colour green.”

      But, it can be shown with this lecture, on the nature of colour, that each colour of the spectrum is an experience of inner perception.

      http://wn.rsarchive.org/Lectures/GA/GA0349/19230221p01.html

      And that is why green is a fixture of color over each 24 hours, and 365 days of the year. In the deepest darkness of the night, and in the predawn hours before the red hue of sunlight signals the morning daybreak, green can be seen on the fixed field of nature. Why?

      https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d9/Linear_visible_spectrum.svg

      Any kid knows that to get green, you mix yellow and blue. Crayola’s came in
      a box in 1955, and all the colors were given in 12 arrays of the spectrum,
      from Red to Orange to Yellow to Blue to Violet, and also flesh, and black.
      Green had to be a mixture of yellow and blue. Isn’t that interesting?

      Now, if we take your diagram, http://www.jtdesigns.com/jtblog/perry-marshall/the-tactical-triangle
      what does it imply? It implies Red as the originating motive of the enterprising inspiration (traffic), and Yellow as the stream leading to its consumers (conversion), which is Blue. Green is the intended outcome as (economy). Thus, the mixture is the same, i.e., yellow is the extension from red, which meets blue as the deciding factor, and is transformed into green if the advertising works.

      Steve

      Like

      • Gemma

        Steve, you do make me chuckle sometimes, really you do. I am well aware that any kid knows that to get green, you mix yellow and blue. What they don’t know, and aren’t taught at school is that Newtonian theories of light only take the matter so far.

        As to the diagram, the colours only tell anybody who does understand Goethe’s Farbenlehre that the businessman who used those colours does not.

        Now earlier you quote a full lecture by Rudolf Steiner in order to ascertain that “the perception of colour is a matter of inner perception.” Well, indeed it is, just as when you look at a measuring tape, you have an inner perception of the numbers written on it. I have spoken about such things at length in my series ‘Beyond Newton’. So much for the soul. However, there is a difference between the physical manifestation of colour and the physical manifestation of the numbers written on a measuring tape. That is something you’ve pointed to, but you still make statements that tell me you are still wedded to the material world. Which is fair enough in our modern times, it is what the Fifth Epoch demands of us. Your problem – and it is your problem – is that you need to take a step further with your conceptual thinking in order to arrive at what colour actually is.

        Not just the tubes marked ‘Chrome Yellow’ and ‘Ultramarine’ in your paint box. You won’t get far with the Madders either, because they too are material; mostly azo dyes rather than the kind of pigments that Turner used. Again, this is spoken of on my website, as modern intellectuals see things and believe what they see… rather than looking at Turner’s pictures through the ‘lens’ of Goethe’s Farbenlehre. I am told that I may make no links to my website, so you will have to dig hard if you wish to find the relevant posts. Some people believe that curtailing a person’s ability to communicate is good for them. But this is as much a belief as the people held that led them to mis-interpret Turner’s so-called seascape, and has quite as much substance in the real world.

        Once you have begun to appreciate these things, we can move on to the question of morals in the Fifth Epoch. Rather than have them forced on others as was inappropriate even in the Fourth! We all know, or should know, that an impulse that was beneficial for a previous time will be evil in a later one. That is a moral question that needs serious consideration.

        Comment 2 out of 4.

        Like

      • Gemma wrote:

        “You make free use of quotations…perhaps this is what you must learn from my allotted four comments? How to be yourself and not resort to paintpots to make colours.”

        If you believe that, then it proves that you are not listening, for the simple reason
        that you fail entirely to see that the source of light on earth is us. We are the source that sends the light-rays up, and then meets a focal-point, which becomes the optical sun. And you never even read it, but only called it, “quotations”. Expected.

        I could bury you right now on the anthropopper blog, but I won’t. Instead, let me ask this: Have you ever considered why shadows are cast on earth? The reason is contained n those simple diagrams, which you refuse to acknowledge. We are the Source of Light, which ascends and is received by an optical foci, which is the apparent Sun, and reflects back its recognition. As such, it is totally beholding to the Earth, as its focal point. It is dedicated to reflecting back to us its warmth element, colours, and shadows. One of
        these is our own image, and all that we have created in the domain of co-creators.

        As such, we all project a shadow. This is the effect coming from the light of the sun.

