Metamorphosis of the Architectural Space of Goetheanum

Abstract

In the beginning of the XX century, political, economic, and demographic revolutions contributed to the emergence of extraordinary people. In architecture, they were Frank Lloyd Wright, Antonio Gaudí, Frank Owen Gary, Le Corbusier, Hugo Hering, Alvar Aalto, Hans Sharun, Walter Burley Griffin, and Marion Mahony Griffin. Each of them was given a lot of attention in the media resources and their creativity was researched in different fields of knowledge. However, Rudolf Steiner’s work remains controversial to this day. Although many of the architects mentioned above enthusiastically commented on Steiner’s architectural works, there was always ambiguity in the perception of this mystic architect. Such a careful attitude to the work of the architect is due primarily to his worldview, his extraordinary approach to art and architecture in particular, because it is in architecture that Steiner was able to implement the basic tenets of anthroposophy, which he founded. The purpose of this study is to determine the content of the spatial structure of Steiner’s architecture, which makes it unique in the history of architectural heritage. The authors offer the scientific community the first article in a series of articles on the anthroposophical architecture of Rudolf Steiner and the philosophical concept that influenced the formation of this architecture.

Full text

applied
sciences
Article
Metamorphosis of the Architectural Space
of Goetheanum
Romana Kiuntsli 1, Andriy Stepanyuk 2, Iryna Besaha 3and Justyna Sobczak-Pi ˛astka 4, *
1Department of Design of Architectural Environment, Lviv National Agrarian University, Zhovkva District,
80381 Dubliany, Lviv Oblast, Ukraine; romana.lviv@ukr.net
2Department of Architecture and Rural Settlements’ Planning, Lviv National Agrarian University,
Zhovkva District, 80381 Dubliany, Lviv Oblast, Ukraine; andriy.lviv@ukr.net
3Faculty of Training for Police Prevention Subdivisions, Lviv State University of Internal Affairs,
79007 Lviv, Lviv Oblast, Ukraina; animespirit12@ukr.net
4Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Architecture, UTP University of Science and
Technology, 85-796 Bydgoszcz, Poland
*Correspondence: justynas@utp.edu.pl
Received: 30 May 2020; Accepted: 30 June 2020; Published: 8 July 2020


Abstract:
In the beginning of the XX century, political, economic, and demographic revolutions
contributed to the emergence of extraordinary people. In architecture, they were Frank Lloyd
Wright, Antonio Gaud
í
, Frank Owen Gary, Le Corbusier, Hugo Hering, Alvar Aalto, Hans Sharun,
Walter Burley Griffin, and Marion Mahony Griffin. Each of them was given a lot of attention in
the media resources and their creativity was researched in different fields of knowledge. However,
Rudolf Steiner’s work remains controversial to this day. Although many of the architects mentioned
above enthusiastically commented on Steiner’s architectural works, there was always ambiguity in
the perception of this mystic architect. Such a careful attitude to the work of the architect is due
primarily to his worldview, his extraordinary approach to art and architecture in particular, because
it is in architecture that Steiner was able to implement the basic tenets of anthroposophy, which he
founded. The purpose of this study is to determine the content of the spatial structure of Steiner’s
architecture, which makes it unique in the history of architectural heritage. The authors offer the
scientific community the first article in a series of articles on the anthroposophical architecture of
Rudolf Steiner and the philosophical concept that influenced the formation of this architecture.
Keywords: Rudolf Steiner; anthroposophy; architecture; Goetheanum
1. Introduction
The beginning of the twentieth century was marked by emotional and intellectual conflicts that
have become embodied in new artistic and literary trends and philosophical views. The accumulation
of such great ideas, events and their unpredictable consequences put some artists in the spotlight and
forgot the others. Among the undeservedly forgotten was the work of Rudolf Steiner, whose philosophy
was incomprehensible to mass perception and contained views unacceptable to Christian society
because they conflicted with Christian dogma. Rudolf Steiner’s architectural creativity must be seen in
close conjunction with his outlook. It is through the works of Steiner that one can often learn about the
motives of his architectural decisions. Despite the researchers’ attention to the Goetheanum, the ancillary
structures of the Rudolf Steiner Architectural Complex carry no less important information than the
Goetheanum itself, yet remain unaddressed today. For the researcher of Rudolf Steiner’s work, the most
valuable source is without a doubt the memories of his friends and followers. Among the published
memoirs today we can find the memoirs of Andrey Beliy [
1
], Herbert Khan [
2
], Asia Turgeneva [
3
],
Appl. Sci. 2020,10, 4700; doi:10.3390/app10144700 www.mdpi.com/journal/applsci

Appl. Sci. 2020,10, 4700 2 of 10
Margarita Voloshyna [
4
], and others. An analysis of Steiner’s life and anthroposophical doctrine
was made in the works of Bondarev G.A. [
5
], Rudy Lissau [
6
], and Karen Swassjan [
7
]. The analysis
of Steiner’s architectural works in the context of the world architectural heritage is analyzed in the
works of Sokolina A. [
8
–
11
] and Elena Bogdanovich [
12
]. An important contribution to the study of
Steiner’s design work is the dissertation of Reinhold Johann Fet [
13
], and concerning the architecture
of Goetheanum, Fiona Gray [
14
], Marina Agranovskaya (Emmendingen) [
15
], and Latief Perotti [
16
].
David Adams [
17
], Ionova O.M. [
18
], and others devoted their research to the Waldorf school. The aim
of this study is to determine the purpose of the architectural spatial structure of Steiner’s work,
which makes it unique in the history of architectural heritage.
