Mothering › Mothering Discussion Forums › Education › Learning at School › Waldorf › Reflections on a weekend waldorf conference
New Posts  All Forums:
 

Reflections on a weekend waldorf conference - Page 2

post #21 of 63
Thread Starter 
Beansavi

Yes, we've talked about this before. I'm aware that some kindergartens don't provide black (or brown) to the children. What I could have said better is the things like the black crayons are rumored to be quote/unquote "official" Waldorf, that black is "forbidden". I've heard many times that some teachers pull these colors, and I think you earlier indicated this was the case when you taught in your school. I meant that it's a rumor that Waldorf education itself *forbids* them, like some official policy or something. Black crayons were made available in my children's classrooms, even their kindy drawings. And they were available from the waldorf vendors. What I characterize as *rumors* are the claims that these issues are "the way it's supposed to be", that there is some kind of official Waldorf rule in effect. (An additional rumor holds that the more experienced teachers are more rigid to these so-called official rules, and that new teachers are more likely to deviate. This isn't true in my observation from our school either. I think the more experienced teachers are much more successful in distinguishing and prioritizing between what's the True Waldorf philosophy and one Particular Waldorf Practice or another).

I forget the exact relationship, but I've heard Stockmar described as an anthroposophical company. And they do sell crayon sets without black or brown, but they also sell sets with only black (or only brown).

When I was in kindergarten, we were only allowed one color at a time for the first few months. I can remember this so well . We started with red, and that's all we had for a week, it seemed like. We were given coloring book dittos of "red" things to color. A red fire engine. A red apple, etc. We used it to color a letter we were learning in the ABCs too.Then blue--I remember the bluebird (which we don't have where I grew up ) Yellow sun, Orange - orange. Green tree. Purple grapes, then brown. Anyway, black was last. I remember we colored a black bear. And though the teacher must have had some pedagogical reason for teaching us colors this way, in this sequence, black last, I wouldn't characterize the black as "forbidden" in my public school.

But I'd like you to explain more what you mean about the blonde thing. I was speaking of angels, not fairy tales. So this is a different, though equally unsettling, issue. What do you mean that you were taught that the blonde fairy tale characters were closer to Christ? How exactly is this taught? In Jorinda and Joringel, for example, no hair color is given, although Jorinda is described as the "fairest of all". Though "fair" can mean "blonde", it can also simply mean "pretty". As in another FT my children were told, Little Snow White, who was the "fairest one of all", though her hair was as black as ebony. And no Waldorf teacher is encouraged to add any concrete specifics to the FT that weren't already there. They aren't even taught to impart any specific emotional drama to it, but to just let the child respond to the archetypal imagery that comes from the folk tale itself.

Do teacher trainees in the class question this at all?

Linda
post #22 of 63
I have to add that my kids had black and brown crayons in Kindergarten and they had teachers with over 20 years of experience. My son used black for his boat riggings. My daughter used black and brown to draw people of all colors because that was a reflection of her friends at school as well as the dolls available for play. The teachers had many puppets available and often told the same story more than once. They would often change which puppet represented which part with each telling. So the girls in Mother Holle would be blond in one telling, brown haired and skinned in the next and so on.
post #23 of 63
Okay,

So we can say that things vary from school to school. My point is simply that Waldorf teachers like me were trained in what I said below. I think where the actual professors come from make a difference, too. My main one was from Germany and her father had been a big Waldorf person there and in founding Rudolf Steiner College. My other point is that Steiner talks about the "vibration of black", etc etc. I'm not really in the mood to go into all that again, but its covered in the "Safe Haven" thread, thoroughly.

Just trying to set an example of "it's not all black and white, right and wrong..."

My baby needs me....signing off for now...

Beth

Quote:
Originally Posted by beansavi
Linda,

As a trained Waldorf teacher, I have to say that the information you've sited in your original post are not "rumors". They are actual facts about Waldorf Education, though there may be occasional exceptions in some conferences, schools, etc. Yes the black crayons come in the box, yes there are multicultural dolls, but...

