STEINER WALDORF SCHOOLS AND INSTITUTIONS

[theantignome]

hi everyone, i wanted to start a new thread with a NEW topic heading here, as the active one at the moment with over 700 posts looks like it is all about the Cambridge school. This may confuse newcomers.

Let's continue the debate here !
All newcomers welcome !

I will shortly link our two previous threads on MN for any one new to have a look at.

Davy, could you also give a link to your new yahoo list here please ? Thanks.

Kneedeepinthedirtylaundry - Great post

Could you say more about the phone conversation with the person running the school. Did you allude to the outside world? Say something terribly modern? Mention radio, or even tv?

"They don't actually teach anthroposophy, but it does inform all their decisionas and choices, so they can honestly say they don't TEACH it.....Anthroposohy underpins everything in the Steiner movement, but they never mention it in any promotional literature."

Northern, it's exactly this deception by ommission that has come to light in this thread. I find it chilling.

Janni, sorry, would really rather not say publically. Would happily CAT you the info though, if you're CAT-able?

Judgement is a very big thing here. Having been around steiner for the last 6/7 years I have never felt so judged. My family including my children have come under the closest scrutiny. How you talk, how you move, what you wear, what job you have, what car you drive, your 'energy', your starsign, what food you eat, the medicine you do or don't take etc.

The first question people ask around here is not what do you do, where do you live. Its what school does your dc's go to?

Thing is I don't want to or need to ask that question. I can spot the buggers higher spiritual beings at 50 paces.

Kneedeepinthedirtylaundry,

you have also asked:

"are you going to clear up this Wiki business or just act as if DianaW hasn't challenged you?"

What DianaW has written about the admin Durova's description of her as histrionic, after I suspected Diana to have been a new user at WP, who started editing extensively in a very crafty way, immediately after appearing, using very similar argumentation as DianaW, after DianaW inexplicably disappeared from the discussion (now she has told it was caused by a heart attack of her father), is correct.

As far as I remember, the admin agreed with my suspicion that the new user was a sock puppet, and afterwards described DianaW with:

"In my last interactions she was decidedly histrionic".

At one time some 18 months ago, Diana and I discussed and disagreed on whether it was proper to describe the small, anti-Waldorf fringe group, that she has supported fervently for many years at is mailing list and through diatribes in different forums, as a "hate type of group" or not.

To the basis for my view, developed over the last decade based on experience of the group, belongs among other things this, and what is summarized here. The first mentioned section at a site is a more systematical and developed description of what is found here.

After our discussion, Diana on the WC-discussion list described her own way of "discussing" with me at WP with:

"Y'all know me here, so you know what I did. I ranted and raved, and then I ranted and raved. I ranted and raved systematically, every 2 hours or oftener"

Her own view of herself and her natural way of being ("Y'all know me") does not seem to differ that much from the admin's view of her.

As for sock puppets, the waldorf critic that DianaW supported at all times at WP until he was banned indefinitely from editing all Waldorf-related articles for his behaviour, at one time expressed his suspicion, that DianaW calls lying, that I and I think two others used sock puppets.

I just told him it was nonsense and left the issue.

Kneedeep and Northern - They should be own up and rename themselves 'Anthoposophy Schools'.

Tis the only way.

barking, I think the thing that offended that person (trying to be gender non-specific) most was that my lo attends a montessori nursery. They gave me a brusque lecture about the evils of montessori, and how my ds is already badly programed and will need to spend a long time unlearning all the negative stuff that had already gone in.

He's a person, not a computer, I felt like adding. But didn't, sadly, being 24 hours behind any confrontational situation at any given moment.

They didn't ask me a single question about him except his age.

Then that person seemed to be trying to freak me out by, out of the blue, coming out with "all the teachers meditate on each child every and say a prayer for him or her" kind of stuff, and seemed frustrated when all I said was "that's nice". (I know meditating on the children is a Steiner thing, which I had genuinelly thought was "nice", but I think they thought I was either unsuitably underwealmed, or not as terrified as they would have liked me to have been.)

I told them I lived quite far from the school, and wondered about the travelling time to and fro. They told me that if I wasn't willing to move close to a school, i had obviously chosen my proirities...

