So maybe I am confusing; I realize, not for the first time, that what I aspire to do, as well as what I am actually doing, can seem rather obscure. I am confusing people (I bet I am). Of course, confusing people does little to help them, especially those who have been left utterly confused by the anthroposophists. And as a commenter noted the other week: ‘The more I read in this blog the less I understand.’ (My reply.) It’s rather damning evidence that I do indeed confuse people; and I don’t make myself any illusions, I admit I confuse people in all camps. On the other hand, I don’t know how to do it differently. I don’t think it would be worth blogging if I weren’t free to confuse, myself and everyone else; I don’t think I am able write about these things without being extremely bewildered (and it’s not surprising if it’s evident on the results) because I believe the issue of confusion has everything to do with the reasons I do this in the first place. I have written about the whys numerous times — you can scavenge this rather arbitrary and incomplete selection of posts — but maybe I don’t ever get to the bottom of it. Maybe I have not exactly been aware myself. Maybe my motifs have changed over time. Or rather, what I perceive as being my motifs have evolved in to something differently than they initially were. That’s were confusion began.
One problem is I could potentially do a lot more good if I didn’t confuse myself and others; if, for example, I set my mind on providing information and arguments and a whole organized arsenal of stuff that people would actually need. That would be good, but it won’t happen. I’ve basically left all that, for better or worse. Sure, every now and then I argue about something. I’m driven to contradict what proponents of waldorf pedagogy say when what they say is wrong, misleading, mistaken or deluded. There may, one day, be a more organized version of waldorf criticism in Sweden. It won’t come from me though. I’ve left all such ideas and pretensions behind, if I ever entertained them at all. I’m not going to hide behind a thin veneer of altruism. It has all been about me me me me and me. Nobody else. If there are beneficial effects for anybody else, well, that’s nice and good and all. But it’s still a superbly egoistic project.
So I can’t provide any decent reply to that comment, although I did make an attempt that wasn’t all that bad. I understand I confuse people but perhaps that’s par for the course. I could have been helping people instead. But not as long as I am me, so I suppose that all has to wait ’til another incarnation. And honestly I don’t really care that much about children rotting away in waldorf schools, because I don’t care about children, period. Dumb adults who make stupid decisions on behalf of their children make me angry. It’s a pity, but it will continue to happen for all sorts of unconsidered reasons. I never liked children and I never understood them, so I won’t be making any child-related decisions ever in my life. That’s enough for me to know, when all else is said and done. Maybe I wouldn’t have disliked children so badly if all children in waldorf school hadn’t been big arses. But it’s too late to change this now, even if there were some causal link there, and I think we can all agree on that. (Yes, I’m an unbalanced adult. That’s why I’m not really the person to help others. It would be like having a blind leading a visually impaired, but not entirely blind, person. We ought not have confused people giving directions and advice to confused people. Just look at the anthroposophists! It’s not going all that well, is it?)
That I don’t give a damn about children isn’t the politest things to say, but perhaps it is the most true of all the conceivable options. I care about one child, and that’s the child I was. Not in a way that I want it back — I’d never want that. But that’s the child I’m writing for and about; not other people’s children, not other children’s potential misfortunes in waldorf schools. I will never have anything much to do with children, by conscious choice and through mere necessity (in that I simply cannot), and honestly don’t care what people to or with their children. Fuck them up as best as you can. Guillotine them, for all I care. (No, don’t do that. That’s not a nice thing to do. Really. Besides, it isn’t legal.)
I happily concede that Rudolf Steiner knew more about the handling of children than I do. He had more experience, and possibly more knowledge. A far cry from enough of it, but still. On the other hand, I don’t go ahead and conceive my own version of pedagogy. In my opinion, anthroposophy would do better to give up on education. It’s a waste of resources and a squandering of talent. Children’s as well as grown-ups’. Waldorf school was not for the kind of child I was, and I know I’m not the only impossible child left a wreck on the side of the spiritual highway.