The Synthesis of Empathy, Abstraction and Nature in the

Work of Kandinsky, Steiner and Mendelsohn

Fiona Gray
Deakin University, Geelong, Australia

Abstract
In the latter part of the nineteenth century aesthetics turned away from the
classical idea of imitating nature and concepts such as empathy and
abstraction began to offer a new way of understanding the relationship
between nature, art and architecture. The theory of empathy espoused the
notion of oneness of nature, while abstraction was seen as a withdrawal from
nature. An alternative perspective to this seemingly antithetical outlook can
be revealed however in the work of German Expressionists such as Wassily
Kandinsky, Erich Mendelsohn and Rudolf Steiner. Through their exchange of
artistic, architectural and aesthetic ideals, they broke down the polarity
between empathy and abstraction, to reveal a complimentary relationship
which looked to nature as its mentor.

Empathy and abstraction were dominant themes in nineteenth century German

aesthetics that played a major role in shaping the theoretical objectives of artists and
architects at the turn of the twentieth century. Since 1907, when Wilhelm Worringer
published his highly influential doctoral dissertation Abstraction and Empathy1, there has
been a general tendency among scholars to explicate these two concepts as strictly
antithetical.

Worringers notion that empathy and abstraction respond to opposing

relationships between human beings and the external world has led to interpretations of
art and architecture that emphasise the role of one or the other, failing to recognise that
each contains an intimation of the other. The work of eminent artists and architects such
as Wassily Kandinsky, Rudolf Steiner and Erich Mendelsohn demonstrates that these
concepts are not mutually exclusive. There is a concordance between empathy and
abstraction in their work that rests upon their understanding of nature and which is

Proceedings of the XXVth International Conference

of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand
Geelong, Australia, 3-6 July 2008

History in Practice

The Synthesis of Empathy, Abstraction and Nature in the Work of Kandinsky, Steiner
and Mendelsohn

indispensable to their artistic expression. By investigating the mixed epistemologies adopted

by Kandinsky, Steiner and Mendelsohn a deeper understanding of the theories of empathy
and abstraction can be gained along with a greater appreciation of their work.

The Paradox of Empathy and Abstraction

The term einfuhlung, which literally means in feeling, was coined in 1873 by the German
aesthetician Robert Vischer.2 The English translation of the term, empathy, generally refers
to the attribution of ones own feelings towards an object. However, in German the term
denotes a more complex transference of ones ego3 into the object, whereby the object and
the observer become united.4 The ego is believed to actually penetrate the object so that its
form is filled out by the observer's emotions. Whereas sympathy recognises a parallelism
between subject and object and acknowledges a distinction between them, empathy is a
fusion of subject and object.

And unlike sympathy, where ones own identity is still

maintained whilst feeling for the other, in empathy one tends to lose oneself in the other.5
Empathy, therefore, presupposes an initial emptiness of the object in order that the observer
can invest it with his own vitality. Accordingly, the effect of an object, such as a work of art or
architecture, is felt differently by different individuals, depending upon the extent to which
their ego penetrates the work.

Abstraction is derived from the Latin word abstrahere meaning to draw away from.6
Abstraction is achieved by eliminating accidental features in order to leave what is universal
or essential. By considering something independently of its associations, attributes or
concrete accompaniments7, its very essence becomes the objective quality. Around 1900
the terms abstraction and abstract were used in German art theory and criticism to
describe the process of stripping back and paring down to the essential. This concept
offered the artist freedom from the representational qualities of art.

Proceedings of the XXVth International Conference

of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand
Geelong, Australia, 3-6 July 2008

History in Practice

The Synthesis of Empathy, Abstraction and Nature in the Work of Kandinsky, Steiner
and Mendelsohn

In 1907, Wilhelm Worringer wrote Abstraction and Empathy: A Contribution to the

Psychology of Style.8 The influence of this dissertation on German art and architectural
theory, and particularly on the artists of the Blue Rider, is generally considered to be
substantial. Worringer states in the introduction that the basic purpose of his essay was to
show that empathy was inapplicable to wide tracts of art history and that he endeavoured to
demonstrate the antithetical relation of empathy and abstraction.9 Worringer attempted to reevaluate the role of abstract forms in primitive, ancient and medieval art. According to
Worringer those artworks refuted empathetic perception and responded instead to an urge to
abstraction. Worringer declared that The urge to abstract is to purify an object of all its
dependence upon life, that is everything that is arbitrary, in order to approximate it to its
absolute value.10

