Dusan Pajin, Ph.D.

						It advances by itself, creatively handling,
						Posits itself, and then transforms;
						Only apparently the moments stay still.
						The eternal makes advance in all,
						For all to nothingness must fall,
						If it persists in standing still.
								(Goethe: One and All)

Goethe (1749-1832) was a creative, and many-sided personality. Beside literary output (considered as his main work) he had many other pursuits: writing on nature philosophy, being a critic, journalist, painter, theater manager, statesman, educationalist... His writings on science (theory of color, metamorphosis of plants and animals) alone fill about 14 volumes. His capacity distinguishes him as a good German, and good European, and some consider him as one of the last personalities in European culture, who kept the legacy of the great many-sided Renaissance personalities.

In October 1765 Goethe was sent to study law at the University of Leipzig. His first literary successes were the drama Goetz from Berlichingen (1773) and the novel The Sorrows of Young Werther (1774). This novel had two sides. One addressed the new generation of the educated, with a romantic predilection for absolute: in love, art, or society. The other had a popular, sentimental appeal for the general reader - a story of unhappy love affair, followed by suicide. This made it one of the first bestsellers in world literature - it influenced fashion of the times (people started to wear clothes resembling those of the main characters), and even a wave of suicides, among young, followed its multi-editions. This novel carried German literature into the world arena; it remained influential in Europe when German Romanticism had already burned out. For the last 200 years Goethe was, sometimes, criticized as not being enough German, or national, and as too much international. Sometimes the tendency was opposite - to consider him as a representative of the nationalist spirit. But, now it is realized that - being international and classic as he is - he is among the best Germans Germany ever had.

Goethe went to Weimar in 1775, which was the capital of the Duchy of Saxe-Weimar. There he further developed his magnanimous literary output (managing to get new creative enthusiasm from his trip to Italy, in 1786-8). And just as he sought and found the Urmensch, or archetypal man, in the forms of Greek and Roman antiquity, so in Italian landscapes came to his mind the extension of this idea to plants as well. In his literary work these pursuits led to the creation of characters who are individual manifestations of a clearly discernible type; to themes that are universal, but treated in a highly differentiated way.

Faust, a Fragment, published in 1790, is a step in the direction of the cultural symbol, that the character (Faust), and the play, would eventually become, rather than an attempt to weld into unity the episodes of the original version, the Urfaust. The two characters from his novels and dramas (Wilhelm Meister, and Faust), became symbols of modern man’s (and his own) search for wisdom, and happiness (through the mystery of living, loving, and thinking) often shaken by love, and sorrow, or losing themselves on the way. He was happy to complete Faust, the work he had carried with him for 60 years, a few months before his death. His life, and his writings, were a synchronous process of the intensification of inborn talents, through surrender to the rhythm of opposing tendencies. He found wisdom, realizing that it is possible to be happy, although it is not possible find or keep happiness, for more than a moment.

Disenchantment and enchantment

In Renaissance, humanity in Europe was eager to have freedom to investigate the secrets of nature, to experiment with its powers, to give full momentum to curiosity, and to tell others what was discovered. But after several centuries some men refuted the one way of developing the scientific spirit, that progressively ”de-spirited,” depersonalized, and striped the world and nature of their enchantment. In Romanticism, the interest in past, mysterious and exotic is developed in opposition to the preceding spirit of Enlightenment - artists are redefining Middle Ages, in order to liberate art and imagination from Enlightenment and Classicism. Therefore, we find the romantic complaint about the rationalist period from which they were emerging. The humanist felt nostalgia for the Ancients, opposing the constraints of Middle Ages, but the romantic was looking back with nostalgia to the Middle Ages, because he believed that imagination was allowed freer rein in those times, and was not repelled by the narrow rationalism of the 18th century. They felt squeezed by rationalism, like the humanists by the religiousness of the Middle Ages. The process that started in the 16th and 17th c. was named by Schiller as “striping nature of God” (die Entgötterung der Natur) and, later, by Max Weber, as “dis-enchantment of the world” (die Entzauberung der Welt).

It all started as a legitimate quest to be free to investigate the “secrets of the nature,” and to discover its “laws” - even if these discoveries and secrets do not fit with the Bible concept of the world, and man (created by God). However, the (unintended) outcome was, also, the feeling that the world became more and more common, a set of “natural facts” losing its enchanting spell.

