ABSTRACT
In the context of reviewing a series of new books on Waldorf education and Rudolf Steiner, Dhondt, Van de Vijver and Verstraete question whether it is actually possible to have an unbiased history of Waldorf education. Accounts of Steiner and his education, they say, are either partisan and mythologizing (by which the authors mean something widely believed but untrue) or take the form of defamatory leaflets. They suggest that a real de-mythologizing has not occurred because of the widespread success of the Waldorf movement and the strict control it exercises over its institutions and because there are too many interests involved. In terms of de-mythologizing, in the sense of exposing widely held beliefs as untrue or not authentic or original, Stephen Sagarin (2007) has identified a number of Waldorf practices (he counts 20) that are not ‘original’ in the sense of going back to Steiner and the Foundations.
