The Fateful Year of 1923

GA 259 — 5 February 1923, Stuttgart

Meeting of the Circle of Thirty

according to Dr. Heyer, beginning at 11 o'clock in the evening.

Dr. Unger reports that they want to meet in serious responsibility for the continuation of anthroposophical affairs. A statement to the membership with the signatures of all those present should be formulated definitively. Individuals wanted to take responsibility for the foundations.

Dr. Palmer says that Dr. Noll should be given time to work on the Vademecum and that the deadline of August 1 should be extended.

Dr. Noll hopes that the obstacles can be overcome and that the book can be written.

Dr. Peipers wants to take responsibility for the connection with doctors and for lectures to doctors, etc.

Alexander Strakosch says that the tasks set in 1920 should be the focus again. Dr. Maier should work on the magnetic field, Dr. Noll on the vade mecum, Dr. Streicher on crystal solutions and plant substances; Dr. Theberath considers the day and night task to be completed. They all wanted to work to ensure that Dr. Steiner's courses could be properly worked through.

They report:

Dr. Heyer on the work on the weekly journal “Anthroposophie”;
Dr. Theberath on his scientific work, comparing the decomposability of light-sensitive substances by day and by night;
Dr. Hahn on the work on the linguistic course and on the relationship to youth work;
Dr. Kolisko on the trust organization;
Dr. Unger also on the planned trust organization;
Paul Baumann on the work in schools;
Jürgen von Grone wants to work on the complex of opposition.

Dr. Steiner: At first I can't find any point that should have emerged from any consultation. That various things have been promised is stated in the initiative of the various personalities. The only point that has occurred to me is that today a consultation with the youth organization took place. This could contain something positive.

Dr. Unger on this negotiation with the youth. Constant contact. Exchange.

Dr. Steiner: What was the content of the discussion?

Dr. Unger: Mistrust of the youth towards the older ones. Cooperation decided.

Dr. Steiner: These are formalities. What about the specifics?

[There is obviously a gap in the stenographic notes here.]

Dr. Steiner: What should be presented to the assembly of delegates? Or what should be in the circular letter? Then I would like to ask: Does this committee of seven have anything to say about what has been said today? Is it satisfied with the results of the deliberations of the last few days?

Dr. Kolisko: We have considered it our duty to work together with the entire group.

Dr. Steiner: One could even, if one wanted to make an appeal today, possibly put together individual sentences that I have given for clarification, in the appropriate wording. The result would be an appeal in which the remarkable fact would be that no one had noticed that I had already given advice in the last few weeks. It is remarkable that people constantly demand advice and then do not even notice it.

The alternative of December 10 is on the table: I must ask, whether – in view of the events of recent years – the central board, together with the others, is able to say what it wants to do to enable the disintegrating Anthroposophical Society to move forward. Otherwise I would be forced to go over their heads and do what I consider necessary. If two such possibilities are being considered, then you cannot speak as you have done today. It cannot be a matter of my giving directives to be carried out. For I have indicated: if a Central Board is to have any meaning, it must want something that goes beyond mere formalities. The will of the Central Board must not be zero. Otherwise, you can make as many promises as you like to the individual institutions, that they want to be good, since they were not good in the past. It would all be in vain. It is really necessary that we not just theorize today, but that there is something tangible to be done. I find that in everything that has been said, the most important thing has not been said. Because youth is not the most important thing. Youth should be an echo for you, not the other way around. In reality, youth expects something from the old. Impotent— What has actually been positively discussed in recent days? The next step should be to issue a call for a meeting of delegates and to include the things that I thought should be dealt with tangibly. The Hochschulbund is the most sterile and one of the most harmful foundations: sterile because nothing has been done; harmful because the demonstrations had no support. This has resulted in a huge amount of opposition. The Hochschulbund has a number of young people who are quietly immersing themselves in anthroposophy; they have not said that they want to do something to give something to young people in the future. The first task would be to describe the facts in the right words. Take the attitude of my course for young people [GA 217].

Dr. Unger speaks about the planned appeal.

Dr. Steiner: Perhaps I may ask: How do you think the current affairs should be continued? It would have been enough if the proclamation had been read out. The declaration was foolish because no one stood behind it; but the declaration itself was certainly clever.¹ The youth have not declared that they want to do something. The Pedagogical Youth Course [GA 217] contains advice that has simply been ignored. What we are discussing here is not connected with the burning of the Goetheanum. The Goetheanum was still standing when the mandate of December 10 was given. The inaction has continued. The first thing that happened was that I was approached by a young man who told me that today's discussion had been²

Dr. Unger said that the draft should not be made earlier than until the most important things had been presented.

Adolf Arenson: Dr. Unger tried for two days, but the occupation from morning to evening did not make it possible for him.