He saw empathy and abstraction as two poles of artistic volition which

were based upon fundamentally opposed human reactions to their environment, stating that:

Whereas the precondition of the urge to empathy is a happy, pantheistic

relationship of confidence between man and the external world, the urge to
abstraction is the outcome of great unrest inspired in man by the phenomena of
the outside world.11

Despite Worringers strictly antithetical interpretation of empathy and abstraction, there are in
fact intimate and complex connections between these two concepts which find common
ground in their relationship to nature. The paradox that exists however is that while empathy
is described by its proponents as a union with nature, by projecting the ego into nature it is in
fact a humanisation of nature, thereby implying a faith in humanitys ability to subjugate
nature.12 A similar paradox exists with the notion of abstraction. Rather than a withdrawal
from nature, abstraction acknowledges natures powerful presence and is a distillation from
nature.13

Abstraction recognises natures inherent integrity and therefore rather than

imposing art upon nature, the artist must penetrate the essence of a thing where nature
speaks for itself.

Proceedings of the XXVth International Conference

of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand
Geelong, Australia, 3-6 July 2008

History in Practice

The Synthesis of Empathy, Abstraction and Nature in the Work of Kandinsky, Steiner
and Mendelsohn

In understanding their relationship to nature, the competing doctrines of empathy and

abstraction cannot be completely extricated from one another.

This can be further

demonstrated by the mixed epistemologies adopted by several theorists, artists and

architects towards the end of the nineteenth and beginning of the twentieth centuries. In
1886 Heinrich Wolfflin applied a theory of empathy to architecture in his doctoral dissertation
Prolegomena to a Psychology of Architecture14, which sought to account for the expression
of mood in architectonic forms. However Wolfflins reasoning goes beyond the notion of
projecting emotions into forms. He suggests that an object can possess a life of its own and
speaks of how matter must be overcome in order that the potential inherent in matter, its selfdetermination, may be realised.15 This recalls the notion of essence which is fundamental to
the concept of abstraction.

Similarly, elements of empathy and abstraction are evident in the works of Jugenstil
architects such as August Endell and Henry Van de Velde. In seeking to stimulate an
empathetic response from the viewer, these architects abstracted botanical and zoological
contours from nature. Despite their attempts to create a new style, Jugenstil architecture
has been criticised for its mimetic representation of nature which resulted in an
unsophisticated naturalism. It is interesting to note, however, that the concepts of empathy
and abstraction are intimately entwined with those of imitation and naturalism. Worringer
directly associated the concept of empathy with naturalism in art, stating that:

Naturalism is approximation to the organic and true to life but not because the
artist desired to depict the object true to life in its corporeality, not because he
desired to give the illusion of a living object, but because the feeling for the
beauty of organic form that is true to life has been aroused and because the artist
desired to give satisfaction to this feeling which dominated the absolute artistic
volition. It was the happiness of the organically alive, not that of truth to life,
which was striven after.16

Proceedings of the XXVth International Conference

of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand
Geelong, Australia, 3-6 July 2008

History in Practice

The Synthesis of Empathy, Abstraction and Nature in the Work of Kandinsky, Steiner
and Mendelsohn

Yet even in the most naturalistic art, some degree of abstraction is never entirely lacking,
since in the act of transposing nature onto canvas or into sculpture for example, some
distancing between the object and the image or form must occur. Through the process of
abstraction the image becomes distanced from nature by means of artistic reflection.

Empathy and Abstraction in the Steiners Philosophy and Architecture

Rudolf Steiners theories on art and architecture are often associated with the theory of
empathy.