        Steve

        Like

      • Gemma,

        I may make you chuckle, as you make me laugh. This is to be expected. First of all, your diagram is a hoax, while my diagrams depict truth. Who cares what the businessman fabricates as a notion in his diagram. The real issue is who is this Turner that you mention, no less than two times, with his colour process? Personally, I don’t see it, nor do I see how it relates to how the sun enters as a reflective mechanism in earth evolution, unless it involves the camera. Well, if it involves the camera, which is designed to see the upside-down image, which is a reflection, and has evolved from black-and-white exposure, and made it into its colour images, it makes sense.

        But only sense. In the larger domain, sense meets evil, and this is brought into our dreams. As such, confusion comes into being. But, we
        can discuss it here, in order to effectively ameliorate it with our means to do so.

        SH

        Like

      • Ton Majoor

        Steiner (1920): ‘Our upper organic sphere is designed so as to enable external light and internal light to counteract one another, to operate alternately; …’
        ‘It is a grave error to suppose that our light on earth comes from the sun. That is only a somewhat fatal fantasy on the part of physicists and astronomers. Our light on earth comes from this outer zone. There it springs up, there it is generated, there it grows as plants grow in the soil of the earth.’
        GA0312/19200331

        From a height of 14 miles upwards the sky appears black:
        Professor August Piccard on his high altitude balloon flight circa 1938 said that the sky turned from blue to deep violet to black. The sky colours recorded by Russian aeronauts changed from ‘marine blue’ at 5.28 miles, through dark blue, dark violet, dark violet-marine, dark violet-grey, to, at a height of 13.67 miles, black-grey.

        Like

    • Ton Majoor

      The quote (The belief that the sun …) is from GA 174b (11/23/1915).

      Like

      • Caryn Louise

        “… the Ether too is imperceptible for our physical senses. If I may put it so, when you are looking at a small fragment of Ether, you see nothing with your physical senses, you simply see through it. The Ether is like an empty nothingness to you. But when you regard the etheric environment as a totality, you behold the blue sky, of which we also say that it is not really there but that you are gazing into empty space. Now the reason why you see the blue of the sky is that you are actually perceiving the end of the Ether. Thus you behold the Ether as the blue of the heavens. The perception of the blue sky is really and truly a perception of the Ether. We may therefore say: In that we perceive the blue of the sky we are perceiving the universal Ether that surrounds us. (GA326 19240604)

        And this leads us to distinguish two parts in the cosmic ether, from which, as you know, our own ether-body is derived. One part is warmth, light, chemical ether, life ether. But behind all this, behind the warmth and light and chemical processes and life, is a moral element — the moral essence of the cosmic ether. (GA0218 19221112)

        The physical organism breathes in air, and breathes out air. The ether organism breathes out light, and this light it gives to us. And when it breathes out light and confers the light upon us, we live by means of its light. And it also breathes in light. As we breathe in and out air, so does our ether body breathe in and out. And when it breathes in light, it uses up the light, just as we use up air physically. The ether body breathes in light, uses up the light and changes it into darkness, and can then receive into this darkness the sound of the worlds that lives in the Harmony of the Spheres, can receive into it the impulses of life. (GA171)

        Liked by 1 person

      • Steiner would go into even further depth of how light has its source on earth with this course; the so-called “first scientific course on light”, given one year before what he blatantly reveals in GA202, December 18, 1920.

        http://wn.rsarchive.org/Lectures/GA320/English/GSF1977/LitCrs_index.html

        You see, he had it known and identified. Even from November 23, 1915, he knew it, ref GA174b, 23 November 1915.

        Why? The Mystery of Golgotha.

        Steve

        Like

  3. Hi, Jeremy, thank you for another interesting post. It does not surprise me that Artists may not like each other’s work. I think of Tolkien and Lewis who remained friends all their lives but their work (and religion) was completely different in tone and character. I have never yet met a creative artist who didn’t wear some sort of blinkers.
    But the issue between Nin and Aldan is more complex than not liking each other’s work. The difference between them reminds me of the discussion between Sophia and Estella in the Prelude to ‘The Portal of Initiation’.
    You asked, ‘what is it about the subject matter that makes Anais Nin and others who don’t share Aldan’s interest in anthroposophy to feel “alienated” and conclude that her poetry has become “removed from human life and psychology”?’
    In the Prelude Estella wants her friend Sophia to accompany her to see ‘The Uprooted’ a contemporary drama, whereas Sophia is committed to supporting a performance (unnamed) at her Occult/Spiritual Society. Almost the first comment Estella makes about her friend’s interest is,’…your world of ideas – which is so ALIEN to me – will destroy even the last remnants of our friendship…’. (My capitalisation)
    Estella also says, ‘….every year … your feelings become more and more estranged from everything in life that seems to me worthwhile…’. She accuses Sophia of believing that her world view is more profound and superior.
    I think Steiner was aware of this gap that can appear between those who are attracted to Anthroposophy and those who are not and he puts words in the mouth of Sophia which can be said in defence of his own drama/art.
    You asked, ‘What is it about the subject matter….’. My own feeling is that it is not so much the subject matter which is a barrier but sometimes it is the way anthroposophists speak of it. Nin says, ‘I feel as if in the presence of a Catholic dogmatist: every thought controlled by a theory.’