However, Waldorf is Anthroposophy. Therefore it has earned its stereotypes by its own history of actions and pedagogical recommendations.

Stockmar crayon company is not "Waldorf" itself. It's a company Waldorf schools order from. When teachers get their crayon shipment, they pull out the black ones.

Waldorf teachers tell fairy tales having been taught themselves in Waldorf teacher-training that the blonde haired character is closer to Christ than a dark one! The Waldorf teacher has been taught this and knows she is passing this information on to the child. That is a Waldorf teacher's mission. S/he believes they will improve the world by passing on the "Mysteries" hidden in the fairy tales that only the child's soul can grasp, since they are so pure.

Therefore, in the Waldorf classroom, you will see the child gravitate toward the blonde doll in play because she or he looks most like "Jorinda and Joringal" or whatever characters from the fairy tale they've been hearing that week.

I am a trained Waldorf teacher, and none of what I saw you mention in the original post was rumor at all. It was fact, recommended to me in my training by the head honchos in Waldorf Education in the USA!
post #24 of 63
Beansavi - doesn't it stand to reason that you may have had a slightly different training and practice than what Linda experienced at the conference. One person cannot speak for the entire movement.

And, we used stockmar products in the public school in which I taught most recently.
post #25 of 63
Big sigh.

I have addressed the "speaking for the whole movement" thing many times, cheerfully. Like I said, it's on the "Safe Haven" thread.

Lastly, I believe what I was saying in my previous post is that the crayon issue Linda categorized as a "rumor". That word is what I have issue with. It is not a "rumor", it is a practice, recommended in some teacher training institutes and concretely recommended by Steiner.

My point has been that all Waldorf schools are members of AWSNA, all AWSNA officials are Anthroposophists, and Anthroposophists have made clear statements about what Linda is calling "just rumors".

The Steiner/Anthroposophy element in teacher training does not vary. It is concrete. I am not "speaking for the whole movement". But facts are facts.

Let's be clear here: I am glad some Waldorf schools don't follow Steiner to the letter.

I am not a "bad guy" here. I like to speak openly and honestly, and play devil's advocate for the sake of open, free speech. I love language and have spent a great part of my life studying it and teaching it.

Beth
post #26 of 63
Thread Starter 
The Waldorf first graders, some of whom apparently still aren't provided "black" crayons, spend their days in a classroom facing an enormous expanse of pure-black blackboard. So, and I'm sorry if this sounds irreverent, but the Waldorfian brouhaha over these dang little black crayons is hilarious at one level. The earlier thread here entitled something like, "they're just crayons, for cryssakes!" was spot-on.

I'm still concerned about the blonde hair issue, and it may relate to what you're saying about the teacher being from Germany. I read polls about this, that in Germany most polled claimed angels are blonde. But I'm surprised if a Waldorf educator is teaching this as if it's Steiner's directive for teachers to present thru stories to children, and I'm concerned if teachers-in-training are passive and okay even hearing this taught them. I'm surprised that Steiner would have claimed real angels have "hair", period, let alone blonde.
post #27 of 63
I am interested in all this as i am currently looking into a waldorf school for my 12 year old (we have been homeschooling until now) and starting up a waldorf playgroup for my 2 little ones in home.My best friend is a waldorf teacher and a witch (wiccan). she says she likes waldorf because it is the closest thing to earth worship as far as schools go. the referance for nature,seasonal celebrations the like, she teaches african dance and her dh is an african drummer. She teaches her children about many religions and so the christian aspect does not bother her because she says it is not the main thing. she does not remember being taught to take out black or brown crayons and says she seems bummed that that would be told to prospective waldorf parents. she says it seems weird. anyway we have been having lots of conversations about waldorf and while she does not like everything about it, the public schools and even private tip the scales in what she does not like. so she says take the good, leave the bad,as in all schools/education...
post #28 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by beansavi
Big sigh.