While I was being upbeat and friendly throughout, their tone was cold, unwelcoming, and I though to myself "neurotic" as soon as I put the phone down.

I was not disappointed the prospectus didn't come, and made further enquiries at a different Steiner school where everyone I spoke to was very nice.

Eva/Sune/TheBee/whatever - I am a happy Steiner parent (and ex-pupil) and yet you are managing to alienate even me!

Why can't you actually explain some of the Anthro stuff? Why do you insist on getting bogged down in minutae about who uses what name and who knows who and who's in what group? I don't understand at all why you seem so determined to avoid answering anyone's questions.

I have to say I think you are not doing Steiner/Anthroposophy any favours at all. You're coming across as evasive, obsessive, blinkered, and slightly weird. Sorry. But you are.

I suspect that there are not Anthros coming on the threads to offer reasoned debate is cos they don't tend to have computers - not the real hardcore ones anyway. In fact most Anthros I know would think it was not healthy to be spending lots of time bickering on the internet when life has so much to offer

And before anyone asks me to hold forth on Anthro matters, as I've said before I think its quite mad and I have no interest in it. My child has been at a Steiner school as I feel it offers the education most in tune with our lifestyle. I am happy to take what I need from the school and disregard the bullshit rest - I know its not what everyone would be happy with but it suits us.

I think they should also put in brackets under each school sign, by the way we're only here to find Manes/Manu
Or do you think that would put prospective money parents off?

Rickross website
Poster: Erasmus

The most disturbing thing I ever read about Steiner was from a short lecture given in 1946 at the Threefold Community in NY state. I always thought Steiner was the rational one during the Krishnamurti fiasco of the Theosophical Society. From what I understood, Steiner completely rejected Theosophical attempts to pass a boy off as the reincarnation of Maitreya. However, then I discovered this little gem:

"The threefold social order of Rudolf Steiner is particularly a preparatory work to bring about a future incarnation of Manes. I once discussed with Rudolf Steiner the question of when would be the proper time for the application of etheric forces for technical uses. He said that this would be when the threefold order is established. He said that Manes could not find a suitable body yet, that all the forces he would be able to bring to an incarnation would be destroyed by modern education. Therefore he said that Waldorf education needed first to come into being and that the threefold social order must also come into being.
Therefore I would see it as our immediate task to bring about this threefold order first through thought and then through action, so that Manes can incarnate. By karma, Manes' incarnation would be due by the end of the century. Whether this will be possible I do not know, but if the threefold social order and Waldorf education were established he could incarnate. I see it as our task to make the preparations so that he can incarnate again."

Ehrenfried Pfeiffer
THE TASK OF THE ARCHANGEL MICHAEL
1946

And to confirm this, I also quote Bernard Lievegoed from his THE BATTLE OF THE SOUL ( 1993 ):

"Rudolf Steiner once said to Pfeiffer that he had started the Waldorf school and the threefold social order to make the incarnation of Manu and his helpers possible. Let us hope there are enough active anthroposophists to accomplish what Manu needs for his development. And let us hope anthroposophists will recognize him once he is here."

My question is this: How many people who are involved in Waldorf education, whether they be teachers, parents, students, etc, are aware that the grand purpose of Waldorf is to create a culture conducive to the incarnation of a spirit being named Manes/Manu??

plumandolive, you write:

"There aren't many Steiner bods on here though are there? Why don't they support what they believe in?"

They support what they think is good by work, not by engaging in endless fruitless discussions about it with people like some of those here in these threads.

Well said, Stripeymama

Barking - I would hazard that NONE of the parents at my sons' school would be aware of that.

Kneedeep - "They gave me a brusque lecture about the evils of montessori, and how my ds is already badly programed and will need to spend a long time unlearning all the negative stuff that had already gone in".
I guess they feel threatened by Montessori as put simply - Montessori is based in the real practical world and steiner is based in the imaginary.

So disturbing. Yes the age thing was probably wondering how many years your lo had been exposed to the modern world. And any relationship with the modern world means (in their eyes) it pollutes the community.