The relationship between Steiners architecture and empathy has been

investigated by Eugene Santamasso in his doctoral dissertation The Origins and Aims of
German Expressionist Architecture.17 Santamasso also demonstrates the link between the
empathetic forms of expressionist architecture and those of the Jugenstil architects such as
Endell and Van de Velde. While Santamasso provides a detailed account of the role of
empathy in the emergence of architectural Expressionism, he fails to acknowledge the
equally important role of abstraction. He argues that Worringers thesis Abstraction and
Empathy bolstered Steiners belief that through the empathetic perception of material
phenomena, especially art, a person can develop powers of spiritual perception.18

He

demonstrates this by linking Worringers discussion of the empathetic significance of

botanical ornamentation with Steiners use of the acanthus leaf motif in his design for the
Goetheanum. Steiner, amongst other scholars of his time including Worringer and Alois
Riegl, had studied the origins of the acanthus leaf motif and claimed that rather than being a
naturalistic representation as Vitruviuss well known anecdote had suggested, it in fact had
developed from the ancient palm motif which had been used by the ancients to express the
sun forces in their art works. As such, Steiner used the acanthus leaf in his design to convey
solar and terrestrial forces. For Steiner, the pushing and pulling forces of the universe
necessitated a dynamic interaction of forms and the assorted sizes, shapes and clusterings
of the acanthus leaves were intended to create empathetic sensations of expansion and
contraction.19

Proceedings of the XXVth International Conference

of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand
Geelong, Australia, 3-6 July 2008

History in Practice

The Synthesis of Empathy, Abstraction and Nature in the Work of Kandinsky, Steiner
and Mendelsohn

The influence of empathy theory on Steiner is unmistakable, however to attribute his

architecture to empathy alone, as Santamasso has done, is to ignore other important ideas
resulting in an incomplete understanding of Steiners work. Had, for example, the influence
of Worringers concept of abstraction also been taken into consideration, a greater
appreciation of the significance of Steiners work may have been realised. The similarities
between Worringers notion of an abstract artistic volition or kunstwollen and Steiners ideas
on art and architecture were recognised by Ursula Marcum in her doctoral dissertation Rudolf
Steiner: An Intellectual Biography.20 Marcum compares Steiners and Worringers view on
the role of abstract art in primitive cultures, thereby highlighting the significance of
abstraction in Steiners conception of art. In a lecture Steiner delivered in Dornach on
September 12, 1920, he claimed that:

in this materialistic age we have forgotten the supersensible origin of art, so

our aim now, more or less, is to copy what our senses see out there in nature.
But those who really have a deeper feeling for nature on the one hand and art on
the other will certainly not be able to agree with naturalism, with art copying
nature.21

This, amongst numerous other statements of similar sentiment, suggest that rather than
attempting to provide a naturalistic representation of the acanthus leaf, Steiner employed an
abstract approach in his search for what lay behind the artistic form of the motif. In coming to
understand how the motif had evolved, Steiner saw the acanthus leaf as an abstract
representation of the forces of the sun. He claimed that his architecture could only be
comprehended by a living sense of how its forms come into being and of what their essence
is.22 It is reasonable to suggest therefore that Steiner embraced empathy and abstraction
simultaneously because each in its own way could reveal for him the laws that governed
form. According to Steiner our feelings allow us to perceive the inner qualities of an object
just as our eyes perceive the outer qualities.

Proceedings of the XXVth International Conference

of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand
Geelong, Australia, 3-6 July 2008

History in Practice

The Synthesis of Empathy, Abstraction and Nature in the Work of Kandinsky, Steiner
and Mendelsohn

Many of the forms that Steiner used in his architecture had a somewhat anthropomorphic
quality to them. It is possible that he was influenced in this regard by Nietzsche, who argued
that all human knowledge was a result of anthropomorphic projection.23 Despite holding
radically different views to Nietszche, Steiner was sympathetic to Neitzsches philosophy.
Anthropomorphism is a phenomenon closely related to empathy and in his doctoral
dissertation on empathy Wolfflin noted that Our own bodily organisation is the form through
which we apprehend everything physical.24 According to Steiner, the laws present in the
architectural utilisation of matter are also those found in the human body. He claimed that
when we project the specific organisation of the human body into the space outside it, then
we have architecture.25 He refuted however that any resemblance between the forms in his
building and those of the human body were based upon imitation. He accounts for any
similarities by arguing that the higher spirits that work in nature create in accordance with the
same forces with which the individual creates. Fundamental to Steiners view concerning
artistic creation is the notion that creative activity does not originate solely out of the
individual, but out of a higher world of spirits.26 Steiner saw art as the creation of organs
through which the spiritual world could speak to humanity. He believed that when the
appropriate artistic forms were found, they would act in the same way as the human larynx,
allowing buildings to speak.27