2. Main Materials
Andrei Bely wrote about the misunderstood ideas of Rudolf Steiner “who understood Paul’s fiery
spirit (Apostle Paul), [as] he also understood Steiner: he understood his problem—the problem of
the seeds of future unexperienced flowers. He was completely sealed with the seal of fire and a real
understanding of the now incomprehensible and modern problem: “thinker”, “scientist ”, “teacher”,
“yogi”, “magician”, “occultist”, “anarchist”, “crusher of the basics”, “chancellor of the order”, “gnostic”,
“cultivator”; and he did not fit into the framework of this literature! Paul was a fidget: and so was
Steiner. Thundered that one; and this one rattled. When I read Paul’s cry that he was everything for
everyone to wake some up, I say to myself: “Oh, I understand; I saw Steiner!”” [
1
]. Even during
his life, Steiner felt the enmity of theologians, Catholics, Protestants, occultists, Marxists, nationalists,
and Nazis. There were two attempts on his life and the arson of his greatest creation, the Goetheanum
(Figure 1).
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 2 of 10
anthroposophical doctrine was made in the works of Bondarev G.A. [5], Rudy Lissau [6], and Karen
Swassjan [7]. The analysis of Steiner’s architectural works in the context of the world architectural
heritage is analyzed in the works of Sokolina A. [8–11] and Elena Bogdanovich [12]. An important
contribution to the study of Steiner’s design work is the dissertation of Reinhold Johann Fet [13], and
concerning the architecture of Goetheanum, Fiona Gray [14], Marina Agranovskaya (Emmendingen)
[15], and Latief Perotti [16]. David Adams [17], Ionova O.M. [18], and others devoted their research
to the Waldorf school. The aim of this study is to determine the purpose of the architectural spatial
structure of Steiner’s work, which makes it unique in the history of architectural heritage.
2. Main Materials
Andrei Bely wrote about the misunderstood ideas of Rudolf Steiner “who understood Paul’s
fiery spirit (Apostle Paul), [as] he also understood Steiner: he understood his problem—the problem
of the seeds of future unexperienced flowers. He was completely sealed with the seal of fire and a
real understanding of the now incomprehensible and modern problem: “thinker”, “scientist ”,
“teacher”, “yogi”, “magician”, “occultist”, “anarchist”, “crusher of the basics”, “chancellor of the
order”, “gnostic”, “cultivator”; and he did not fit into the framework of this literature! Paul was a
fidget: and so was Steiner. Thundered that one; and this one rattled. When I read Paul’s cry that he
was everything for everyone to wake some up, I say to myself: “Oh, I understand; I saw Steiner!””
[1]. Even during his life, Steiner felt the enmity of theologians, Catholics, Protestants, occultists,
Marxists, nationalists, and Nazis. There were two attempts on his life and the arson of his greatest
creation, the Goetheanum (Figure 1).
(a)
(b)
Figure 1. (a) Goetheanum of 1913–1920; (b) Goetheanum of 1925–1928 [19].
Almost 90 years after Steiner’s death, his anthroposophical postulates remain as keenly
stimulating for ideological opponents. Despite the complexity of the anthroposophical teachings of
Steiner, at the beginning of twentieth century, his ideas and doctrines, as well as those E. Blavatsky,
A. Aksakov, E. Shure, P. Shenavar, Dr. Papus were popularized in art. V.S. Turchin writes in detail
about it, analyzing the situation of the twenties: “Inheriting the doctrines of mysticism, esoteric and
occult sciences, alchemy, dreaming of a synthesis of the religions of the West and East, both ancient
and new, reading Boehme, Swedenborg, and the founders of the Masonic orders, the artists rushed
to a new Theosophy, which at the beginning of the century was reborn into anthroposophy, what A.
Besant and her followers spoke of... Theosophy was associated with the artists of the Nabi group and
the founder of the Rose and Cross association, Sar Pelladan, members of the Free Aesthetics society
in Brussels, and Italian J. Segantini, Odilon Redon, and the young K. Petrov-Vodkin, E. Munch and
F. Kupka, G. Klimt and E. Carrier. A little later V. Kandinsky, N. Kulbin, the brothers Burliuk, K.
Malevich, A. Exter, P. Mondrian, and R. Delaunay... “[20].
Figure 1. (a) Goetheanum of 1913–1920; (b) Goetheanum of 1925–1928 [19].
Almost 90 years after Steiner’s death, his anthroposophical postulates remain as keenly stimulating
for ideological opponents. Despite the complexity of the anthroposophical teachings of Steiner, at the
beginning of twentieth century, his ideas and doctrines, as well as those E. Blavatsky, A. Aksakov,
E. Shure, P. Shenavar, Dr. Papus were popularized in art. V.S. Turchin writes in detail about it,
analyzing the situation of the twenties: “Inheriting the doctrines of mysticism, esoteric and occult
sciences, alchemy, dreaming of a synthesis of the religions of the West and East, both ancient and new,
reading Boehme, Swedenborg, and the founders of the Masonic orders, the artists rushed to a new
Theosophy, which at the beginning of the century was reborn into anthroposophy, what A. Besant and
her followers spoke of... Theosophy was associated with the artists of the Nabi group and the founder
of the Rose and Cross association, Sar Pelladan, members of the Free Aesthetics society in Brussels,
and Italian J. Segantini, Odilon Redon, and the young K. Petrov-Vodkin, E. Munch and F. Kupka,

Appl. Sci. 2020,10, 4700 3 of 10
G. Klimt and E. Carrier. A little later V. Kandinsky, N. Kulbin, the brothers Burliuk, K. Malevich, A.
Exter, P. Mondrian, and R. Delaunay... “[20].