    Like

    • Thank you, Tom – you may well be right that a large part of the problem is how anthroposophists speak of anthroposophy. But the problem is inherent in anthroposophy itself, as Tho Ha Vinh has observed: “I feel there is a lack of clarity for most anthroposophists concerning the nature of Rudolf Steiner’s teachings. On one hand everybody emphasizes that it is NOT a religion but a spiritual science, but on the other hand most of the contents of Anthroposophy are completely beyond any one’s cognitive grasp and have to be accepted in good faith. The method presented by Steiner is indeed accessible to all, but the contents he researched are mostly far beyond anyone’s grasp who is not an initiate or a fully realized being. And there seems to be a confusion between advocating for a scientific methodology of contemplative research and inquiry that includes the spiritual dimension of the human being and of the world; and upholding contents that can only be perceived by non-anthroposophists as a revelation given by an enlightened master. I have no problem with the latter, but there is no way one can present these revelations as scientific results that everyone can acknowledge.”
      As it happens, I don’t think Tho has got this quite right; and if one truly has a heart connection with Steiner and feels that one knows and trusts him in his full integrity, then it is quite possible to say that he was, in Canon A P Shepherd’s phrase, “a scientist of the invisible” – but it would of course be unreasonable to expect most people to adopt such a viewpoint without that love, understanding and trust also being present. This is the issue for anthroposophy today and it is why it is likely to remain a niche interest – and why anthroposophists need to reach out and make common cause with others of good will if we are to make any significant difference in the world under today’s conditions.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Visitor

        Following seems to be quite relevant quote for this recurring topic of believing vs. cognition in regards to what was given by/through R. Steiner:

        “It is a complete misunderstanding to say spiritual science must also be believed”

        Spiritual science can be understood by every person who wants to understand its findings. It strives to give people what each individual soul can truly achieve on its own, not by following the religious founders, as in earlier times. And although it must be individual researchers who make the results of this science of the spirit available today, they do so in a form that can be understood by everyone who wants to. I have often emphasized that it is a complete misunderstanding to say spiritual science must also be believed. When people say this, it is because they are so crammed full with materialistic prejudices that they do not look at what spiritual science really has to offer. As soon as it is examined, everything becomes understandable. One does not need clairvoyance for this; our ordinary understanding is enough to really grasp and comprehend all this gradually — of course, “gradually” will be inconvenient for some people.

        https://rudolfsteinerquotes.wordpress.com/2016/10/16/it-is-a-complete-misunderstanding-to-say-spiritual-science-must-also-be-believed/

        Cheers!

        Liked by 1 person

      • Visitor,

        You need to understand that belief is no different than knowledge when it cones down to faith and reason. Some folks perceive it as such.

        You said: “The following seems to be quite a relevant quote for this recurring topic of believing vs. cognition in regards to what was given by/through R. Steiner: It is a complete misunderstanding to say spiritual science must also be believed”

        Steiner never demanded that spiritual science be a matter of belief. Rather, he spearheaded the advocation of knowledge that would embrace living knowledge as proof.

        You said it yourself here, and a fine quote indeed:

        “Spiritual science can be understood by every person who wants to understand its findings. It strives to give people what each individual soul can truly achieve on its own, not by following the religious founders, as in earlier times. And although it must be individual researchers who make the results of this science of the spirit available today, they do so in a form that can be understood by everyone who wants to. I have often emphasized that it is a complete misunderstanding to say spiritual science must also be believed. When people say this, it is because they are so crammed full with materialistic prejudices that they do not look at what spiritual science really has to offer. As soon as it is examined, everything becomes understandable. One does not need clairvoyance for this; our ordinary understanding is enough to really grasp and comprehend all this gradually — of course, “gradually” will be inconvenient for some people.”

        The only thing that matters is that you wrote this. It means a lot, Rudolf Steiner said it again and again, as he hoped for faith to make its way to reason. He was patient, above all things.