Steiners use of biological metaphors in describing his

architecture relied upon both empathetic and abstract understanding. The metaphor allowed
his audience to empathetically relate to the architecture, but the very use of a metaphor is
itself an abstraction. In the Hermeneutics of Postmodernity, Gary Madison writes:

A concept expresses the essence of something, but what is it, really, to state the
essence of something - what is it if not to draw a creative analogy and say what
it is like? What is the essence of something if not a metaphor taken literally?28

The notion that a metaphor captures the essence of a thing again recalls our earlier definition
of abstraction. However the fact that a metaphor transcribes one thing in terms of another,
also involves the empathetic concept of transference.

Proceedings of the XXVth International Conference

of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand
Geelong, Australia, 3-6 July 2008

History in Practice

The Synthesis of Empathy, Abstraction and Nature in the Work of Kandinsky, Steiner
and Mendelsohn

Steiners use of organic metaphors included not only biological forms but also biological
processes. The cyclic pattern of birth, growth, maturity, decay and death involves a process
of transformation known as metamorphosis. Metamorphosis means change (meta) of form
(morphosis).

The theory of metamorphosis was developed by Goethe and applied to

architecture by Steiner.

Metamorphosis in living organisms takes place in time.

By

transferring the idea to architecture, Steiner attempted to demonstrate the sequence of

growth and change that normally takes place in time, by showing it side by side in the seven
columns of the Goetheanum auditorium.29 Through a series of gradual transformations of
the motifs on the column capitals, time was intended to be made visible. Through the
process of abstraction, Steiner aimed to make the hidden laws of nature perceptible to our
senses and metamorphosis provided a means to express the living, dynamic quality of
architectural form.

Steiner and Kandinsky

By the outbreak of the first world war in 1914, Wassily Kandinsky had established a
reputation as one of the leading proponents of abstraction. For Kandinsky abstraction
provided a means of expressing anti-materialist values as well as awakening spiritual values.
Finnish scholar, Sixten Ringbom, suggests that Kandinsky may have first encountered
Steiner through his reading of Goethes theories on colour and aesthetics.30 In his role as
editor of Goethes scientific writings, Steiner had written many of the introductions and
commentaries which accompanied the texts. During the first decade of the twentieth century
Steiner was also the spokesperson for the Theosophical Society in Germany and it was
during this period that Kandinskys interest in the occult reached its culmination. Kandinsky
listened to Steiners lectures and read his books. Steiners synthesis of Goethes aesthetics
combined with a theosophical gnosis is what particularly attracted Kandinsky. Theosophy
enabled Kandinsky to experience alternative realities, and thereby relinquish the object in
favour of the ineffable. In his treatise Concerning the Spiritual in Art Kandinsky wrote:

Proceedings of the XXVth International Conference

of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand
Geelong, Australia, 3-6 July 2008

History in Practice

The Synthesis of Empathy, Abstraction and Nature in the Work of Kandinsky, Steiner
and Mendelsohn

This eternally exquisite matter, or as it is more commonly called, spirituality, does

not give itself up to firm expression and cannot be expressed by overtly material
forms. The need for new forms has arisen.31

Kandinsky propounded the Goethean notion of inner necessity, whereby form is driven from
within. He saw true art as a manifestation of natural internal laws and his concept of beauty
was founded on this premise. Kandinsky rejected the conventional materialistic concept of
beauty, defining it instead as a spiritual quality that shone through the physical.

By

acknowledging the reality of an objective spirituality, the subjective reactions of like and
dislike became redundant.