It was Steiner who became the intellectual source from which Ukrainian cultural figures like
L. Kurbas and G. Narbut borrowed their ideological and creative ideas. They organized the circle
of “creators and scientists” (Kiev, 1916), where “Steiner’s theories” were studied. The members of
the circle were prominent representatives of Ukrainian culture (F. Ernest, M. Zerov, Ya. Stepovyi,
P. Tychyna, and others), who later became known as “Executed Renaissance” [
18
]. The idea of the
creation of a new world of Kazimir Malevich was clearly in line with Steiner’s theosophical idea.
“The strategy proposed by K. Malevich (for the reconstruction of urban space) was based on the fact
that the artist considered urban planning, like all Suprematism, as a promising project for a rationalistic
world order, the transformation of the world based on the ideas of universal harmony as Creation” [
21
].
Steiner’s views influenced the creativity of M. Khvylov, A. Bely, K. Boguslavskaya, M. Voloshin,
V. Kandinsky, B. Pilnyak, M. Sobashnikov, V. Khlebnikov, M. Chekhov, and others. The implementation
of anthroposophical ideas into architectural forms was continued by Eric Asmussen and Joachim
Haider, the Camphill Architects in Scotland, a Dutch architect Anton Alberts, and a Hungarian
architect Imre Makovecz. Some researchers [
22
,
23
] consider Rudolf Steiner’s architecture to be organic
architecture. However, to date, there is no single clear and generally accepted definition of organic
architecture, as well as its differences from environmental and bionic [24].
Steiner’s architecture can be talked about from the works of Steiner himself and his followers
(about 70 works devoted to architecture). This architecture can be called anthroposophical or Steiner’s
architecture, since its primary feature is a visualized idea, and all other characteristics are not minor.
They follow the idea and attached to it. The architectural form of Steiner’s building was to contain
important information, a matrix of anthroposophical doctrine that would be readable over the centuries.
Steiner himself believed that the correct architectural forms of the artist creates a “larynx for
the gods” [
25
], thus emphasizing the role of architecture in the spiritual development of society.
Moreover, such correct forms are present in all buildings of Steiner. The building he was speaking
about was Goetheanum (named after a German poet and scholar named Goethe). For the shape of the
Goetheanum, Steiner chose the shape of a skull. One of the prerequisites for this choice was the idea
of the metamorphosis of the image of man: “The inner unity of all nature is based precisely on the
fact that, in essence, everything, even extremely dissimilar appearances, are metamorphoses of one
original basic form”. The Lord, or as Steiner calls him, the Wise Divine Authorities of the Cosmos,
have created us all in one form, but each of us is transformed, changed according to our chosen path,
and the strangers we meet. The skull is this common human form that has become zero in the direct
metamorphosis: the process of human materialization, the development of the skull from the spine
(common to all people), and after zero when the person becomes an individual in his own form.
In the first Goetheanum, the skull was not clearly defined. The main idea here was expressed by
the intersection of two domes of different sizes. In the researcher of Steiner’s architecture by D. Adams
the domes of the first Goetheanum expressed the “union of spirit and matter” [
17
], and for Latief
Perotti [
16
] it was a demonstration of human essence through images of the frontal and parietal lobes
of the brain, the somatosensory and somatomotor cortices (Figure 2).
Analyzing the works of Steiner, we understand: the first Goetheanum is the Universe and the
human projection of the world through the senses. Further, not without reason, Steiner presents the
domes in different sizes: man is not able to comprehend all the greatness of the universe, which
is represented by a large dome, he can comprehend only a small part of it. This knowledge is the
personality (smaller dome). The intersection of the domes is also not accidental, like everything in
the design and planning of the anthroposophical center in Dornach. Steiner embodies his theory of
the origin of races. Man is a divine creation, he comes from cosmic energy, is a part of it, and draws
strength from it. He is a product of the universe. He is its observer and participant in great actions.
Joining, the contact of two hemispheres, is a direct indication of a common space, which, although
invisible, is always present. The world exists because it is reflected in our senses, and our perception of

Appl. Sci. 2020,10, 4700 4 of 10
the world is transmitted into space. The concept of quantum theory and its philosophical applications
was perceived by Steiner at the beginning of the twentieth century: “The vitality of our building is
expressed in the fact that in some sense one dome finds a consciously displayed reflection in the other,
in that both domes are reflected in each other, just as existence of the outside world is reflected through
the senses of man” [
25
]. The double dome is present in many buildings of Steiner. “If there was only
one dome, then the essence of our building would be dead”.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 10
Figure 2. The philosophical structure of the first Goetheanum according to Perotti L. [16].
Analyzing the works of Steiner, we understand: the first Goetheanum is the Universe and the
human projection of the world through the senses. Further, not without reason, Steiner presents the
domes in different sizes: man is not able to comprehend all the greatness of the universe, which is
represented by a large dome, he can comprehend only a small part of it. This knowledge is the
personality (smaller dome). The intersection of the domes is also not accidental, like everything in
the design and planning of the anthroposophical center in Dornach. Steiner embodies his theory of
the origin of races. Man is a divine creation, he comes from cosmic energy, is a part of it, and draws
strength from it. He is a product of the universe. He is its observer and participant in great actions.
