What gives a course its "soul"?

[Mike_Cirba]

Paul;

I hear you!!

But did The Clash ever have the versatile, brilliant, caustic, "bite the hand that feeds me" soul of Elvis Costello?

Any modern designers come to mind who might be a distant cousin of the immensely talented, contradictorily prolific bespactled one who is being inducted into the R&R Hall of Fame this coming weekend??

[Jeff Fortson]

I am more of a Ramones or Pistols kind of guy when it comes to old school punk groups.  I like straight forward punk  .  The Clash is a great band but it's more of a fusion of funk and ska with a punk under current.

I never thought I'd discuss punk on GCA.  Maybe this has gone too far!

Jeff F.

[ForkaB]

I personally do not think that courses, per se, have a "soul" any more than they are "strategic."  Rather, they offer us the chance to choose and try to express our golfing strategies and may or may not find a resonance with our "souls."

Tommy's post expresses that resonance very articulately.  I feel the same resonance with a completely architecturally insignificant course that I used to play when on vacation as a kid on Cape Ann, near Boston.

As for music, "soul" in a spiritual sense and "soul" in a muscial sense are two largely different things, for most people.  I must admit that from time to time, after a particularly satisfying golf shot, I might hear "I Feel Good!" reverberating through my bones, but, let's be honest, golf has much more affinity with the Blues..........  As for the Clash, Ramones, etc., isn't what they express more "attitude" than "soul"?  Maybe that's what Strantz has--attitude.  Any other candidates?

Musically, I'd love to think that there is some sort of analogy between GCA and my era (the 60's), but when I was living in England in 1966 only 20 miles away from Woodhall Spa, somehow trying to link GCA to a performance by Them in a warehouse in Grantham was and is far from my imaginative capabilities.

If there is a link between music and GCA it is probably in the classical genre.  Experiencing a great course is more like listening to a great symphony than a great set of popular songs (whatever era or genre) IMHO.  Grand recurring and subtly modified themes.  Points and counterpoints.  Crescendos and diminuendos.  Incontestible beauty.  Etc.

Great post, Mike.

[TEPaul]

Rich Goodale said;

"I personally do not think that courses, per se, have a "soul" any more than they are "strategic."  Rather, they offer us the chance to choose and try to express our golfing strategies and may or may not find a resonance with our "souls.""

Rich:

That statement of yours is extremely interesting and after a number of years on here I believe it says almost everything about you and the way you look at this whole subject of golf architecture and probably golf.

What you are is a golf and golf architecture "existentialist"--and really bigtime!

You tend to see everything only in relationship to yourself. That would be the realm and viewpoint of a true existentialist. It explains to me why you always seem to say or imply there's really not that much, if anything, in what an architect does--there's no art in what he does. It also says a lot about why you don't seem to really understand the essence of "naturalism" or the perception of it in golf architecture!

This definition from the Randon House College dictionary describes you almost perfectly in the way you look at and discuss architecture and particularly "naturalism" in architecture--and I must say you've always been very consistent about it.

The definition of "existantialism";

"A modern movement encompassing a variety of themes, among them the doctrine that individual existence determines essence, that man has absolute freedom of choice but that there are no real rational criteria serving as the basis of choice, and the general claim that the universe is absurd, with an emphasis on the phenomena of anxiety and alienation".

That explains you and your take on architecture and its architects and the medium they use (the earth)--ie naturalism--just about perfectly.

Of course, as Jerry Seinfeld and George Costanza used to say, ".....but there's nothing wrong with that."

That's exactly what you are--a golf architecture "existentialist".

If you wanted to be or feel something else--to feel or maybe even be more than that you'd have to start to read someone like Max Behr and begin to understand what he's saying and to start to get outside of just yourself a little more--to start to feel things coming at you instead of always only you coming at other things! To start to look at things outside yourself and feel them and maybe their "spirit" and "soul" as not just always coming from your own mind alone. Things like the universe, it's Nature, the ground, it's lines and movements, its elements and forces. Then you might see things like strategies and even "soul" as something bigger than yourself or at least outside yourself.

And frankly, that's about precisely why Max Behr made his fundamental distinctions in golf and golf architecture between Man's fundamental relationship with Nature vs Man's fundamental relationship with Man.

His point was that Man should feel (or more naturally does feel) that Nature is ultimately bigger than he is, more powerful than he is, that it's outside of him and he shouldn't do everything in his power to try to control and overpower it.