        Like

    • Ton Majoor

      Tho Ha Vinh: “… most of the contents of Anthroposophy are completely beyond any one’s cognitive grasp and have to be accepted in good faith. The method presented by Steiner is indeed accessible to all ….”.
      Maybe it is just the other way around: the complicated contents have been made accessible to all, Steiner’s Rosicrucian method (beyond the first stage) has to be accepted in good faith and is not discussed.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. Daisy Aldan translated the Foundation Stone Meditation, c. 1980, and in her preface gives this most remarkable insight into how the first three parallel stanzas can also be put side-by-side and read in a way that becomes music.

    http://wn.rsarchive.org/Lectures/GA260/English/SGP1980/FStMed_preface.html

    “The mantram has four major divisions, three of which are in parallel structure, concerned with the threefold aspect of the human being, as a being of willing, feeling and thinking. A progression is in process. If the three divisions are placed side by side, the lines may also be read across, and there will occur an experience as of music, with major and minor themes, commingling vertically and horizontally, which directions in subtle variations, are evident throughout. Indeed, penetration into the complex structure will reveal a pentagonal dodecahedron implicit in the number of lines, directions indicated, etc.”

    I have studied this method, and it is quite effective in giving a sense of the laws inherent in the dodecahedron structure itself, and its weaving mobility.

    Like

    • For anyone who is interested, here is Daisy Aldan’s translation of the Foundation Stone Meditation:

      The Foundation Stone Meditation

      by Rudolf Steiner (translated by Daisy Aldan)

      Human Soul!
      You live within the limbs,
      Which bear you through the world of space
      Into the Spirit-Ocean-Being:
      Live remembering Spirit
      In soul-depths,
      Where in majestic sway
      Of World-Creator-Being
      Your own I
      In God’s I
      Is begotten:
      And you will live truly
      In the Being of the Human World.

      For there reigns the Father-Spirit of Heights
      In World-depths, creating life.
      You Spirits of Force
      Let from the heights resound
      What in the depths an echo finds;
      This speaks:
      Of the Divine is Mankind born.
      This hear the Spiritual Beings in East, West, North, South:
      May human beings hear it!

      Human Soul!
      You live in the heart-lung throbbing,
      Which guides you through the time-rhythm
      Into the feeling of your own soul’s being:
      Live meditating on Spirit
      In soul equanimity,
      Where the surging
      World-evolving acts
      Your own I With cosmic I
      Unite;
      And you will feel truly
      In Human-Soul-Creating.

      For there reigns the Christ will in the earth-sphere
      In Cosmic rhythm gracing souls.
      You Light-Spirits
      Let from the East ignite
      What through the West takes form:
      This speaks:
      In the Christ, death becomes life.
      This hear the Spiritual Beings in East, West, North, South:
      May human beings hear it.

      Human Soul!
      You live in the reposing head
      Which out of eternal springs
      Unfolds for you Cosmic thoughts:
      Live with Spirit-Vision
      In thought’s tranquillity,
      Where the eternal goals of Gods
      Grant
      Cosmic-Beings’-Light
      To your own I
      For free willing;
      And you will think truly
      Out of founts of Human-Spirit.

      For there reign the Spirit-Cosmic-Thoughts
      In the World-Being, Light imploring.
      You Soul-Spirits
      Let from the depths be prayed for
      What from the heights is granted:
      This speaks:
      In the Spirit’s Cosmic Thoughts
      The soul awakens.
      This hear the Spiritual Beings in East, West, North, South:
      May human beings hear it.

      At time’s turning point
      The Cosmic Spirit-Light entered
      Into earthly life-stream.
      Night-darkness
      Had ended reign.
      Day-bright Light
      Rayed within human souls.
      Light
      Which warms
      The simple shepherd-hearts,
      Light
      Which enlightens
      The wise heads of Kings.

      Godly Light
      Christ-Sun
      Warm
      Our hearts
      Enlighten
      Our heads
      That good may become
      What we
      From hearts found
      What we
      From heads
      Direct with single will.

      Like

  5. wooffles

    Jeremy and Tom, I’ve been thinking about this poem and what you’ve said about niches and dogma. One of the things that is striking about it is that it isn’t about anthroposophical dogma, it’s about anthroposophically guided transformative human experience and the urgent striving for such experience, with Steiner’s imaginations becoming the poet’s’s own. It stands on its own feet; you can respond to it without knowing any of the (niche) anthroposophical background to it.