Joining, the contact of two hemispheres, is a direct indication of a common space, which, although
invisible, is always present. The world exists because it is reflected in our senses, and our perception
of the world is transmitted into space. The concept of quantum theory and its philosophical
applications was perceived by Steiner at the beginning of the twentieth century: “The vitality of our
building is expressed in the fact that in some sense one dome finds a consciously displayed reflection
in the other, in that both domes are reflected in each other, just as existence of the outside world is
reflected through the senses of man” [25]. The double dome is present in many buildings of Steiner.
“If there was only one dome, then the essence of our building would be dead”.
On the night of 31 January 1923, the Goetheanum was set on fire and burned completely [3].
Since the building was insured for 3.2 million francs, Steiner began active work on the new image of
Goetheanum. In addition to the smooth shapes made possible by the use of the latest material, concrete,
the new building has acquired a new symbolic meaning.
One can say that Goetheanum of Rudolf Steiner is a continuation of the use of a new material, namely
reinforced concrete, in construction, the use of which was invented in Europe by Auguste Perret. In 1904
he built the first residential building in Paris with reinforced concrete, and in 1922–1923 the Church of Our
Lady in Le Rennes, which became the first church in France built with reinforced concrete. In 1909 he
worked at the firm of Auguste Perret and studied the basics of technical drawing by Le
Corbusier.Structure of Steiner’s Goetheanum, built in 1925–1928, made entirely of reinforced
Figure 2. The philosophical structure of the first Goetheanum according to Perotti L. [16].
On the night of 31 January 1923, the Goetheanum was set on fire and burned completely [
3
].
Since the building was insured for 3.2 million francs, Steiner began active work on the new image
of Goetheanum. In addition to the smooth shapes made possible by the use of the latest material,
concrete, the new building has acquired a new symbolic meaning.
One can say that Goetheanum of Rudolf Steiner is a continuation of the use of a new material,
namely reinforced concrete, in construction, the use of which was invented in Europe by Auguste
Perret. In 1904 he built the first residential building in Paris with reinforced concrete, and in 1922–1923
the Church of Our Lady in Le Rennes, which became the first church in France built with reinforced
concrete. In 1909 he worked at the firm of Auguste Perret and studied the basics of technical drawing
by Le Corbusier.Structure of Steiner’s Goetheanum, built in 1925–1928, made entirely of reinforced
concrete. Impressive dimensions in differentiated organic design are unique. Steiner was convinced by
the advantages of reinforced concrete in terms of fire safety, cost, and its spatial plasticity.
Hermann Ranzenberger, Otto Moser, Ernst Eisenpreis and Albert von Baravalle participated in
the design and construction of the Goetheanum as architects/executioners of the project. The first
three were already involved in the creation of the Goetheanum in 1913–1919. The Basel engineering
office of Leuprecht & Ebbell was responsible for the load-bearing structure in reinforced concrete.
Exquisite framework was created by a carpenter from the Anthroposophical Center under the
management of Heinrich Ledwogel.

Appl. Sci. 2020,10, 4700 5 of 10
The basic structure with an area of 3200 square meters extends for 90 m in the east-west direction
and over 85 m in the north-south direction. The building measuring 72 m by 64 m rises to 37 m in
height. The internal space is 110,000 cubic meters, with 15,000 cubic meters of concrete and 990 tons
of reinforcement steel. However, the massiveness of the building is only illusory. The building is
built of delicate, uninsulated concrete frame structure (separate rooms are insulated from the inside).
Reinforced concrete columns and beams are placed with large spacing and concrete slabs 8 cm thick.
The walls of the first floor in the west side of the building have a solid thickness of 50 cm. Despite its
filigree nature, the load-bearing structure, which is also the skeleton of the building, is extremely
strong. The quality of the building is evidenced by the fact that during the first 50 years of operation
the bare concrete facade did not require any maintenance whatsoever [26].
It should be noted that Steiner was an esoteric. The esoteric skull has always been regarded as the
repository of the soul and it has been thought that the soul continues to live within the skull after a
person has died. The human skull is given a special value. In the second Goetheanum, a skull shape is
clearly drawn, and domes are no longer dominant in the architecture of the building. Steiner placed
all visitors of Goetheanum in their primordial form, in one which, in his opinion, was the ascendant
pre-metamorphose point of the people. Having composed the mystery of human creation, Steiner built
a concrete skull that was reincarnated with hundreds of souls as spectators of Goetheanum. “The form,
writes Rudolf Steiner, is perfect when it is filled with the proper content” [
25
]. He demonstrates the
effect of the metamorphosis of the dead and the living, which occurs with the participation of spectators
who are participants in the action. He created what he repeatedly stated in his lectures: “We really
must become disciples of the creative hierarchies who have created through metamorphosis, and we
must learn to imitate the creative principle of the higher hierarchies in the same way” [25].
Steiner imitates the actions of the higher powers: in the man-made space there is a life that arises
through art. Both the actor and the viewer of the Goetheanum become members of the great Steiner
mystery. Such a symbolic image could not have been erected just anywhere. The site for sacred
structures was carefully selected and researched. Steiner was not able to choose a place for Goetheanum
himself. This is why he granted a sacred meaning to the piece of land he owned. Steiner placed the
Goetheanum, according to the architect Perotti [
16
]. The outbuildings were placed within the projection
of the Plato Pentacle (ordinary pentagon), and the spiral, according to the Fibonacci mathematical
series. The true proportions of this symbol are based on the sacred proportion called the golden
intersection: this is the state of a point on any drawn line when it divides the line so that the smaller
part is in the same proportion to the greater part as the greater part to the whole (Figure 3). So, when
you look from space at the planning structure of the anthroposophical settlement, you can see that
Steiner focused on the dodecahedron, which, as a geometric figure, he paid much attention in his work
(the plan shows one of the planes of the dodecahedron, the tops of which fix the buildings in space).