Colour for example, was not the physical pigment, but the

spiritual made visible to our senses through a material substance and therefore according to
Kandinsky, every colour was intrinsically beautiful.32 Steiner's theories on colour, which stem
directly from Goethe, were central to Kandinskys conception of abstract painting. Steiner
not only understood colour empathetically, in its ability to express and influence moods and
feelings, but also in an abstract sense, claiming that It must be possible for us not to merely
look at colours, to reproduce them outwardly here and there, but to live with colour, to
experience the inner life-force of colour.33 Steiner believed that every colour had a formative
gesture from which the forms of the painting should be derived. As an example, Steiner
indicated that blue exhibited an inward gesture, while yellow tended to radiate outwards.
However rather than applying such indications as rules, Steiner emphasised the need for
artists to perceive directly for themselves the inner dynamic of each colour and colour
relationship.34 He stated that:

colour always has something to say, always has a supersensible soul. The
more we enter into the drawing, the more we find ourselves entering an abstract
supersensible element which, since it is making its appearance in the senseperceptible world, must therefore take on a sense-perceptible form.35

Proceedings of the XXVth International Conference

of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand
Geelong, Australia, 3-6 July 2008

History in Practice

The Synthesis of Empathy, Abstraction and Nature in the Work of Kandinsky, Steiner
and Mendelsohn

Steiner believed that once a form is given colour, the inner movement of the colour lifts the
form out of its resting condition and allows the spirit to flow through it, thereby bringing it to
life.36 Steiner finds in colour, as in metamorphosis, a living, moving quality. According to
theosophical mysticism, the manifestation of life in matter produces vibrations and it was this
concept of vibration that was fundamental to Kandinskys theories on art.

Kandinsky

believed that human emotions consist of vibrations and that these vibrations shape works of
art. In turn the work of art vibrates and sets the viewers soul into vibration. Kandinsky, who
often used musical analogies to describe his work, eloquently expressed this notion when he
wrote:

Colour is the keyboard, the eyes are the hammers, the soul is the piano with
many strings. The artist is the hand that plays, touching one key or another
purposively, to cause vibrations in the soul.37

Kandinsky, like Steiner, attempted to combine empathy and abstraction in his theory. For
Kandinsky, abstract forms possessed a life or sound of their own which was independent of
representation, and rather than excluding the connection between art and nature, abstraction
allowed Kandinsky to express natures internal harmony.

Mendelsohn
Kandinsky provided an important precedent for the work of the young German architect,
Erich Mendelsohn. In his search for new architectural forms, Mendelsohn had turned to the
pioneers of the abstract revolution in contemporary painting. Mendelsohn was particularly
interested in Kandinskys technique of depicting movement.38 Kandinskys work also led
Mendelsohn to an appreciation of Jugenstil architecture and design with its abstract
curvilinear forms derived from nature.39 Mendelsohns first major architectural commission
was the Einstein Tower in Potsdam which was designed to test Einsteins theory of relativity.
Introducing time as the fourth dimension, Einstein postulated a space-time continuum that
captured the imagination of avant garde artists who aspired to depict what they knew rather

Proceedings of the XXVth International Conference

of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand
Geelong, Australia, 3-6 July 2008

History in Practice

10

The Synthesis of Empathy, Abstraction and Nature in the Work of Kandinsky, Steiner
and Mendelsohn

than what they saw. For Mendelsohn the dynamism of Jugenstil forms and Kandinskys
paintings captured the energy implicit in the theory of relativity.40

Aside from its important implications for science, discussion of the fourth dimension took on
non-mathematical, mystical associations. It was interpreted as a higher reality which existed
beyond three-dimensional visual perception.