He said that because he felt if man looked at Nature that way he would face it less critically than if he felt whatever faced and challenged him was made by man (some other golfer--an architect). He would face nature less critically, less negatively than he would face something clearly made by man!! Even within the definition of "existentialism" you can see some interesting parallels and similarities to the 'phenomenon of anxiety and alienation' and Behr's ideas about man's "criticisms" or man's "negativity" of man facing man-made things--and conversely not feeling negative or critical if those things were "natural", if they were bigger than him--outside of him (or even IF he only perceived them that way)! If you want to rid yourself of that anxiety and alienation (in your case so far it's a matter of you thinking architecture is basically absurd or meaningless) you should try harder to get outside yourself a bit more.

Obviously this has a real application to golf and golf architecture and a golfer playing golf across the unadorned landscape of Nature as a "sport" instead of man attempting to rearrange almost every single aspect of golf into his own man-made "game".

But of course, to date you think that too is absurd and meaningless.

You're a complete "existentialist" in the way you look at all things to do with golf architecture. You should try to get outside yourself more---there actually just might be some things going on out there that are more than just in your own mind.

[ForkaB]

Tom

If I'm anything (which is doubtful) I am an linksoepistemologist.  I golf, therefore I am.  I gave up existentialism in High School.  Too simplistic.  Like Behr.

[TEPaul]

"If I'm anything (which is doubtful) I am an linksoepistemologist.  I golf, therefore I am.  I gave up existentialism in High School.  Too simplistic.  Like Behr."

That is absolutely not true. What you are I don't really know but to date you appear undeniably no more than a high school "existentialist". It doesn't work to just throw big words at a subject like "linksoepistemologist" hoping that it will make others feel you know something that a Max Behr, for instance, doesn't.

You don't! Even a mega mind such as Eienstein understood even with all he knew and could conceive of that there were things around him far bigger than he was or his own mind could conceive of.

You probably did give up considering the aspects of "existentialism" in high school because you didn't like what it was telling you. To say it was 'too simple' is again, classic you. If you don't get it, it's so easy to say it's simple, it's absurd, it's meaningless!

But to say something like "I golf, therefore I am" is no more than middle school "existentialism". I'm surprised you didn't also say "I am, therefore I golf".

There's no question that you're an architectural "existentialist". And now it appears you're not even a high school "existentialist, you're a middle school "existentialist". High school "existentialism" must have been too complex therefore it automatically had to become simplistic and meaningless--even absurd.

But as a way of encouragement, you should be aware that there just may be more out there to learn, to know, and to feel if you open your mind and try to get outside yourself a bit more. But perhaps not.

Again, as Jerry and George said, “….but there’s nothing wrong with that (being a middle school existentialist in how you look at golf architecture).”

[TEPaul]

Rich said:

""If I'm anything (which is doubtful)......."

Rich, you need to get a grip on yourself! Now you might be down to lower school existentialism. It appears you haven't yet gotten past the point where you even feel you yourself are meaningless and absurd.

Try not to go any lower or after a while someone is going to agree with you.

[ForkaB]

Tom

I like "I am, therefore I golf" just as well as "I golf, therefore I am."  Very much the Yin and Yang discussed on another thread.  You should read the Parable of the Assassins.  There are no answers, just questions.

[TEPaul]

Rich:

Uh huh! I see. Now you're well on your way to being a kindergarten "existentialist" and a "existentialist assassin" at that.

Don't ask me any more questions then--I'm at least going to wait til you graduate from architectural High School someday.

[TEPaul]

Rich:

The rate and direction you're going you'll be flunking out of kindergarten existentialism school soon.

The next stop for you, in that case, will be the dark, mysterious and spooky lowlands of Nihilism.

If you get there I'll lend you a book by the French Philosopher and all time nihilist E.M. Cioran called "The Temptation to Exist". You might even buy into it as it's very negative and you might even think it's profound although there's nothing much more there than total circumlocution.

You'll probably like it because at that level everything is meaningless and absurd and I think you might even have a shot at understanding nihilism because by its definition there's really "nothing" there anyway.

[ForkaB]

Tom

I'm actually a very positive person--logically positive in fact, just like my main man Lugwig Wittgenstein.  As old Luddie said once famously, "Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, daruber muss man schweigen."  I'll try to stick to this dictum in the future.