    Liked by 1 person

    • That poem is indicative of a strong conviction. Considering Nin’s background and behaviour, it is no wonder that she would write:

      “Daisy Aldan’s interest in Rudolf Steiner alienated us. She sees everything through his eyes. God is back again in her poetry – an abstraction. It has removed her from human life and psychology. I feel as if in the presence of a Catholic dogmatist: every thought controlled by a theory. She translates a bad (Swiss) poet, Albert Steffen” From The Diaries of Anaïs Nin, Vol. 7 (1966-1974).

      All I know of Anaïs Nin is contained in the film, “Henry and June”, which depicts the author, Henry Miller, and his existentialist lifestyle in Paris, France. Anyone can see that these were superficial people, and just look at how Daisy Aldan had to maintain the “trapeze life” for Nin in the post-war era in New York. She didn’t have to do it, but she did, out of friendship. Aldan is a special person, whose own obituary was paid for and placed in the New York Times.

      As for Albert Steffen, we all know that he succeeded Rudolf Steiner as President of the General Anthroposophical Society until 1963. And, as such, he wrote a great deal of prose and poems that honored his deep esoteric inclinations. Sadly, it is largely forgotten today, but not to Daisy Aldan, who wrote of him.

      http://www.exploringtheword.com.au/Text/1134177111046-9533/About-Albert-Steffen

      Liked by 1 person

  6. Truth Seeker

    It is a long time ago when I read Delta of Venus and I have forgotten the details.
    Would Steiner have enjoyed this book? 😉

    Like

  7. What a wonderful tribute, Jeremy.

    Like

  8. A wonderful piece, Jeremy, thank you.
    The reason for our state today, where there are so few anthroposophists, and where, if you quote Steiner, you can almost see a thought-bubble over someone’s head: ‘Blind follower of a guru’, is because although all the truths Steiner gave CAN be understood by anyone with healthy human reason, that healthy reason is lacking today.

    It’s a knock-on effect. If more people in the 1920’s had taken what Steiner came to offer, then the following decades would have been different, the education of more children would have been different …. and so on. We are where we are now because far fewer people ‘woke up’ than was hoped.

    I can’t back this up with links; but I’ve read nearly everything by Steiner in English, and in the past, whenever I came to a ‘prophecy’ about the future, as in, ‘Fifty years from now, this or that will be accepted’, I made a mental note of it. And it’s clear that he foresaw a very different scenario from the one we have. Was he wrong? No, it could all have happened, but didn’t …. humanity, you could say, chose another timeline.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Truth Seeker

      If you profess the power of exact clairvoyance, should you not be right about the things you make prophecies about?

      Liked by 2 people

      • Who said that Teleile had the power of exact clairvoyance? I didn’t get that notion at all. Rather, I see the human timeline as averting somehow the predicted disaster of consequences since the wars of the 20th century. That should have ended it, and yet now we are engaged in a great war on terror, which would have been kept still if a Soviet Union still existed. Yet, America intervened in order to upset the balance of power in the world. Thus, the prophecies are real, none the less.

        Steiner predicted a future in which initiates would foretell the truth, and in which we can all look forward to our very next incarnation, in which the Michael faculty will be present as an existent fact. Likely, you missed this rendering as mere words, which makes sense for an atheist. Yet, it is not really about this incarnation at all, but the next, where we begin to “get it”.

        Steve

        Liked by 1 person

    • Humanity did not choose any other timeline. If that were so, then peace
      would be upon us. But is peace upon us? No. Anyone can see rather easily that Steiner’s foresight predicted exactly what we face today. In other words,
      annihilation of the human species, and its earth, is what Steiner worried about some 100 years ago by now. And don’t we have the history to prove it?

      Yet, Steiner also saw both Christ and Michael as becoming instrumental in helping to avert the ultimate disaster. Maybe we stand in the balance, and that represents our timeline today. As ignorant as ever, we stand within grace and truth, and yet still don’t know it. In future, I believe this present dilemma will change. It will require getting on to the next incarnation. I perceive that, by then, we will be fully invested in this perception:

      “Not I but Christ and Michael in Me”. I say this all the time, even today, in this incarnation, in which I bemoan the world situation as it stands.

      Steve

      Liked by 1 person

    • Can anyone tell me exactly what is the difference between ‘human reason’ and ‘..healthy human reason’ ? What does ‘unhealthy’ human reason look like?

      Liked by 1 person

  9. I really give up here. You somehow contrive always to miss the point, and go off on an intellectual exercise in pedantry or hair-splitting. I don’t wish to be rude, but I’ve had more intelligent conversations with cats. (Not you, Gemma – I mean the others).