For theosophists such as Blavatsky and

Steiner, the idea of a fourth dimension offered a means of making the ineffable more
concrete and supported their notion that three dimensional matter could be subsumed within
a higher spiritual realm.41 The apparent incompatibility between Einsteins scientific approach
and Steiners spiritual one was reconciled to some degree by Mendelsohn in his design for
the tower. Munich was an important center for theosophical debate and it is likely that
Mendelsohn would have become familiar with the teachings of theosophy during his time
spent at the University of Munich and the Technische Hochschule before his graduation in
1912.42

His knowledge of Steiners philosophy has also been suggested through his

friendship with Kandinsky in Munich after 1910.43 In his architecture Mendelsohn attempted
to express the energy state of matter which was fundamental to Einsteins conception of the
universe however he did so with a metaphysical sensibility informing his design. Shortly after
the towers construction Mendelsohn claimed that:

for architecture two components are necessary the first component (is that of)
the intellect, brain, the organising machine . The second is that of the
creative impulse, the blood, the temper, the senses and organic feeling. Only the
union of these two components leads to the mastery of the spatial elements.44

Like Steiner, Mendelsohn often describes architecture as a metaphor of the human body,
observing that architecture demands freedom of space in order to stretch its limbs.45 And
like Steiners Goetheanum, analogies are often drawn between the Einstein tower and the
human body, suggesting that its shaft resembles a phallus or human vertebrae, arousing an
empathetic response from the observer who understands the compression and tension

Proceedings of the XXVth International Conference

of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand
Geelong, Australia, 3-6 July 2008

History in Practice

11

The Synthesis of Empathy, Abstraction and Nature in the Work of Kandinsky, Steiner
and Mendelsohn

visible in the reinforced concrete in terms of their own bodily experience.46 In a lecture
delivered in July 1914 titled The Aesthetic Laws of Form Steiner diagrammatically
demonstrated the human body as a microcosm of the cosmos, relating the moon to the brain,
the earth to the lungs and the sun to the heart.47 Vaughan Hart, an American architectural
scholar, has interpreted the Einstein Tower plan based on this diagrammatic representation
of cosmic forces.48

While his interpretation is highly speculative, it does highlight the

compatibility between Steiners theories and the towers form and purpose, both of which
aimed to develop an understanding of the relationship between the earth, sun and the moon.
Further similarities exist between Steiner and Mendelsohn in the way that they employ the
concept of time so as to create a non-static, living architecture. Steiner does this by adapting
Goethes theory of metamorphosis while Mendelsohn achieved dynamism in his design by
applying Einsteins notion of a space-time continuum.

In his desire to emphasise the expressive qualities of architectural form along with his focus
on the inherent elements of architecture such as form and structure, Mendelsohn, like
Steiner, combined both empathetic and abstract methods of design. This is perhaps best
illustrated in his widely published sketches made between 1914 and 1917.49 In these
sketches Mendelsohn sought to recognise what modern architecture called for the inner
necessity derived from the use of new materials such as steel and concrete. His drawings
consisted of abstract lines and contours made with simple, flowing gestures, aimed at
providing a spatial outline of the building which expressed its essence rather than detailing its
realistic form. Yet these sketches also express the physical and emotional act of drawing.50
The curvature of the lines convey a sense of energy encouraging the viewer to
empathetically follow the buildings contours.

Mendelsohn defined art empathetically,

claiming that:

Art is an expression of a persons own sense of rhythmThe rhythm alone

makes for aesthetic value not the amount of technical ability which has been

Proceedings of the XXVth International Conference

of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand
Geelong, Australia, 3-6 July 2008

History in Practice

12

The Synthesis of Empathy, Abstraction and Nature in the Work of Kandinsky, Steiner
and Mendelsohn

used, but the flood of recognition which comes over us, derived from the
personality of the artist when he was inspired by nobly rhythmic feelings.51

Yet in 1913 his inclination towards abstraction is also apparent when he writes:

One should not approach art with a preconceived opinion based either on visual
memory or emotional expectation. The artist must only serve truth. But truth is
not to be confused with reality, with the tangible form of things; it is the shaping of
nature, made possible by the artist. Hence shaping = creation.52

In a letter written in 1914, Mendelsohn had praised Worringers book Form Problem in
Gothic which discussed the abstract quality of Gothic architecture.53 According to Worringer,
the structural forms of Gothic architecture were abstract expressions of mechanical forces, a
view which encouraged Mendelsohns own emphasis on structure. As the great architects of
the Gothic cathedrals had done centuries before, Mendelsohn also exploited the immaterial
effect of light as a means of dematerialising the building fabric. Mendelsohns interest in the
relationship between mass and light is effectively demonstrated in the towers deep window
recesses which allow the play of light and shadow to emphasise the buildings plastic quality.
By invoking a sense of energy and movement Mendelsohn achieved his aim of creating a
sensation of indefinable space which expressed in artistic form Einsteins theory of relativity.