I can remember waiting to get my prospectus at one of the fayres and while waiting in the queue, a mother in front asked the secretary: 'how do you help children who are psychic?'
he replied oh so wisely 'Here, we believe all children are psychic.'

By Thebee on Wed 26-Mar-08 21:34:10
plumandolive, you write:

"There aren't many Steiner bods on here though are there? Why don't they support what they believe in?"

They support what they think is good by work, not by engaging in endless fruitless discussions about it with people like some of those here in these threads.

well said 'TheBee'...now why dont you sod off and allow us to disscuss the schools and thier meothods like normal 'mums at the school gates' do?? why do you feel the need ot constantly pick holes in what we have experienced???
i couldnt care less which reincarnation of which fish you think you are, but i dont keep telling you that you are wrong do i??

oh, maybe i do...

Kneedeep Thanks for telling about your waldorfian encounters. I think the kids didn't look happy because they weren't happy. Happiness is in short supply in waldorf schools/kindergartens. It's not their priority.

It's a really sad and depressed environment, in my opinion. The rituals and the rigidity, the solemn emotional state, the boredom, the general disorder (because of the boredom), kids trying to enjoy themselves by teasing and hurting each other. And actually I think lots of the children feel the lack of appreciation, that they aren't loved or even liked, by the grown-ups (teachers etc).

Barking The psychic incident - ah, well, they confess when the audience is right (slight mistake to not note the other people, though). To a sceptic parent asking about their beliefs in psychic abilities, they would never answer that they believe all kids are psychic. Try ask Sune what he thinks the general attitude towards psychic children are. There will be no comprehensible answer. (I bet there will be yet another link.)

StripeyMama I always sort of suspected that that was how Sune comes across even to people who are positive to waldorf, at least when exposed to him for a while

JamSamBam, you write to me:

"why dont you sod off and allow us to disscuss the schools and thier meothods like normal 'mums at the school gates' do?? why do you feel the need ot constantly pick holes in what we have experienced???"

I feel no great need to pick holes in, and regret the sad experiences at times described here, that primarily may be rooted in the attitude of one or more of the co-workers at a school, problems of parents, or problems of the children that the parents often with great hopes and expectations have put at a Waldorf school, expecting the school to help them with all their problems with their children.

In Germany, the number of pupils at Waldorf schools who 2005 lived in a divided home with just one parent is markedly greater (36,1%) than the average for all schools in Germany (29,6%).

Maybe something similar is the case in the U.K.

What I do take an interest in is the way anthroposophy is described and referred to here as the direct cause and "explanation" of the experiences in question.

As most of the "info" on this point in these discussions are taken from what is cultivated and published by the small anti-waldorf fringe group, that I have mentioned a number of times, and of which I have some ten years of experience, possibly more than most people, I think it is important to contribute to an understanding of the nature, context and origin of the "information" in question.

Thebee - my younger son, now in a 'proper' school, is considered bright, able and a pleasure to teach. At Steiner he was up on his desk and under his chair with the rest of them.

My husband and I have been together for twenty years.

Sune Nordwall wrote:

"What DianaW has written about the admin Durova's description of her as histrionic, after I suspected Diana to have been a new user at WP, who started editing extensively in a very crafty way, immediately after appearing, using very similar argumentation as DianaW, after DianaW inexplicably disappeared from the discussion (now she has told it was caused by a heart attack of her father), is correct."

The above is classic Sune prose - one of the purest nuggets I've seen . . .

Look what he does above - admit I am right and he was totally wrong, but oh so many words between "What Diana has written . . . " and " . . . is correct"! A long twisted deranged rant in between that is supposed to sound like I was actually wrong when I was right. Phrases like "very crafty" and the administrator "suspected" etc. etc. - yes everyone "suspected" things because you accused me of them, but they were PROVEN UNTRUE.

Ladies, he will try absolutely every angle that occurs to him - he will stop at nothing. This "maybe these are all divorced families," he's tried this dozens of times. It's just throw stuff at the wall and see what sticks.

For the record, I've been happily married for 18 years.