The very foundation of the “Corner Stone” was a unification of two copper dodecahedrons, for
the 1st Goetheanum of 21 September 1913, consisting of twelve pentagons, was the sacralization of
the site. Two united dodecahedrons Steiner laid as a symbol of the indissoluble connection of the
universe (macrocosm) and man (smaller dodecahedron) of the microcosm. When Herbert Zoifert
writes about the “corner stone” in the Goetheanum foundation, he mentions a document that was
placed in a copper vessel. The text corresponds to Steiner’s speech: “In the name of the Seraphim,
Cherubim, Thrones, Spirits of Wisdom, Spirits of Movement, Spirits of Forms, Spirits of Personality,
Archangels, Angels: In the macrocosm, as a microcosm, let man live. Anthropos, represented here also
as a twice-duodecimal image of the spiritual world. And inside it the expression of the Rosicrucianism
expressing the meaning of our aspiration: Ex Deo Nascimur, In Christo Morimur, Per Spiritum Sanctum
Reviviscimus” [27].
Perhaps coincidental is the fact that a physicist from the University of Ulm (Universität Ulm)
Frank Steiner, has advanced another version [
28
] of the Universe structure over the centuries, according
to which the latter has the form of a dodecahedron. Thus, it is likely that Rudolf Steiner’s feelings,

Appl. Sci. 2020,10, 4700 6 of 10
beliefs, or intuitions prompted him to locate the Goetheanum, which demonstrated the materialization
of man on Earth at the center of the dodecahedron (Figure 3), symbolizing the Universe.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 10
Archangels, Angels: In the macrocosm, as a microcosm, let man live. Anthropos, represented here
also as a twice-duodecimal image of the spiritual world. And inside it the expression of the
Rosicrucianism expressing the meaning of our aspiration: Ex Deo Nascimur, In Christo Morimur, Per
Spiritum Sanctum Reviviscimus” [27].
Figure 3. Goetheanum and ancillary structures.
Perhaps coincidental is the fact that a physicist from the University of Ulm (Universität Ulm)
Frank Steiner, has advanced another version [28] of the Universe structure over the centuries,
according to which the latter has the form of a dodecahedron. Thus, it is likely that Rudolf Steiner’s
feelings, beliefs, or intuitions prompted him to locate the Goetheanum, which demonstrated the
materialization of man on Earth at the center of the dodecahedron (Figure 3), symbolizing the
Universe.
The Universe is invisible and invaluable without the main viewer – the man. The birth of
manmade the Universe visible as well. By the way, the basic idea of the four anthropic principles
proposed by Carter, Hole, Pringle, and others, in the field of studies of astronomical and atomic
physics, states that the Universe exists and expands only because it is in us and we observe and
understand it. Steiner’s understanding of the origin of man and his relationship with the divine
influenced his vision of the temple. After all, if the Greek temple, according to Steiner, is the location
of the god where no human presence is required, where he is a guest, then the Gothic temple is half
the temple. It is incomplete without prayer and human presents. “There is no God in the Gothic
temple unless there is a prayer of believers. If it is, it is filled with the divine. The Greek temple is not
the house of believers, it was created as a house in which God himself lives, he can stand alone” [29].
Steiner’s Temple is a message with information for those who can read, art for those who can
admire, science for those who want to learn. However, Steiner with his worldview went far ahead of
his time, and therefore was lost from view. The Goethanu, the anthroposophical temple, is not a
reflection of the structure of the universe. It is the embodiment of creation of the universe and the
evolution of man and his materialization. The main emphasis was on the mission of a materialized
person in the world where the Calvary events took place. The Anthroposophical Temple is a language
in itself for the disciples in the spiritual science who understand the Universe not only as a great
mechanism, but as a living, Spirit-filled organism, a particle of which is present in every human being.
Steiner’s creations carry important knowledge, they are filled with symbols and original details,
but devoid of symbolic casuistry. Marina Agranowska (Emmendinger) in the analysis of the
architecture of the Goetheanum writes that in the account of the building you can see: “the echoes of
the organic architecture of the American Frank Lloyd Wright, the roll call with the architectural
fantasies of the Spaniard Antonio Gaudi, we see the common with the architecture of quiet
expressionism, however the originality and uniqueness of the Goetheanum are undeniable” [13].
Figure 3. Goetheanum and ancillary structures.
The Universe is invisible and invaluable without the main viewer – the man. The birth of manmade
the Universe visible as well. By the way, the basic idea of the four anthropic principles proposed by
Carter, Hole, Pringle, and others, in the field of studies of astronomical and atomic physics, states that
the Universe exists and expands only because it is in us and we observe and understand it. Steiner’s
understanding of the origin of man and his relationship with the divine influenced his vision of the
temple. After all, if the Greek temple, according to Steiner, is the location of the god where no human
presence is required, where he is a guest, then the Gothic temple is half the temple. It is incomplete
without prayer and human presents. “There is no God in the Gothic temple unless there is a prayer
of believers. If it is, it is filled with the divine. The Greek temple is not the house of believers, it was
created as a house in which God himself lives, he can stand alone” [29].