I have addressed the "speaking for the whole movement" thing many times, cheerfully. Like I said, it's on the "Safe Haven" thread.
It is typical at mdc for threads to get very long. Some who have participated since the beginning and have followed page by page enjoy this. Others who are interested in the topic but are starting afresh like to ask questions that may have been answered in the long thread. However, there are a lot of times that the long thread is just too long to enjoy anymore. I happen to think it would be more helpful to just answer the question succinctly than point a reader to a thread that is very long. We repeat ourselves a lot at mdc and the most helpful mamas don't mind it at all.

Playing devil's advocate back at you, I found a Steiner quote about why black is not used. Based on this lovely quote, I can see why followers of Steiner would want to limit the use of black crayons.

Quote:
Now submerge yourself in black; you are completely surrounded by black--in this black darkness a physical being can do nothing. Life is driven out of the plant when it becomes carbon. Black shows itself alien to life, hostile to life; when plants are carbonized they turn black. Life, then can do nothing in blackness. And the soul? Our soul life deserts us when this awful blackness is within us.

Black represents the spiritual image of the lifeless
.

Rudolf Steiner
post #29 of 63
didn't realize this had posted twice.
post #30 of 63
sorry!
post #31 of 63
Quote:
My best friend is a waldorf teacher and a witch (wiccan). she says she likes waldorf because it is the closest thing to earth worship as far as schools go.
I suppose this is supposed to provide some comfort to parents wondering whether to put their children in Waldorf?:
post #32 of 63
Just to clarify the crayon issue, I was in our local Steiner toystore/library today, and checked out the Stockmar materials. These are my findings:

Box of 8 crayons: no black
Box of 16 crayons: black is there
Box of 24 crayons: black is there
watercolor paints: no black
post #33 of 63
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmlp
I suppose this is supposed to provide some comfort to parents wondering whether to put their children in Waldorf?:
I'm not usually one to make any predictions, but I really don't think you would be all that happy if you were to choose Waldorf.

It doesn't seem like anything about it makes you very comfortable, so I'm curious why you're considering it at all. You really shouldn't choose a school with an approach that you disagree with in so many key areas, including ideas about the nature of children and their development, about fantasy, early reading, etc.

I don't mean to discourage you or anything, but you do sound sometimes as if you feel you're being pulled into something you really don't like at all. It's okay :-). You should chose what you like, not what others like.
post #34 of 63
Oh sorry Linda, did not mean to give impression that I was considering putting DD in Steiner. I have read a lot about it because it was the first "alternative education" method that I ever came across but yes, you have correctly guessed that Waldorf is not for us. I meant the remark in relation to other parents who might be considering Waldorf but who are wary because of the occult/teaching religion accusations.

Have to say though, if I were considering Waldorf, the whole earth worship thing would definitely turn me off.

I do love some elements of Waldorf though, as I have said in a previous thread. The organic food, the natural materials, the knitting, the ban on television and commercial characters. I even like the idea of no black crayons (although DD wouldn't - she likes black because it shows on the paper the best).
post #35 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmlp
Have to say though, if I were considering Waldorf, the whole earth worship thing would definitely turn me off.
This is actually one of the things that I enjoy most about Waldorf.
post #36 of 63
Thread Starter 
Thanks--I didn't want to sound like I was trying to tell you what you should decide to do, but it didn't sound like a promising match to me ;-)

Yeah, the "Earth Worship" thing might offend some. Here's a typical example, a song my children sang every morning in kindergarten:

"Good Morning, dear earth, Good Morning, dear sun
Good Morning dear stones and flowers every one
Good Morning dear bees and birds in the trees
Good Morning to you and Good Morning to me!"