Opposition to this is also expressed in lines of one of Goethes’ contemporaries - like William Blake (1757-1827) - who wrote: “So, you ask me - do I see the rising sun as a fiery guinea-size disc? Oh, no - I see a grand heavenly army announcing: Glory, Glory to the Lord, Almighty God.”

Some artists, like Goethe, responded to this dis-enchantment of the world not only through particular criticism via literature and art (Goethe: Faust), but also with an effort to shape (or give examples) of a (possible) alternative route for present and future science. Such science, was supposed to be based on spiritual, organic, and holistic approach, instead of understanding the world in terms of pragmatic, mechanical and specializing disciplines. While in Leipzig, Goethe rebelled against an arbitrary division of knowledge and sciences into faculties (or departments), which cut up science into rival disciplines.

He developed his stand (and demonstrated his methodology) in two particular fields: color theory, and metamorphosis of plants and animals. In his Farbenlehre ("Color Theory" - 1805-10) he proposed an alternative to the already existing Newton’s theory. It is easy for the physicist to pick holes in his attempt to prove Newton wrong. On the other hand, the Historical section (in this book) is an invaluable and impressive model of writing on history of science. However, there is something more important – in this text Goethe developed his concern for basic phenomena (Urphänomen) of an objective world, grounded on observation undistorted by machines.

“Goethe’s method was to extend and deepen his experience of the phenomenon until he reached that element of the phenomenon which is not given externally to sense experience. This is the connection or relationship in the phenomenon which he called the law (Gesetz), and which he found by going more deeply into the phenomenon instead of standing back from it, or trying to go beyond it intellectually to something which could not be experienced” (Bortoft, 1996: 21). The archetype of the phenomena could be perceived by intuitive experience, or insight (Anschauung). Contemplation of the visible aspect can bring intuitive knowledge, “when the mind functions as an organ of perception, instead of the medium of logical thought” (Bortoft, 1996: 21).

His approach to nature phenomena differs from Newton (and the prevailing science) in three ways: (a) in encountering the wholeness of the phenomena, (b) considering quality, and not quantity, as essential in understanding the world around us, (c) preferring intuition, instead of analytical thinking.

“Newton tried to go analytically from whole to parts (white light separated into colors), and from parts to whole (colors combined to make white light). In contrast, Goethe encountered the wholeness of the phenomenon through the intuitive mode of consciousness, which is receptive to the phenomenon instead of dividing it according to external categories” (Bortoft, 1996: 23).

Among others, William Turner (1775-1851), the famous English painter, read and annotated Goethe’s Theory of Colors (translated by Eastlake, in 1840). He did not approve the poet’s anti-Newtonian bias, but admired the acuity of his observation of optical phenomena related to color. He made two paintings: Shade and Darkness, and Light and Color (1843), relating them to Goethe’s speculation on the associative properties of color - “cool” tones of the spectrum as “negative”, and “warm” tones as “positive” (at the same time Shade and Darkness presented the gloom of the Deluge day, and Light and Color the hopeful morning after). Actually, Goethe (being a hobby-painter himself) shared the obsession of many a painter (starting with Da Vinci) with the “language of colors” - a possibility to define a color “vocabulary” expressive of feelings as poetry, or music, but more immediate, and universal than any language. The subject became even more actual with abstract painting, in our century (W. Kandinsky, J. Itten), when painting gave up the figure, and had to rely solely on line, form and color.

Metamorphosis and evolution

His work in botany Metamorphose der Pflanzen ("Metamorphosis of Plants"; 1790) is a model of presenting his main thesis, that all the parts of the plant are modifications of a type-leaf, or of archetypal plant (Ur-pflanze). His discovery in biology (in 1784), of the premaxilla in the human species, caused Darwin to hail him as a forerunner. His idea of the metamorphosis of archetypal organism (Urorganismus) was an interesting alternative for the idea of evolution. While evolution assumed as primary external influences, metamorphosis assumed as primary the internal capacity of the primal organism (Urorganismus) to take manifold forms, which are (at particular time) best suited to conditions. The hard-core science considered this as metaphysical concept (of nature), while later science, inspired by the New Age paradigms - from 1960’s onwards - considered this as a way to overcome the Newtonian and Cartesian paradigm in life sciences, and humanities.