Conclusion
Kandinsky, Steiner and Mendelsohn shared the dual aim of externalising their emotions as
well as distilling the inner essence of objects in order to create forms that would embody the
universal spiritual laws of nature. Steiners occult philosophy was influential in developing this
spiritual understanding of nature, despite often being dismissed by scholars as heretical.
Nature provided the common ground between the theories of empathy and abstraction and
this in turn led to a melding of seemingly opposing ideals, thereby breaking down the false

Proceedings of the XXVth International Conference

of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand
Geelong, Australia, 3-6 July 2008

History in Practice

13

The Synthesis of Empathy, Abstraction and Nature in the Work of Kandinsky, Steiner
and Mendelsohn

dichotomy that had been expounded by aestheticians. This dichotomy had resulted in the
theory of empathy being almost exclusively associated with naturalism in art and
architecture. However such interpretations are parochial and insight into the complementary
nature of abstraction offers a more complete understanding of the synthesis that occurred in
the work of German artists, architects and philosophers at the turn of the twentieth century.

Endnotes
1

Wilhelm Worringer, Abstraction and Empathy: A Contribution to the Psychology of Style

(International University Press, New York, 1967).
2
Julia Bloomfield, Kurt Forster, Thoma Reese (ed.), Empathy, Form and Space: Problems in German
Aesthetics 1873-1893 (Getty Centre for the History of Art and the Humanities, Santa Monica, CA,
1994,) 21.
3
In this context ego refers to the metaphysical sense of oneself, the conscious thinking self, as
opposed to the psychological concept of ego as self-centredness or self-importance. See definition in
the New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary on Historical Principles (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1993),
778.
4
The New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary on Historical Principles, 25.
5
Charles Edward Gauss, Empathy in Phillip Weiner (ed.), Dictionary of the History of Ideas: Studies
of Selected Pivotal Ideas, Volume II (Charles Sribners Sons, New York,1973), 87.
6
Paul-Alan Johnson, The Theory of Architecture: Concepts, Themes and Practices (International
Thomas Publishing, Victoria, Australia, 1994), 332.
7
The New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary on Historical Principles, 10.
8
Worringer, Abstraction and Empathy.
9
Worringer, Abstraction and Empathy, 4.
10
Worringer, Abstraction and Empathy, 17.
11
Worringer, Abstraction and Empathy, 15.
12
Richard Padovan, Proportion, Science, Philosophy, Architecture (E & FN Spon, London, 1999), 2425.
13
Padovan, Proportion, Science, Philosophy, Architecture.
14
Heinrich Wolfflin, Prolegomena to a Psychology of Architecture, translated in Bloomfield, Empathy,
Form and Space.
15
Wolfflin, Prolegomena to a Psychology of Architecture, translated in Bloomfield, Empathy, Form
and Space, 160.
16
Worringer, Abstraction and Empathy, 28.
17
Eugene Santamasso, Origins and Aims of German Expressionist Architecture: An Essay into the
Expressionist Frame of Mind, Especially as Typified in the Work of Rudolf Steiner (Unpublished
dissertation, Columbia University 1970).
18
Santamasso, Origins and Aims of German Expressionist Architecture, 305.
19
Santamasso, Origins and Aims of German Expressionist Architecture, 303-304.
20
Ursula Marcum, Rudolf Steiner: An Intellectual Biography (Unpublished dissertation, University of
California 1989), 443.
21
Rudolf Steiner, The Supersensible Origin of the Arts in Michael Howard (ed.) Art as Spiritual
Activity: Rudolf Steiners Contribution to the Art (Anthroposophic Press, New York, 1998), 238.