And the attempt to blame it on the families or the children ("problem children"), Sune has no idea what a misstep that is, the anger it causes when the children themselves are blamed - how badly that hurts his position rather than helps. He has no idea how far in outer space comments like that make him appear, and how impossible it would be to repair a rift of trust like that afterwards.

Janni, like your child, my child also has been very successful in other schools, and at the Waldorf school, he was extremely well liked. He never caused a problem of any kind at the Waldorf school or anywhere else.

He is now an honor student at one of the best public high schools in the US, and a happy, well-liked, well-adjusted 15-year-old. At recent report card conferences, every teacher told us how much they like our son and how happy they are to have him in the class.

"regret the sad experiences at times described here, that primarily may be rooted in the attitude of one or more of the co-workers at a school, problems of parents, or problems of the children that the parents often with great hopes and expectations have put at a Waldorf school, expecting the school to help them with all their problems with their children."

Sune, you just have no idea - I just can't tell you what a misstep the above is, how far wrong you go saying something like that to mums here. I'd like to chalk this up to childlessness and cluelessness but frankly I think it's sadistic.

"After our discussion, Diana on the WC-discussion list described her own way of "discussing" with me at WP with:

"Y'all know me here, so you know what I did. I ranted and raved, and then I ranted and raved. I ranted and raved systematically, every 2 hours or oftener"

Her own view of herself and her natural way of being ("Y'all know me") does not seem to differ that much from the admin's view of her."

What are you on about? You can't even follow a conversation. I guess you think I said something bad above?

I was talking about trying to keep up with the anthroposphical zealots who babysit wikipedia. Try it sometime for laughs - make a change on one of those pages that suggests anything critical about steiner or Waldorf - it will be reverted within minutes. Literally - I would test it - whatever I wrote would be reverted in under 30 minutes on the clock.

They sit in shifts, babysitting the Steiner related articles on wikipedia.

"What I do take an interest in is the way anthroposophy is described and referred to here as the direct cause and "explanation" of the experiences in question."

... There is just quite a bit to parse in your contributions here today, Sune. They are demented, and misguided and that's the kindest thing I can think of to say about them.

I suggest you get some kind of advice or mentoring from other anthroposophists as to whether this kind of thing is really helpful to anybody. It cannot be luring people to Waldorf schools. You have even pro-Steiner people on this thread trying to tell you you're giving them second thoughts about anthroposophy - not that they had any very positive thoughts about anthroposophy anyway.

Let me tell you why: you state above that while you have no particular interest in picking holes in people's stories 1) these are probably problem children anyway, perhaps from divorced homes and 2) your only real interest "what I do take an interest in" is . . . anthroposophy.

You sum up what the mothers here are trying to tell you, and what they are expressing in the bitter stories told on this thread:

Anthroposophists don't care much about children. Anthroposophists care about anthroposophy.

You say it yourself clearly. What you don't seem to know is how right you are, and how sad that is.

Sune tells us:

"In Germany, the number of pupils at Waldorf schools who 2005 lived in a divided home with just one parent is markedly greater (36,1%) than the average for all schools in Germany (29,6%)."

I'm curious what is the source of that statistic, Sune?

(Been doing some research? Any progress on sourcing the quotes on your own web site?)

Can I ask you something - do you honestly believe that it's possible there are problems in German Waldorf schools because of some greater incidence of divorce?

and I wonder if we know which came first - the divorce and then they put the kids in a Steiner school, hoping the school will "solve all the child's problems" - or the child starts to have problems in the Steiner school and the parents disagree about it and ultimately divorce?

On the critics and survivors lists we've heard quite a few tales of parental disputes about Waldorf/Steiner. There is often one parent smitten and totally absorbed in the cult (more often the mother) and the other parent dismayed and trying/hoping to extricate them. We used to call it the "bride of Steiner" phenomenon.

DianaW - at The Bride of steiner phenomenon, but at the same time all so familiar.

Sorry to disappoint you Bee/sune/eva Another happily married one here - 16 years. And child thriving top of class in 'proper school'.

You forgot one thing, we would all still have our children at steiner school were it not for the hidden agenda that calls itself anthroposophy.

Think about it.