Goethe resists the “exorcism” of physics, and Enlightenment, who banished the “spirit” from nature and history, together with the “ghosts.” The continuing interest for Goethe's science is not primarily related to his discoveries, but to his method (insight into his methods). Few have been (as he was) aware of the mental processes involved in the study of natural phenomena (later, quantum physics had to admit this), and no one understood that the way of coping with this involvement (of the observer in the phenomena to be observed) is to let "knowledge of self" develop with "knowledge of world." The impulse to find a scientific, as well as an aesthetic, corrective to the inevitable tendencies of specialization, is visible in Schiller’s Letters on Aesthetic Education of Man (1795), and in Goethe’s poems on plant and animal metamorphosis in which he presents to imagination and feeling, what has been understood by the mind. These poems were later introduced into a cycle Gott und Welt ("God and World"). THOU art confused, my beloved, at, seeing the thousandfold union Shown in this flowery troop, over the garden dispers'd; any a name dost thou hear assign'd; one after another Falls on thy list'ning ear, with a barbarian sound. None resembleth another, yet all their forms have a likeness; Therefore, a mystical law is by the chorus proclaim'd; Yes, a sacred enigma! Oh, dearest friend, could I only Happily teach thee the word, which may the mystery solve! Closely observe how the plant, by little and little progressing, Step by step guided on, changeth to blossom and fruit! (fragment from the poem The Metamorphosis of Plants, trans. by E. A. Bowring, London, 1853)

In his conversations with Eckermann, Goethe will define focus on the archetype (basic phenomena - Urphänomen), not only as a possible method in understanding the world around us, but also as a definite goal of a spiritual quest.

“The height of human attainment is amazement; and if the object of a man’s amazement is an Urphänomen he will have attained tranquillity; he can have no higher awareness and he ought not to seek anything beyond it; for here is the absolute limit” (Eckermann, Feb. 18, 1829).

One can find a comparable sense of enchantment with the basic phenomena in William Blake - who wrote in Auguries of Innocence: To see a World in a Grain of Sand And a Heaven in a Wild Flower, Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand And Eternity in an hour.

Morphology and the New Age paradigms

Morphology, as he understood it, was the systematic study of formation and transformation: of natural phenomena (rocks, clouds, colors, plants, animals), or the cultural phenomena (human society, history). He did not propose it as a substitute for the quantitative sciences, and he was not opposed to analysis (his favorite principle was that analysis and synthesis must alternate - as breathing in, and breathing out).

His objection to physics was its tendency to claim monopoly of understanding (as Schiller’s objection to business attitude was its claim on monopoly of life). His aim was a humanizing supplement - to understand nature in all its qualitative manifestations, as well. Therefore his impassioned pleas for a concert of all the sciences, a cooperation of all types of method and mind.

Rudolph Steiner, Jan Smuts (1926), and Ludwig von Bertalanffy later overtook some of these ideas. Steiner’s ideal was the reunion of science, religion, and art in a new, human sacramental culture. With some variance this ideal was also overtaken by New Age (after 60’s). After 70’s, a new set of paradigms (in Goethean spirit) was developed by the new generation in physics and biology. Goethe’s idea of the planet as an organism and of the world soul (Weltseele), which permeates and gives teleology to the dynamics and metamorphosis of the overall matter, was developed into various hypothesis and paradigms. Idea that life on planet earth is not just a layer, or crust, over the lifeless ground, but makes a dynamic living whole with the planet (as a global organism), was included into the Gaia hypothesis (Lovelock, 1979), and the global brain hypothesis (Russell, 1995).

Ideas related to metamorphosis were incorporated into ”implicate order” (Bohm, 1980), ”formative causality” and ”morphogenetic fields” (Shaldrake, 1982). They were pursuing the same goal as Goethe – to exchange the mechanistic model of explanation, with holistic, organic, and teleological (Wright, 1976) explanations, in the spirit of general systems theory (Bertalanffy, 1968), and to broaden the explanation basis by adding ”paradigms” to ”nature laws”.

Though Goethe was not an orthodox believer, he was neither a pagan (as some critics imagine). He understood other religions as different metamorphoses of an Ur-religion, or archetypal religion - giving in this field (as in plant morphology), expression of the same idea. This idea supported religious tolerance, and was later articulated as a principle, that all religions have the same essence, and therefore no matter which God they address, should be considered as serving the same purpose - to bring harmony, and not strife to the humankind.

Gothe rebuked opinions that as poet he was a polytheist, as scientist a pantheist, and that as a moral being he accepted a personal God. This means, that for him - as for some German philosophers of his time - ethics had sufficient support from reason, from the human heart, and empathy. Thus, one could consider morality not as obedience to a command (of a God, capable to punish the sinner), but as an expression of the essential part of human nature - a behavior in full accordance with the human nature. The past proved to them, that in doing evil men were not stopped by fear (from God), but - perhaps - if they developed their reason, and empathy (hearts), this could stop the evil in history. Psychoanalysis will come later to claim that human nature is basically evil, and can be tamed only through supression, socialization, and fear from punishment.