Steiner’s Temple is a message with information for those who can read, art for those who can
admire, science for those who want to learn. However, Steiner with his worldview went far ahead
of his time, and therefore was lost from view. The Goethanu, the anthroposophical temple, is not a
reflection of the structure of the universe. It is the embodiment of creation of the universe and the
evolution of man and his materialization. The main emphasis was on the mission of a materialized
person in the world where the Calvary events took place. The Anthroposophical Temple is a language
in itself for the disciples in the spiritual science who understand the Universe not only as a great
mechanism, but as a living, Spirit-filled organism, a particle of which is present in every human being.
Steiner’s creations carry important knowledge, they are filled with symbols and original details,
but devoid of symbolic casuistry. Marina Agranowska (Emmendinger) in the analysis of the architecture
of the Goetheanum writes that in the account of the building you can see: “the echoes of the organic
architecture of the American Frank Lloyd Wright, the roll call with the architectural fantasies of the
Spaniard Antonio Gaudi, we see the common with the architecture of quiet expressionism, however
the originality and uniqueness of the Goetheanum are undeniable” [13].
However, it should not be forgotten that all these representatives belong to the beginning of
the twentieth century, characterized by motifs of organic and bionic architecture, ornaments in the
style of modernity. Their contacts, communication could not but affect each other’s architectural
works. However, an important fact is that each of the architects, and in particular Steiner, contributed
something unique to architectural science.
Despite the original dynamic forms, the author’s interpretation and the pedantry of the interior
first denied the well-known thesis of Louis Sellivan (or Sullivan) that the form follows function.

Appl. Sci. 2020,10, 4700 7 of 10
He did not go along with Antonio Gaudi, who combined the idea, function, and constructive elements.
Steiner put the idea above function, and this idea was present not only in the Goetheanum, but also in
the auxiliary structures. In order to harmonize the aura of the occult space, Steiner constructed the
building of the boiler room in the form of a human spine which symbolized the further evolution of
man, or rather his materialization (Figure 4).
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 10
However, it should not be forgotten that all these representatives belong to the beginning of the
twentieth century, characterized by motifs of organic and bionic architecture, ornaments in the style
of modernity. Their contacts, communication could not but affect each other’s architectural works.
However, an important fact is that each of the architects, and in particular Steiner, contributed
something unique to architectural science.
Despite the original dynamic forms, the author’s interpretation and the pedantry of the interior
first denied the well-known thesis of Louis Sellivan (or Sullivan) that the form follows function. He
did not go along with Antonio Gaudi, who combined the idea, function, and constructive elements.
Steiner put the idea above function, and this idea was present not only in the Goetheanum, but also
in the auxiliary structures. In order to harmonize the aura of the occult space, Steiner constructed the
building of the boiler room in the form of a human spine which symbolized the further evolution of
man, or rather his materialization (Figure 4).
Figure 4. The boiler room (1915) [19,30].
If we follow the theory of transformation (metamorphosis) of Steiner, the skull developed in a
person from the spine. It is the eve of conscious perception of reality. The skull, which arose from the
expansion of one of the vertebrae, became a housing for human consciousness to store information
about the Universe. “If you imagine that such a vertebra is expanding, expanding in the way, so that
the hole through which the spinal cord passes, because the vertebrae are located one above the other,
becomes larger, and the bones accordingly become thinner, and also expanding like something
elastic, not only in the horizontal direction, but in other directions, then from these spinal bones a
shape arises, which is nothing more than the shape of the bones that make up the shell of our skull.
The bones of our skull are, therefore, transformed bones of the spine” [29].
The spine, according to Steiner, is an anatomical element that appeared in humans as a result of
his materialization. So, initially, man was a spirit. The effect of human materialization is holistic when
operating a boiler room, namely, when smoke rises above a building, giving it life. Important
elements of the boiler room are domes that symbolize Luciferic and Ahrimanic in humans: Luciferic,
i.e., emotional, provoking killings and wars, aggression, and Ahrimanic, i.e., practicality and
calculation. The domes are symmetrical and thus testify to the balance of these two demonic
principles, which are alongside of materialized person. Steiner divided spirit of Mephistopheles from
Renaissance and Satan from Christianity into two characters who represent two opposite poles of evil
Figure 4. The boiler room (1915) [19,30].
If we follow the theory of transformation (metamorphosis) of Steiner, the skull developed in a
person from the spine. It is the eve of conscious perception of reality. The skull, which arose from the
expansion of one of the vertebrae, became a housing for human consciousness to store information
about the Universe. “If you imagine that such a vertebra is expanding, expanding in the way, so that
the hole through which the spinal cord passes, because the vertebrae are located one above the other,
becomes larger, and the bones accordingly become thinner, and also expanding like something elastic,
not only in the horizontal direction, but in other directions, then from these spinal bones a shape arises,
which is nothing more than the shape of the bones that make up the shell of our skull. The bones of
our skull are, therefore, transformed bones of the spine” [29].
The spine, according to Steiner, is an anatomical element that appeared in humans as a result
of his materialization. So, initially, man was a spirit. The effect of human materialization is holistic
when operating a boiler room, namely, when smoke rises above a building, giving it life. Important
elements of the boiler room are domes that symbolize Luciferic and Ahrimanic in humans: Luciferic,
i.e., emotional, provoking killings and wars, aggression, and Ahrimanic, i.e., practicality and calculation.