Slainte

Rich

[Andy Levett]

man has absolute freedom of choice but  there are no real rational criteria serving as the basis of choice

Has anybody noticed how existentialism came into vogue at about the same time as the trend  away from the options and width espoused by Golden Age architects?
You can just imagine Sartre and Camus teeing it up on a road trip to St Andrews, looking at that first fairway with its 'absolute freedom of choice' and suffering a long dark night of the soul

[Tommy_Naccarato]

The Seinfeld Quote is actually "NOT that there is anything wrong with that" or "Well, good luck with all of that."

You know, last night I was ready to remove my post on this subject because I felt it was "TOO" out there. Then my computer locked-up and I simply shut it off and went to bed.

Let me take this to another direction. Personally, I have experienced soul on a lot of golf courses that didn't have an ounce of architectural merit--maybe even a little too much glitz for their own good. For example, my experience on one of the worse times in my life that led me to Spanish Bay, and ended up turning to be a life-changing experience. I mean, I was really "F"-up in the head that day, but golf at Spanish Bay or maybe just golf in general, was my ticket out of this mass of negativity and insecurity. As some of us know, it is that paticular dramatic setting for such a life-changing event on a golf course that could have architecturally, been so much better.

But since then, I've had so many other soulful experiences on great courses--architecturally and even unarchitecturally. Standing on the first tee at Pacific Dunes watching the first group of Tom Doak, Bill Coore, Brad Klein and Jim Urbina tee-off in its pre-opening state was a soulful experience for me. I think that it may be one of the more pivital moments in modern golf architecture because it was there, that some of the most commercial minds in the business, got to see exactly what GREATNESS actually is, and how minimally it can be acheived with the right mindset, or....Heaven forbid.....The right soul.

Or it could be the assorted few that got to experience Rustic Canyon it the most perfect of conditions--all to ourselves, with the guys that built-it.

If these weren't soulful events, then there is no such thing as a soul.

Here are two vastly different golf courses in two completely different areas, and I can see the different characteristics of soul in each one of them. Talk about VARIETY!

Rich,

ex·is·ten·tial·ism--
A philosophy that emphasizes the uniqueness and isolation of the individual experience in a hostile or indifferent universe, regards human existence as unexplainable, and stresses freedom of choice and responsibility for the consequences of one's acts.

What then, is a person that emphasizes the uniqueness and isolation of the individual experience in a hostile or indifferent universe, regards human existence as a gift and stresses that our freedom of choice should be made with the integrity and a moral standard, with responsibility of the consequences of one's acts?

[ForkaB]

Tommy

By your definition I am not an existentialist, although some of the words suit me.  Of course, you can find words in any "ism" that are seductive.  That's why they are "isms."  As for the latter conundrum, I'll stick with Wittgenstein's advice.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Rich, I wasn't saying that you were. Tom was.

I was ASKING, what then, is a person that emphasizes the uniqueness and isolation of the individual experience in a hostile or indifferent universe, regards human existence as a gift and stresses that our freedom of choice should be made with the integrity and a moral standard, with responsibility of the consequences of one's acts?

In my opinion, I think that this Discussion Group is a form of Existentialism, given the way we dissect things, tear golf courses apart and reconstruct them back again--only after we have let the world know of their faults, weaknesses, strengths, etc. Including the men that conceived the idea of them.

[Mike_Cirba]

Darn...and I was just thinking it was a good snack shop at the turn when I originally asked the question.      

[ForkaB]

Tommy

The only persons that you seem to describe are Cistercian Monks or senior members of Gulph Mills Golf Club.  I personally don't relate to the "isolation", "hostile" universe, "existence as a gift" bits of your paragraph, but then I've not had the same quantity of expereince at golf course snack shops as has Cirba.

[Paul_Turner]

Paul;

I hear you!!

But did The Clash ever have the versatile, brilliant, caustic, "bite the hand that feeds me" soul of Elvis Costello?

Yeah, course they did!  Strummer's lyrics take a back seat to nobody!  A bit left-wing for this crowd, I suspect but at least they meant something and noone in their right mind could call them "PC"!
("The Only Band That Really Matters")


Ages since I listened to Costello, although he was the very first new wave musician I heard at about age 8.  I'll revisit.

I was too young to be a punk, but my intro to punk was sitting, laughing at the back of the bus going to school, with the older kids playing Pistols et al; it drove the driver nuts, poor chap.  

Tune==Course Routing?
Lyrics==Course Features?

Jeff

The first, self titled, Clash album is pretty much pure Punk.  Better than "Nevermind the Bollocks" IMO.