    Liked by 1 person

    • Excuse me, but that is extremely rude, and Tom asks a reasonable question. I previously wrote my own thoughts on it, but maybe we need to take it to the next level. If the human timeline today existed on its own merits, we would all be dead by now. Why? Well, for one reason, hardly anybody knows, or cares to know of the great work of Rudolf Steiner in bringing spiritual science into the world in order to make a difference. Another, concerns the reason why Siddhartha Gautama went to Mars in the aftermath of his attainment of Buddha-hood. Another reason concerns what it means to be able to say: “Not I But Christ In Me”. Even, “Michael In Me”, is a reasonable expression for those who really care today about the world situation.

      In short, the so-called “final solution” has always been a threat, ever since negative third-force energy was exploited and realized, and then carried into its further consequences, as seen with 9/11 dustification of buildings, and the power of compact “drones” to do the same. Yet, every endeavour comes up short of the goal of “final solution”. Why? Because human spiritual evolution exists to achieve a goal which goes back a long way to when God established a clause and covenant which said: “Let Us make man in Our Own Image, and according to Our Likeness”. “And God made man in His Image, male and female, He made them”.

      So, the covenant and clause, made way back when, must mean something to uphold. Fortunately, it is still working, even as the war on terror increases, and the U.S. is about to elect its next president from two irrepressibly pathetic candidates.

      But, what is one to do? Either vote for an existent failure, or take a chance on the rogue. I am leaning toward the latter, but only because now, in the aftermath of the recent third debate, I can see why she is a “nasty woman”. It really shows, folks.

      At any rate, moving right along toward what the present and future provide.

      Steve

      Like

  10. Wittgensetein’s pupil, Geach, when accused of ‘hair-splitting’ responded, ‘truth may lie half a hair’s breadth away.’
    I am interested in how other anthroposophists understand this apparently innocuous phrase, ‘healthy reasoning’, which we often find in the translations of Steiner’s work. Phrases like this can cover up a lack of precision in thinking.
    Reasoning is either logical or not. It is either consistent or not. It is ‘sound’ or not. The legal realm abounds with useful phrases for evaluating reasoning.
    The reasoning behind, for example, the dropping of nuclear bombs on Japan may have been logical, sound, consistent, and legal. (Though because of my moral stance I personally may have rejected it as a course of action).
    I doubt if any of the generals involved with the bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima asked themselves if their reasoning was ‘healthy’.
    Only in translations of Steiner do we find reasoning being described as ‘healthy’.
    I assume that people who use such formulations as ‘healthy reasoning’ also accept that reasoning can be unhealthy. Otherwise what is the force of the qualifying word?
    I suspect that when some people say ‘healthy reasoning’ they actually mean ‘judgements that agree with my own’. And I suspect Steiner may have been guilty of this! But it sounds good, “My reasoning is ‘healthy’.”
    Being more charitable it could mean, ‘reasoning that leads to a healthy outcome’. Then you could debate , “Well, is that outcome really healthy?”, which is a different question.
    The problem arises from using a ‘value word’, in this case ‘healthy’, to describe a process which is usually evaluated in terms of logic, soundness, consistency and other terms which do not rely on personal value judgements. If ‘unhealthy’ was simply being used to mean inconsistent or illogical, people could easily track down the lack of logic or inconsistency.

    Many people do not see Steiner’s explanations as being either logical or consistent. To quote Tho Ha Vinh ‘most of the contents of Anthroposophy are completely beyond anyone’s cognitive grasp and have to be accepted in good faith.’ I think he is stuck at the point of ‘cognitive grasp’, but that is another realm to explore.

    Most of the arts, have be ‘accepted in good faith’, in the sense that we are required to suspend disbelief. If we can then it is possible for our souls to receive great healing wisdom. For example from Shakespeare’s fantasies, from Sibelius’s music, from Greg Tricker’s paintings – everyone has their favourites.
    This suspension of disbelief is often the closest I can come to the contents of anthroposophy.
    I can tell other people what I experience through inner work but I cannot explain much of anthroposphy to others, except as if I were trying to explain an ancient mythology to some one, or one of Mary Oliver’s poems.
    I don’t give up on anthroposophy, because even after 45 years, I do feel that I get great healing wisdom from it.

    Cats are comforting to talk to, they don’t ask awkward questions. In my experience they are quite phlegmatic, unless in hunter/killer mode.