The domes are symmetrical and thus testify to the balance of these two demonic principles, which
are alongside of materialized person. Steiner divided spirit of Mephistopheles from Renaissance
and Satan from Christianity into two characters who represent two opposite poles of evil in man.
Arild Rosenkranz in “The Fruits of Anthroposophy—An Introduction to The Work of Dr. Rudolf
Steiner” [
31
] writes that with the penetration of a true visionary, Rudolf Steiner gave each power an
individual shape. In the Goetheanum, these two negatives are shared by a pure soul, very reminiscent
of the figure of Christ. Describing the sculptural group of the Gethanum, Arild Rosenkranz concludes
that Christ’s own power establishes the right balance in man.

Appl. Sci. 2020,10, 4700 8 of 10
During construction of the boiler room, Rudolf Steiner makes the image presented in the
Goetheanum more complicated. Between the two domes that represent sin, he places man, not formed
or materialized, but who must already fight for the right to seek spiritual progress. The boiler room
resembles female forms in the shape of the sphinx. At the level of the spatial solution of the boiler room,
the author presented a large canvas of the spiritual world, according to which the backward, imperfect
on the spiritual or mental level cannot find eternity, and always goes into decline. According to Steiner
on the Sphinx has not reached perfection on the spiritual level. It has been reborn, and its astral body
comes to people in other forms. In his 11
th
lecture “Egyptian Myths and Mysteries” Steiner writes that,
during a sunstroke, “The etheric and astral bodies are freed from one part of the physical body, and
these people are transferred to the astral plane and see the degenerate last descendant of the sphinx.
It is called by various names. In some places, it is called the midday woman—Mittags-Frau” [
29
].
Midday woman is a well-known character from the folklore of Western Slavic tribes. This is a woman
in white clothes who comes to those who do not stop working at noon on the field. As a result,
the person receives a sunstroke and, as a rule, can see a reborn sphinx in the form of a woman asking
many questions. If the person cannot answer them, the midday woman punishes such a person with
severe headache.
The building of the Steiner boiler room is information embodied in concrete forms. It is a
ready-made surreal picture of the transformation of a person from a spiritual being into a material
being, as well as an image of a soul seeking perfection.
3. Conclusions
The peculiarity of Steiner’s architecture lies in the reproduction of the anthroposophical worldview
in the spatial and planning decisions of the Goetheanum building and additional structures. The creation
of an architectural complex dominated by a philosophical idea of function.
Rudolf Steiner’s genius is in his unique ability to convey in architectural forms a segment in time
and space without having points A and B. Rudolf Steiner captures the image not as other painters
do, not as photographers do, he did not convey emotions like music does. Rather, with his art of
architecture, he presents to generations a long process and the size of eternity. Steiner looked to the
distant future, and he created an architecture that was able to unite humanity through spiritual science.
Steiner’s teachings went beyond classical thinking about architecture. Despite the ambiguous
perception of his doctrine and his eccentricity, he forces one to look at architecture as a model for the
construction of the universe and the place of man in it.
Author Contributions:
Conceptualization, R.K. (25%) and A.S. (25%); investigation, I.B. (25%) and J.S.-P. (25%).
All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: The authors declare that there is no any funding source for this paper.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
References
1.
Bely, A. Memoirs of Steiner; Editions La Presse Libre: Paris, France, 1982; Chapter 1; Available online:
http://bdn-steiner.ru/modules.php?name=Books&go=page&pid=220 (accessed on 23 June 2019).
2.
Khan, H. Rudolf Steiner. How I saw and knew him, M.: Starklight, translation from German by Victor
Medvedev, Russia. 2006, p. 96. Available online: http://bdn-steiner.ru/modules.php?name=About_Steiner&fbclid=
IwAR3wP6rMai8tKrnl-DgoO32y9OF4DzppqCdEcSihm0QjDE8H4jQJs_eODQE (accessed on 23 June 2019).
3.
Turgenyeva, A.A. Memories of Rudolf Steiner and the Construction of the First Goetheanum. Library of Spiritual
Life. 2002. Available online: http://bdn-steiner.ru/modules.php?name=Books&go=page&pid=7501 (accessed
on 4 April 2019).
4.
Voloshyna, M.; Sabashnykova, M.V. Green Snake. The Story of One Life. Translation from German by M. N.
Zhemchuzhnikova. Enigma, Moscow. 1993, p. 412. Available online: http://bdn-steiner.ru/modules.php?
name=Books&go=page&pid=5702 (accessed on 3 April 2019).

Appl. Sci. 2020,10, 4700 9 of 10
5.
Bondarev, G.A. The experience of understanding the methodology of the science of spirit. In Triune Man
Body, Soul and Spirit; University Book: Moscow, Russia, 1999; p. 688.
6.
Lissau, R. Rudolf Steiner: Life, Work, Inner Pathand Social Initiatives; Hawthorn Press: Stroud, UK, 1987; p. 178.
7.
Svasyan, K. Rudolf Steiner. The Philosophy of Freedom. Preface to the New Edition of 1918. Available
online: http://lib.ru/URIKOVA/STEINER/freedom.txt (accessed on 15 June 2019).
8. Sokolina, A.P. (Ed.) Arhitektura i Antroposofiya; KMK: Moscow, Russia, 2010.
9.
Sokolina, A.P. The Goetheanum Culture in Modern Architecture; Science, Education and Experimental Design;
Shvidkovsky, D.O., Yesaulov, G.V., Ivanovskaya, V.I., Aurov, V.V., Bazhenova, E.S., Bayer, V.E., Bgashev, W.N.,
Volchok, Y.P., Efimov, A.V., Ivanova-Veen, L.I., et al., Eds.; MARKHI: Moscow, Russia, 2014; pp. 157–159.