[BCrosby]

Rich -

Since you bring up OUR man Wittgenstein, I would note that your quotation was from his Tractatus. Wittie later repudiated that idea and others from the Tractatus period. See, among other collections, Die Philosophishe Bemerkungen, pp. 34 et seq.

To tie this in to gca, I heard that Wittgenstein and his separated at birth twin, Samuel Beckett, used to go head to head at Woodhall Spa most afternoons after WWII.

But I'm not sure those reports are to be trusted.

Bob

[Mark_Fine]

I think we have to be careful not to confuse a course with "soul" and a course that is truly special from a golf architecture perspective.  They might be one in the same, but not always.  

One of my greatest (most enjoyable) golf experiences ever was on a little Scottish Highlands course that might only be a Doak 3 or 4 from an architecture standpoint, but that course had soul.  Though the holes there won't be copied anytime soon, it was a combination of the shear beauty of the setting, the mountains in the backdrops, the seclusion and serenity, the peacefulness of the walk, the company I was with, the fun we had, the cost to play (2 quid), the firmness of the ground, etc. that made that course/round inspirational.  I'll never forget that round and that golf course.  Pithlocry was the name for those wondering.

I do agree to some extend with Kelly about feeling the soul of a course after one visit - its very difficult, if not impossible.  I've always said, the greater the course, the more it needs to be studied to be learned.  Having said that, the more one sees and studies great golf courses, the better chance one has of at least getting a little beyond skin deep!
Mark

[TEPaul]

"I personally don't relate to the "isolation", "hostile" universe, "existence as a gift" bits of your paragraph"

Rich:

I know you don't relate to that. That's the point. You're trying to act that somebody you're not. You're trying to convince all of us of that. I'm thinking you're even trying to convince yourself.

You need to take a close look in the proverbial mirror. Look closely and you might have a revelation. Of course, if you see someone over your shoulder call Katz post haste. It'll probably be Max Behr you'll see over your shoulder in the mirror.

If he's laughing at you forget about Katz and call me immediately.

[ForkaB]

Tom

Every time Maxie appears at my shoulder he says two things:

"Keep up the good work!" and "How do I get this TE Paul guy to stop bothering me?  Channelers, mystics, seances, calls to my celestial cell phone--the guy just doesn't give up!"

I spend many a night trying to calm him down, which is good for me as it is in prime REM time.

Bob C

Never made it to "Investigations" but I do keep my dog-eared copy of Tractatus in my golf bag next to Decisions, and find it invaluable when considering issues such as "Maintenance Meld" and unplayable lies.

PS--I heard that regular Saturday game used to be played at Gog Magog rather than Woodhall Spa, but I could be wrong.

[Harry_Colt]

"That is the real test of a course; Is it going to live?-not, Does it provide a test for the game?  There is more than that necessary.  The bunkers may be placed correctly, the putting greens may be true, the lies perfect, and yet no really satisfying enjoyment will be obtained by the critical and experienced player.

There can be no true and lasting success for such a creation, and it will die in the course of years.  An architect's earnest hope is, without doubt, that his courses will have the necessary vitality to resist possible adverse criticism, and will endure as a lasting record of his craft and of his love of his work."  

[Kelly_Blake_Moran]

Mike Cirba,

Boy, you leave for a while and the professors take over.  To answer you about Moselem, I think you made an accurate assessment.  And Doak taking away points for three downhill par threes, Harry Colt's first paragraph, in what I beleive will be the post that immediately proceeds this one, together show that to give an evaluation strictly in terms of a break down about fairway widths, putting surface shapes, length, etc. does give an evaluation but it is totally devoid of the experience, or the soul, of the place that just can not be described properly for the reader.  It is like rating architecture.  Give me the top ten churches, top ten office buildings, top ten residences, it is just so difficult to do and really capture it.  This is not so much a complaint about the way courses are rated and presented in media, as it is a realistic view on golf courses.  They are meant to be played, expereinced, pondered, on a constant basis to really know them.  And the obscure ones that some have pointed out here would give people more pleaseure than the ones that are featured in magazines, featured as the best new thing, when in fact the article is probably paid advertisement.  I will bet what you read as some sort of review in some magazines was actually paid for.  But, beyond all that I think golf courses do have soul, I think land, places, buildings have that potential to convey some sense of soul that goes beyond just the visual aspect of it.  Now, the raters need to figure out how to build a machine to measure it.  

[Forrest Richardson]

It's called a soulmeter. I beleive it's on loan at the moment to Tommy N. out in California.