    Like

    • Visitor

      In today’s circumstances healthy reason is or should be the one which is able to oppose or resist common or linear logic. That probably the first symptom of healthy reasoning, because healthy reaction is putting into question eg. fully logical but in many ways awkward and inevitable final consequences of materialistic worldview.
      Healthy reason is the one which goes beyond ‘safe ride ‘ to ‘facts’ which so conveniently offer linear or even mechanical -like logic. Precisely because of this illusion of safety by threading the chain of logical steps anthroposophy is needed. Steiner’s exposition seems illogical or meta-logical and because of that so different and difficult to follow with usual brains.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Visitor

        Tom, we may see on many occasions Steiner tells that people are oh so clever, almost too clever… For what?
        I see it as attempt to point to fact that most concepts we have about anything today are wrong or directly opposite of true. So, being very clever means having extensive capacity to move in all sorts of wrong directions, instead, it would be better to think or ‘know ‘ less as first step that even Goethe recommends. There are notions of ‘unlearning ‘ in many fields today, slowly cracking even shields of Academia.
        So, sign of healthy reasoning today basically means first and foremost acknowledge but not internalize or identify with all sorts of concepts one gets bombarded with mostly through education. Then there is hopefully some ‘residual ‘ space remained to probe something completely different like Goetheanism.
        Hence, unhealthy is every reasoning completely absorbed and submerged in contemporary ‘knowledge’ in most of disciplines.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Midnight Rambler

      I have heard Anthroposophists talk about using “heart thinking and moral logic” which seem relevant to these discussions. Can anyone articulate what these mean and give examples of how they can be applied to the current world situation ? How do they differ from “gut feeling”, common sense, and intellectual logic and how do they relate to the belief systems people have built up through their religious or political persuasions ?

      Liked by 1 person

      • Visitor, Ton Majoor suggests that ‘healthy reasoning’ equates with commonsense. Both formulations imply that Steiner is appealing to some accepted standard or norm when he speaks of HEALTHY reasoning or COMMONsense. But ‘commonsense’ seems to have less of a ‘spin’ to it than ‘healthy’ reasoning. ‘Commonsense’ seems less biased to me. Most people know that commonsense is not always right.

        As you imply, the great creative thinkers are often those who question the accepted commonsense of their day, who pursue logic beyond the bounds of commonsense, the people who will question the appearance of things. People such as Copernicus – challenging the commonsense belief that the sun moves round the earth, Einstein – challenging the accepted belief that the falling apple is attracted to the centre of the earth by an invisible force, and Wittgenstein – challenging the folk belief/paradigm that language is essentially a process of naming. Steiner himself was just such a person who went beyond the bounds of commonsense so it always amuses me when he does appeal to commonsense.
        I suspect that he appeals to commonsense when he has run out of reasons in attempting to explain something which he experiences as being true, but can’t provide grounds for saying it is true. I mean, grounds which someone like me, who lacks precise clairvoyance, would understand.

        If I understand you correctly you are saying healthy reasoning goes beyond commonsense. So what does unhealthy reasoning do?

        Midnight Rambler , ‘heart-thinking’ is indeed one of those phrases one finds anthroposophists using without ever giving an example of it. When I am feeling charitable I think they probably mean thinking which springs from or takes full account of feeling, or is imbued with feeling. Likewise ‘moral logic’ can be seen as ‘the logic of my morality’. Logic itself is neither moral nor immoral. It is good in the way that maths is good – it is part of God’s creation, of the Logos. But this good gift from God can be used by us for moral or immoral purposes.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Wow, these are huge questions for a blog commentary, but it can be shown that Michael is the focal point of “heart thinking”, which is the warmth-center of the soul. Read these lectures, and you will know what is required.

        http://wn.rsarchive.org/Lectures/GA223/English/AP1946/MiSoul_index.htm

        Perceiving the cycle of the year, and the four seasons, and how the Earth stands between the Sun and the Moon on the ecliptic path involving precession of the equinoxes, and how the earth moves in its various curves, will bring about this “heart thinking”. Studying the Mithras Mystery, which is ‘heart-centered’ around the sacrifice of the Bull nature to the Sun-Hero is a true
        cosmological system. Moral logic is entirely dedicated to freedom, and rising above the stranglehold of nature necessity. Thus, free ethical individualism sees a moral world order above nature, which is pure spirit, and immortal.

        Of course, Evil is a fact of existence that opposes all of the above, and would constrain humanity to the principles of deterministic nature, which would be enslavement if it weren’t for the higher worlds, and the power of a moral imagination based on free being. Thus, education is the cultural imperative today, and why Spiritual Science exists well ahead of its time, thank God.

