One of the most obvious questions involving all this massive architectural collaboration at PVGC involving Crump, Tillinghast, Travis, perhaps MacDonald, Flynn (Toomey), Thomas, Fownes, Wilson, and perhaps others is why if all that talent was around did Crump hire (presumably to pay) Colt in 1913 and why did the club hire (presumably to pay) Alison in 1921, three years after Crump died?
I think the answer to that question can best be seen by simply stripping everything we know today about all those architects (excluding Colt and Alison) that came after the times we're looking at (1913 and 1921) and put the way they were all looked at by others and even amongst themselves in the complete context of only those two times (Colt in 1913 and Alison in 1921) and definitely not our own, or at any time AFTER those two times.
If looked at in that context it obviously made sense to Crump to hire Colt in 1913 and for the 1921 Advisory Committee to hire Alison almost three years after Crump's death (1921). Were Tillinghast, Thomas, Fownes, Wilson, Flynn the famous architects in 1913 they are today? Of course not. Were they the famous architects in 1921 they’d later become? No! Did that mean all of them didn’t have talent in 1913 or 1921? No!
Does the fact that Crump hired Colt in 1913 in any way preclude or minimize what Crump himself did on that course either before Colt arrived or most particularly in the 4-5 years after Colt left? Of course not---the record is pretty clear and getting clearer everyday on that score. And that, to me is the real fascination and the really interesting story behind the creation of PVGC. Because Crump was a novice in 1913 did that mean he didn’t have real talent? No! Does the fact that he managed to do all that he did at PVGC in those 5-6 years he was there almost constantly explain why he was so respected and perhaps glorified when he died suddenly? It sure does to me---and that’s most of the fascination of PVGC and Crump, in my opinion---and I believe the club and numerous others everywhere feel the same way. Should any of that be seen as in some way minimizing Colt or Alison’s part? Not to me.
Obviously, in 1912 and 1913 Crump was a rank amateur, a novice in golf architecture with no reputation for it at all. He’d done nothing before other than go to Europe obviously to study architectural principles. Did he get that idea from Macdonald? I’ve never seen anything to that effect other than he was obviously aware of NGLA and he knew Macdonald at the very least from the Lesley Cups. Did Hugh Wilson influence him to go to Europe to study? I doubt that as they went almost at the same time, certainly not together (had they been close friends that might’ve seemed a natural) and it doesn’t look to me like Hugh Wilson and George Crump were all that close friends!
But we know now pretty clearly what Crump did at PVGC before Colt ever arrived, and I think we’re getting very close to understanding what he was doing with that course in the 4-5 years after Colt left----and one thing he most certainly was NOT doing is simply telling his crews to construct that golf course specifically to Colt’s topo routing or hole by hole booklet. If that’s what he was doing or some on here think he was doing then that course most definitely would’ve been opened and ready to play in about a year or a little more and in effect Crump’s job would’ve been done and he would’ve probably just been happy to play it. But that didn’t remotely happen.
I say this as a way of explaining that the club, PV, and it’s members and Crump’s friends did not remotely try to minimize Colt or Alison in what they did there. Those people were simply recognizing what Crump had done. (the minimizing of what Colt and Alison did came years later in the history books basically only as a result of some research mistakes—and certainly one significant one being completely innocent). I’ve said many times to Paul Turner and Tom MacWood that the club and its members have always had real respect for Harry Colt, even in many cases (members) feeling he was responsible for more there than he actually was. In a word and generally, they feel Colt was considered one of the very best in the world and admire him for that and are in fact proud he had to do with PVGC at all. Of course Paul Turner, many times on here has said that I must be nuts to think that---despite the fact I know probably a hundred or more members of that club that feel that way.
I wish I could say the same for Hugh Alison. Apparently what he did for the club in 1921 and what is today on the course because of him is perhaps the least known significant thing about the course compared to what Crump/Colt/Tillinghast/Flynn (Thomas)/Wilson/Govan/Maxwell/Fazio did there.
But it seems to me that some such as Turner and MacWood seem to think that Crump didn’t do various things at PVGC either before Colt got there, perhaps while he was there and most definitely after he left simply because he couldn’t have! It seems to be as if they think he in fact almost had to rely on Colt. I don’t think so. I think what he did both before, probably during and certainly after Colt, is the single reason why Crump himself became so respected by all who knew of him. Would the course be the same as it is today without Colt or Alison (or Flynn (Thomas), Wilson, Fownes, Tillinghast, Travis, Macdonald, Maxwell, Fazio et al)? Of course not. But the point is without Crump the course would probably be almost nothing like it is today. And that’s the real point, in my opinion, of PVGC and its interesting and long-term creation!