I know some might characterize it as "occult worship", I guess. Seems weird to me to think of it that way, but I live in California. Pretty much EVERYBODY around me thinks in ways that are completely weird to me. I think of this myself as a little "My,oh,my what a beautiful day" type song.
post #37 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmlp
I suppose this is supposed to provide some comfort to parents wondering whether to put their children in Waldorf?:
well I tend to believe there is good in all religions. I don't believe being a witch is ANY different from christianity,judaism,budhism etc. they are all worthy religions and have their own right to exist. So I guess I am not sure what you mean by that statement. Could you elaborate please?
post #38 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamachandi
well I tend to believe there is good in all religions. I don't believe being a witch is ANY different from christianity,judaism,budhism etc. they are all worthy religions and have their own right to exist. So I guess I am not sure what you mean by that statement. Could you elaborate please?
I mean that much of the controversy surrounding Waldorf schools is that they purport to be non-sectarian but in fact could be described as religious. Parents who are wary of this issue would not like hearing that their children will be engaging in earth worship if they are enrolled in Waldorf.

Nor, incidentally, do I think that any parents who are not, themselves, into earth worship would be much interested in getting their children into earth worship at school (except, I suppose, people in California).
post #39 of 63
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmlp
I mean that much of the controversy surrounding Waldorf schools is that they purport to be non-sectarian but in fact could be described as religious. Parents who are wary of this issue would not like hearing that their children will be engaging in earth worship if they are enrolled in Waldorf.

Nor, incidentally, do I think that any parents who are not, themselves, into earth worship would be much interested in getting their children into earth worship at school (except, I suppose, people in California).
Does anyone ever get the feeling that though we're all speaking what sounds like English, most people seem to be interpreting it pretty much with their own unique dictionary? :-)

We get into unnecessary conflicts by attaching "other" people's definitions to words or ideas we'd otherwise have no problem with.

Now----let's take for an example the celebration of birthdays. Jehovah's Witnesses believe it is a heathen religious practice. It's true! Do I myself engage in heathen religious practices? No. I don't. However, I do celebrate birthdays. They can call it heathen, but I don't. I also won't agree with those who insist "heathen religious practices" go on in those schools where birthdays are celebrated.

So I'd characterize this as a weird interpretation of a birthday celebration, and I include this kind of thinking in the enormous collection of "weird" ways of looking at things I've amassed living in CA where just about any and every possible way of looking at things is well represented.

So let's say there's a huge controversy going on about "heathen religious practices" going on in the neighborhood Montessori school. How many Montessori parents knew they were "signing up" for that? And how many neighborhood Montessori schools celebrate birthdays? ALL of them maybe?

So unless you are one of those who objects to birthdays, why would you allow yourself to go to war over this issue about Montessori and heathenism? It's just ALL mixed up to fuss about misapplied characterizations rather than the supposedly objectionable practice itself.

Keep it simple, I say. Montessori, I'm guessing, has no problem being described as a school that enjoys celebrating birthdays. They probably WOULD object to being described as a school that engages in heathen religious practice, even though we can probably concede that there are heathens someplace in the world for whom birthdays are indeed religious. Ditto Waldorf and "earth worship".

Here's another "earth worship" song that's a better analogy than my "zippety-doo-dah" earlier ;-) http://www.mathematik.uni-ulm.de/pau.../whataw~1.html
post #40 of 63
Thread Starter 
I just wanted to add comment to this hypothetical "heathen" school.

If a Jehovah's Witness believes birthdays are heathen religious practice, it's never my intention to "argue" with them about how they view it themselves, in their religion. They don't have to celebrate, they don't have to change their thinking and adopt mine, whatever. But I would not allow them to go unchallenged if they were to presume the right to define it for everyone else, including me.

Ditto with Waldorf and those who presume to redefine Waldorf in terms of their own "weird" thinking.
New Posts  All Forums:
 
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Waldorf
Mothering › Mothering Discussion Forums › Education › Learning at School › Waldorf › Reflections on a weekend waldorf conference