        Like

      • Ton Majoor

        For ‘heart-thinking’ Steiner referred to the biological works of Aristotle (the brain cooling the upward streaming blood) and to Descartes’ animal spirits:

        “This consciousness of etheric currents rising from the heart to the head was certainly to be found until far on into the Middle Ages, right on into the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. We find a certain awareness of it even in the works of Descartes. But according to historians of philosophy ‘Descartes has some fantastic tale about the vital spirits which flow from the heart to the brain, but that is just an old-wives’ tale. Happily we know better than that.’”(GA0129/19110826)

        Cf. Haertl (2000), http://www.rsarchive.org/RelArtic/GoldM/etheric_heart.html

        Like

  11. Ton Majoor

    Healthy reasoning seems to be a retranslation of ‘Gesunder Menschenverstand’ and synonymous with Common Sense (Reid etc.).

    Judgement/truth can be both objective and subjective, e.g.:
    ‘True, the objective content of the judgment remains firmly fixed outside the realm of feeling, but in order that the subjective human soul may become convinced of the rightness of the judgment, feeling must develop. Etc. (Study of Man, Lecture V)

    Liked by 2 people

  12. Caryn Louise

    At time’s turning point
    The Cosmic Spirit-Light entered
    Into earthly life-stream.
    Night-darkness
    Had ended reign.
    Day-bright Light
    Rayed within human souls.
    Light
    Which warms
    The simple shepherd-hearts,
    Light
    Which enlightens
    The wise heads of Kings.

    “It is as if they were at the very centre of all the slow wheeling of space and the rapid agitation of life, deep, deep inside them all, at the centre where there is utter radiance, and eternal being, and the silence absorbed in praise: the steady core of all movements, the unawakened sleep of all wakefulness. They were at the heart of eternity, whilst time roared far off, forever far off, towards the rim.

    DH Lawrence – The Rainbow

    Liked by 1 person

    • It is interesting to note that for many years, the Foundation Stone Verses were cut in half, and only the first portion was allowed to be made public. Even as late as 1976, with this book by Rudolf Grosse, which seeks to re-establish the incentives of the CC of 1923, he leaves out the second half of the four stanzas.

      https://books.google.com/books?id=LktoNPGxXNUC&dq=Rudolf%20grosse&source=gbs_book_other_versions

      Caryn, I noticed that you did this very same thing with the above, concerning the fourth stanza. And maybe you did so for a good reason, but these verses all have two segments. The first half is the convocation, or even what we might call, “the act of consecration”. The second half is the invocation, or “act of transubstantiation”. This is where the Spiritual Hierarchies are invoked for the good of all who listened over the course of those eight days, and who also listen and recite today.

      Why the GAS felt the need to withdraw its full affection for the membership in the aftermath of the death of Rudolf Steiner, and even withholding these verses in their full extent for many years, remains one of those secretive mysteries still not revealed, which also includes the sudden and violent death of Carl Unger in early January 1929; the infamous Purge of the English and Dutch members in 1935; and Marie’s own failure to publish the CC proceedings itself for 21 years, until 1944, ref. GA 260.

      Even Grosse, in his book cited above, says that the members had been clamoring for these verses, as well as the conference proceedings for years. I would say that they were all let down, and Ita Wegman and Elizabeth Vreede were fired from their positions as Vorstand members in 1935. No explanation has ever been given to this day about these matters.

      Steve

      Liked by 1 person

      • Caryn Louise

        One can speak of it as follows, in the words of the meditation given by Rudolf Steiner to the spirit of the German people:

        Er “hat nicht vollendet,
        Was er im Weltenwerden schaffen soll.
        Er lebt in Zukunftsorgen hoffnungsvoll,
        Er hofft auf Zukunftst aten lebensvoll; –
        In seines Wesens Tiefen fühlt er mächtig
        Verborgenes, das noch reifend wirken muß.-
        Wie darf in Feindesmacht verständnislos
        Der Wunsch nach seinem Ende sich beleben,
        Solang das Leben sich ihm offenbart,
        Das ihn in Wesenswurzeln schaffend hält?”

        It “has not completed
        What it is to create in world-becoming.
        It lives in care for the future, filled with hope,
        It hopes for deeds of the future, filled with life;-
        In the depths of its being it feels mightily
        A hidden power which must yet work, as it ripens.-
        How can the wish for its end
        Stir uncomprehendingly in hostile power,
        So long as it revealed to it the life
        That holds it creatively in the roots of being?”

        The Christmas Conference in the Changed Conditions of the Times, page 201, By G. A. Bondarev, 2005

        Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s