Rewriting of the past

“For Goethe the rewriting of the past by no means had the now current sense of self-assertion of the present; on the contrary: it meant a justification of the past. It describes everything just as it ‘really’ took place in those days. (...) History repeats certain basic forms of human destiny ‘with a thousand embellishments’ and it must therefore be rewritten ‘from time to time’ because it is only under analogous circumstances that the fantasies, wishes, hopes, and undertakings of past ages can appear as they really were.” (Löwith, 1965: 228).

A century later (in 1931) Nehru will add to this: ”History is one connected whole and you cannot understand even the history of one country if you do not know what has happened in other parts of the world. (...) Maps and colors show us countries in different colors. Undoubtedly people do differ from one another, but they also resemble each other a great deal, and it is well to keep this in mind and not be misled by the colors on the map or by national boundaries” (Nehru, 1989: 4–5).

In his overview related to color theories of the past (at the conclusion of the third section of Farbenlehre), Goethe says: “World history must be rewritten from time to time... because new points of view are given, because he who lives in time which goes forward is brought to new vantage points from which the past can be surveyed and evaluated in a new manner. The same is true for the sciences.”

More then a century later, Cassirer joined this creative and constructive stand toward the past.

“...The truly great works of culture never confront us as things absolutely fixed and unchanging, shackling and stifling the free motion of the spirit in their fixity. Their content has being for us only by virtue of the fact that they must be continually possessed anew and hence continually recreated” (Cassirer, 1974: 193-4).


BIBLIOGRAPHY

- An Anthology of German Literature of the Romantic Era and Age of Goethe (1993), ed. by K-P. Hinze, & L. M. Trawick, New York, E. Mellen Press
- Bateson, G. (1979): Mind and Nature - A Necessary Unity, N. York, Bantam
- Berman, M (1989): The Reenchantment of the World, New York, Bantam
- Bertalanffy, L. (1968): General Systems Theory, New York
- Bohm, D. (1980): Wholeness and the Implicate Order, London, Routledge
- Bortoft, H. (1996): The Wholeness of Nature : Goethe's Way Toward a Science of Conscious Participation in Nature (Renewal in Science), Hudson, Lindisfarne Books
- Burwick, F. (1986): The Damnation of Newton : Goethe's Color Theory and Romantic Perception, Berlin & New York, W. De Gruyter
- Cassirer, E. (1974): The Logic of the Humanities, New Haven: Yale Univ. Press
- Conversations of Goethe with Eckermann (1930), New York
- Goethe, J. W. (1976): Theory of Colors, Cambridge, M.I.T. Press
- Goethe, J. W. (1982): Selected Verse, New York, Viking Press
- Itten, J. (1961): Kunst der Farbe, Ravensburg, Maier Verlag
- Itten, J. (1967): Design and Form, London , Thames & Hudson
- Lehrs, E. (1958): Man or Matter, Harper, New York
- Lovelock, J. (1979): Gaia - A New Look at the Life on Earth, London
- Löwith, K. (1965): From Hegel to Nietzsche, London, Constable
- Nehru, J. (1989): Glimpses of World History, Oxford Un. Press
- Prigogine, I. & Stengers, I. (1984): Order out of Chaos, N. York: Bantham
- Pulkkänen, P., ed. (1989): The Search for Meaning, Ellingborough: Thorsons
- Seamon D. & Zajonc, A., ed. (1998): Goethe's Way of Science: A Phenomenology of Nature, State Univ. of New York Press
- Sheldrake, R. (1982): A New Science of Life
- The Hypothesis of Formative Causation, Los Angeles: J.P. Tarcher
- Sheldrake, R. (1988): The Presence of the Past, London, Fontana
- Smuts, J. (1926): Holism and Evolution, London
- Steiner, R. (1998): Color - 12 Lectures, London, Anthroposophic Press
- The Poems of Goethe, trans. by E. A. Bowring, London 1853.
- Tompkins, P. & Bird, Ch. (1973): The Secret Life of Plants, Penguin
- Wright, L. (1976): Theological Explanations, Berkeley, Univ. of California Press
- Vaughan, W. (1988): Romantic Art, London, Thames & Hudson