Proceedings of the XXVth International Conference

of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand
Geelong, Australia, 3-6 July 2008

History in Practice

14

The Synthesis of Empathy, Abstraction and Nature in the Work of Kandinsky, Steiner
and Mendelsohn

22

Rudolf Steiner, A new Conception of Architecture, Lecture June 28, 1914 in Christian ThalJantzen (ed.), Architecture as a Synthesis of the Arts (Rudolf Steiner Press, London, 1999), 111.
23
David Morgan, The Enchantment of Art: Abstraction and Empathy from German Romanticism to
Expressionism, Journal of the History of Ideas, 57:2 (1996), 6.
24
Wolfflin cited in Bloomfield, Empathy, Form and Space, 157-158.
25
Rudolf Steiner, Lecture, December 29, 1914, Impulses of Transformation for Mans Artistic
Evolution I in Art as Seen in the Light of Mystery Wisdom (Rudolf Steiner Press, London, 1984), 34.
26
Howard, Art As Spiritual Activity, 10.
27
Rudolf Steiner, Lecture on 17 June 1914, Art as The Creation of Organs Through Which the Gods
Speak to Us in Thal-Jantzen (ed.) Architecture as a Synthesis of the Arts, 82.
28
Gary Madison, The Hermeneutics of Postmodernity: Figures and Themes (Indiana University
Press, Bloomington, 1990), 88.
29
Kenneth Bayes, Anthroposophy and Architecture in Anthroposophy Today, 9 (Spring 1990), 10.
30
Sixten Ringbom, Art in the Epoch of the Great Spiritual: Occult Elements in the Early Theory of
Abstract Painting, Journal of the Warburg and Courtald Institute, XXIX (1966), 389.
31
Wassily Kandinsky, Concerning the Spiritual in Art: and painting in particular, 1912 (George
Wittenberg Inc, New York, 1970).
32
Ringbom, Art in the Epoch of the Great Spiritual, 407.
33
Rudolf Steiner, Ways to a New Style in Architecture (London, 1928), 54.
34
Howard (ed.), Art as Spiritual Activity,105.
35
Howard (ed.), Art as Spiritual Activity, 207.
36
Rudolf Steiner, The Creative World of Colour Lecture on 26 July 1914 in Thal-Jantzen (ed)
Architecture as a Synthesis of the Arts,141.
37
Kandinsky, Concerning the Spiritual in Art, 45.
38
Kathleen James, Expressionism, Relativity and the Einstein Tower in the Journal of the Society of
Architectural Historians, 53:4 (December, 1994), 398.
39
James, Expressionism, Relativity and the Einstein Tower, 393.
40
James, Expressionism, Relativity and the Einstein Tower, 398.
41
Linda Dalrymple Henderson, Mysticism, Romanticism and the Fourth Dimension in Edward
Weisberger (ed.) The Spiritual in Art: Abstract Painting 1890-1985 (Abeville Press Publications, New
York, 1987), 22.
42
Vaughan Hart, Erich Mendelsohn and the Fourth Dimension, Architectural Research Quarterly,
1:2 (Winter, 1995), 54.
43
Hart, Erich Mendelsohn and the Fourth Dimension.
44
Erich Mendelsohn cited in Hart, Erich Mendelsohn and the Fourth Dimension, 57.
45
Erich Mendelsohn cited in Hart, Erich Mendelsohn and the Fourth Dimension, 56.
46
James, Expressionism, Relativity and the Einstein Tower, 407.
47
Rudolf Steiner, The Aesthetic Laws of Form Lecture on 14 July, 1914 in Thal-Jantzen (ed.),
Architecture as a Synthesis of the Arts, 121.
48
Hart, Erich Mendelsohn and the Fourth Dimension.
49
Hans Rudolf Morganthaler, The Early Sketches of German Architect Erich Mendelsohn: No
Compromise with Reality (The Edwin Mellen Press, New York, 1992).
50
Morganthaler, The Early Sketches of German Architect Erich Mendelsohn, 96.
51
Mendelsohn cited in Santamasso, Origins and Aims of Expressionist Architecture, 106.
52
Morganthaler, The Early Sketches of German Architect Erich Mendelsohn, 12.
53
Morganthaler, The Early Sketches of German Architect Erich Mendelsohn, Ibid., 22.

Proceedings of the XXVth International Conference

of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand
Geelong, Australia, 3-6 July 2008

History in Practice

15