The Works of Nature as First Words: Goethe and the Experience of the Natural World
“The works of nature are like the first words spoken by God.”
Goethe.
In the midst of a mounting ecological crisis driven by industrial civilization and an economic system that treats nature as a commodity, Stefan Bollmann’s analysis Goethe and the Experience of Nature arrives as a timely contribution. It points toward a different relationship with the living world. Following Goethe, the view that nature forms an interconnected whole moves away from a rational Cartesian split that reduces nature to parts to be analyzed. It offers instead a more authentic way to know and value the natural world, with an emphasis on experiential understanding rather than mere control. The aim is not only to learn about nature but to engage with it more wisely and responsibly.
Stefan Bollmann’s book presents a true biographical portrait of Goethe through a lesser-known angle: his lifelong engagement with fields such as geology, botany, anatomy, color theory, and atmospheric physics, all explored in depth. This review seeks to reflect what is most meaningful for today’s readers, summarizing how Goethe’s life demonstrates that experiencing and knowing nature is essential for human life itself.
In Johann Wolfgang Goethe (1749–1832), nature emerged as a vital experience through feeling, followed by systematic observation. Goethe’s friendship with Alexander von Humboldt (1769–1859) was pivotal in shaping his understanding of nature. Humboldt, a mining engineer who studied at the Freiburg Mining School, shared a quest to unite the sciences under guiding ideas that would illuminate natural phenomena. He argued that scientific rationality should be complemented by empathy toward the natural world to advance knowledge.
Two dominant intellectual currents of the eighteenth century—rationalism and empiricism—offered different paths to knowledge. Goethe, like Humboldt, moved away from the spiritual drift of romantic natural philosophy and embraced an empirical stance in observing and analyzing natural phenomena. The romantic poet Schiller noted that Goethe drew much from the world of sense, while he drew from the inner life of the soul.
Goethe did not greet the French Revolution with unqualified approval. As discussed in contemporary scholarship, his political and social ideas were intertwined with his scientific insights. The so-called “vulcanists” sought geological transformations of the Earth, but Goethe aligned with the “Neptunists,” who argued for gradual, ongoing geological change as a parallel to social evolution. His leadership at the head of the Weimar mines deepened his understanding of Earth’s geological history. A text from 1817 suggests that nature is never static; forms are not fixed, but constantly shifting and transforming into new configurations.
For Goethe, deeper knowledge of nature meant a clearer understanding of humanity as a living part of nature. He proposed that knowledge of the natural environment arises from experience, declaring that experience is the true science, and that self-knowledge arises through action rather than contemplation alone. Bollmann emphasizes that Goethe’s approach to nature centers on lived experience in the open air, rather than laboratory settings. This aligns with Goethe’s love of walking, a practice his contemporaries called the life of a traveler. The idea of being on the road became synonymous with living, moving “between the mountain and the plain,” a nomadic way of discovery that connected movement with insight.
Goethe’s journey to Italy in 1788 produced the work Journey to Italy, a narrative that Bollmann argues presents Goethe as a naturalist in the field rather than a classic poet in form. The text is read as evidence of Goethe’s negotiation between classicism and emerging romantic sensibilities. In Venice, Goethe admired the civic vigor of the Venetians’ defenses against the sea, while also recognizing nature’s untamable laws. He described nature as powerful, yet knowable, with human beings acting as guardians rather than masters. References to maritime work in the final chapters of Faust reflect this encounter with nature’s forces and human ingenuity.
As Goethe approached the end of life, he became sharply critical of the environmental damage produced by industrial expansion. This concern surfaces clearly in his great work Faust, where science and technology are dramatized as forces that can supplement human knowledge yet also threaten moral limits. Later thinkers, such as Oswald Spengler, would frame similar concerns in terms of a Faustian drive for power over nature, a theme that resonates with Goethe’s cautionary stance. The longing to imitate divine mastery over nature persists as a recurring tension in his writings and in the broader modern discourse about technology and ecological limits.
The central thread of Bollmann’s examination is Goethe’s belief that a fuller understanding of nature enriches human life. The organism and the observer are bound in a shared economy of perception. Nature is not merely a resource to be exploited but a lived experience to be absorbed. This perspective invites readers to consider how outdoor engagement, practical inquiry, and open-air observation can inform a humane, science-informed sense of stewardship. Goethe’s legacy thus offers a model for contemporary readers seeking a balanced relationship with the natural world—one that honors curiosity, reverence, and responsibility in equal measure.