The Influence of Architect Associates

[Adam_F_Collins]

Many (if not all) "name" architects have associates who take part in various phases of golf course design and construction. I'm interested in the influence of such associates.

Great artists such as Michelangelo and DiVinci often had apprentices who carried out much of the actual production of pieces.

As I understand it, Donald Ross had an associate named Walter B. Hatch who carried out a lot of field work for the Ross firm. (My home course, I'm told was never actually visited by Ross - but was carried out by Hatch.)

Now, I'm sure that it must vary from case to case but generally speaking, how much does can an individual associate affect a design?

In this modern, computerized, wired age - with cell phones and helicopters and whatnot - is the architect more able to "keep their thumb on the pulse" of their designs?

Were associates of classical architects given more freedom by the fact that they might be more 'cut off' from the primary?

Can anyone think of examples where the work of the associate is distinct and rises to the surface - "above" the work and style of the primary?

[Shaun Carney]

Adam

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I read on a prior thread that at Ross' Jeffersonville Golf Club outside Philadelphia, there are many traits that don't exactly match Ross' design style. Then someone pointed out that a J.B. Mcgovern was on site for Ross and added his own two cents to the design. Playing this course quite often, I found this to be really interesting. It got me thinking just how often this actually took place. How many Ross designs(or any other architect for that matter) are actually more influenced by an associate than the principal.

[TEPaul]

A good example of this might be Perry Maxwell's (who I feel might just be the finest green designer who ever lived) so-called "Forgotten Man". I can't recall his name but Chris Clouser can surely supply it. Apparently he went everywhere with Maxwell. Maxwell would do the design and then take off for the remainder the day and go to the Philadelphia Orchestra or whatever, and the "Forgotten Man" would do the work.

One might also legitimately wonder about the detailed contributions of Crump's Jim Govan. He hired him in 1913 and he was with Crump constantly (head foreman and greenskeeper) and on the course dailly shot-testing and managing the entire site construction as things went forward to ultimate conclusion about ten years later. A lot of architectural opinions were floating around PVGC but nothing could actually get done without it flowing through Crump and obviously from Crump through Jim Govan. Govan, by the way, was an extremely good player.

[TEPaul]

Shaun:

That one is hard as hell to say with Ross. As busy as he was it's logical to assume he never stayed on any site long and we also now know Ross wasn't crazy about constant travel.

Those three bunker sets that showed up on both Jeffersonville and also Aronimink were probably McGovern (there's no record Ross ever saw the Jeffersonville site). Whether or not Ross actually approved them obviously we'll never know. McGovern was technically considered Ross's office manager in Wynnewood Pa. For whatever reasons McGovern doesn't seem to have the best of reputations around here. I don't have any idea why.

I happened to ask Flynn's daughter the "throwaway" question of whether she could remember anyone Flynn didn't like or had no respect for in the business. She thought about that a while and said not really other than an architect called J.B. McGovern. When I asked her if she knew why she said she really didn't. The only other guy Flynn had trouble with was Dick Wilson when he worked for Flynn for years. He apparently kept changing Flynn's desigins without permission and oft-times they had to go back and redo things. Maybe that's why Flynn didn't like McGovern---maybe McGovern took things into his own hands too often when Ross wasn't there.

The irony with Aronimimk is they still have Ross's "in the field" bunker drawings. Ron Prichard said they're the best he's ever seen from Ross himself. But Aronimink's fairway bunkers apparently weren't built to those Ross drawings.

I wonder why. So did Ron Prichard and the club when they were trying to decide what to restore two years ago!

My own course is sort of interesting this way. We have records of Ross being there for three whole days in the beginning (obviously routing the course) in 1916. We have his written advice to go steal what he considered the very best greenskeeper in Philly and hire him for the course and its construction. We also had a member (Weston Hibbs) who served as a sort of unpaid foreman and manager of the entire course and club construction that took over three years mostly due to shut down during WW1 (19 months). That member sort of served as our own little George Crump type--along with that superintendent who sort of served as his Jim Govan. That's the way thinks worked back then.

[cary lichtenstein]

How about the influence of shapers in the field. The are the real unspoken heros in my opinion.

[Tom_Doak]

Adam,

Associates (and shapers, too) can have a lot of influence if the boss lets them.  Some architects may treat them more like babysitters, but I figure if I'm paying them they had better be contributing something more than that.

An architect who doesn't let the associates out to play is basically saying that he can design the entire course himself in however many days he is on site.

As to what each associate contributes, I think you would get three different answers on any job if you asked the associate, his boss, and the client.  Trying to speculate about what happened 75 years ago is pretty tough, when you can't even figure out what's happening today with everyone involved still alive.

Some people insist that Perry Maxwell would have been nothing without the Wood brothers; a member of the crew at Crystal Downs would have insisted that MacKenzie was nothing without Perry Maxwell.

P.S.  I just got back from pizza with six of my associates, two interns and one ex-intern, all nine of whom will be on the equipment in Washington for the next two days.  The point of that arrangement is so they can all contribute something to the job while I'm here to look at it and provide some input on what they are doing.

[Adam_F_Collins]

Interesting.

Are architects finding that increasingly present communication technology (cell phones, email, etc.) are making them more effective in terms of staying involved in moment-to-moment decisions?

Or are they just adding on more work to offset the advantages?