10.
Sokolina, A.P. Biology in Architecture: The Goetheanum Case Study. In The Routlegde Companion to Biology in
Art and Architecture; Terranova, S., Tromble, M., Eds.; Routledge: New York, NY, USA; London, UK, 2017;
pp. 52–70.
11. Kugler, W.; Baus, S. (Eds.) Rudolf Steiner in Kunst und Architektur; Dumont: Cologne, MN, USA, 2007.
12.
Bogdanovi´c, J. Evocations of Byzantium in Zenitist Avant-Garde Architecture. J. Soc. Archit. Hist.
2016
,75,
299–317. Available online: https://online.ucpress.edu/jsah/article/75/3/299/60956/Evocations-of-Byzantium-
in-Zenitist-Avant-Garde (accessed on 14 June 2019). [CrossRef]
13.
Fäth, R.J. Rudolf Steiner Design: Spiritueller Funktionalismus-Kunst. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Konstanz,
Konstanz, Germany, 2004. Available online: http://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/3624 (accessed
on 7 May 2019).
14.
Gray, F. Rudolf steiner: Occult crankor architectural mastermind? J. Archit. Theory Rev.
2010
,15, 43–60.
Available online: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13264821003629246 (accessed on 7 July 2019).
[CrossRef]
15.
Agranovskay, M. Anthroposophy and Rudolf Steiner Goetheanum: Architectural Image of the Universe. 2017.
Available online: https://www.partner-inform.de/partner/detail/2017/9/240/8678/gjoteanum-arhitekturnyj-
obraz-vselennoj?lang=ru (accessed on 25 July 2019).
16.
Perotti, L. Gewijde Bouw. Available online: https://architect-latief-perotti.jouwweb.nl/(accessed on 4 July
2019).
17.
Adams, D. Organic Functionalism: An Important Principleof the Visual Artsin Waldorf School Craft sand
Architecture. Res. Inst. Waldorf Educ. Res. Bull. 2005,X, 28.
18.
Ionova, O.M. Rudolf Steiner in educational and cultural space. In Pedagogika, Psychology and Medical and
Biological Problems of Physical Education and Sports; Kharkiv: H.S. Skovoroda Kharkiv National Pedagogical
University: Kharkiv Oblast, Ukraine, 2011; pp. 60–63.
19. Foto C Holtermann Goetheanum Tour. Available online: https://www.obretenie.info/txt/sht/geteanum.htm
(accessed on 11 March 2019).
20.
Turchyn, V.S. The Image of the Twentieth... In the Past and Present; Progress-Tradycyya: Moscow, Russia, 2003;
p. 681.
21.
Gryber, Y.A. Urban Planning and Kazimir Malevich, Agreement Moscow. 2014, p. 180. Available online:
http://color-lab.org/files/283/malevich-oznakomitelnyi-f.pdf (accessed on 3 January 2020).
22.
Lokotko, A.I. Architecture: Avant-Garde, Absurdity, Fantasy; Minsk: Belarusian Science: Navuka, Belarus, 2012;
Volume 206, p. 68.
23.
Zymina, S.B. Stylistic features of the organic and environmental. Mod. Probl. Archit. Urban Plan.
2018
,47,
71–88.
24.
Bistrova, T.Y. The Evolution of Organic Architecture: Interpretations and Modifications. Chast 2. KyberLenynka.
2013. Available online: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/evolyutsiya-organicheskoy-arhitektury-traktovki-i-
modifikatsii-chast-2 (accessed on 28 May 2019).
25.
Shtejner, R. Art in the Light of the Mystery Wisdom. Eight lectures delivered in Dornach from December 28,
1914 to January 4, 1915. Translation from German by A. Demidov. Available online: https://www.rulit.me/
books/ga-275-iskusstvo-v-svete-mudrosti-misterij-read-434991- 1.html (accessed on 8 May 2019).
26.
Die Narben der Baugeschichte Sichtbeton, Instandgesetzt. Available online: https://www.espazium.ch/de/
aktuelles/die-narben-der-baugeschichteBAUKULTURSEIT1874 (accessed on 20 April 2019).
27.
Zojfert, G. Michael and Iron, Anthroposophy in the Modern World. Translation from German by O. P. 2002.
Available online: http://anthroposophy.ru/index.php?go=Pages&in=view&id=219 (accessed on 16 January
2019).

Appl. Sci. 2020,10, 4700 10 of 10
28.
Steiner, F. Can One Hear the Shape of the Universe? Universität Ulm. 14 January 2005. Available online:
http://www.matfys.lth.se/seminars/old/abstracts/steiner.html (accessed on 14 March 2019).
29.
Shtajner, R. Lecture: Egyptian Myths and Mysteries. Lecture 11. Available online: http://www.lib.ru/
URIKOVA/STEINER/lec_egypt.txt_with-big-pictures.html (accessed on 3 April 2019).
30.
Heizhaus. Available online: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/62/Heizhaus_2013_002.JPG
(accessed on 19 March 2019).
31.
Rosenkrantz, A. The Fruits of Anthroposophy—An Introduction to the Work of Dr. Rudolf Steiner. The New Impulse
in Art; George Kaufmann Threef Old Commonwealth; The Threefold Commonwealth: London, UK, 1922;
p. 151.
©
2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).