JB McGovern

[T_MacWood]

John
Thanks for offering your perspective...we appreciate it. Thoughtful and thought provoking.

[Brad Klein]

Pat, I have a video copy of a 4-minute long, 8mm b&w film showing Ross working on site during the construction of Aronimink in what I am pretty sure is 1928. I wish I could tell you that the single-engine plane ("The Monocoup") he seems to use while overflying the course (or perhaps leaving the site) was piloted by Col. Dallin.

I am, however, mystified by the use of Hartford GC as evidence of McGovern's design skills one way or another. The course evolved in pieces, with Devereux Emmet's early work significantly revised by Ross in 1914, then again by Ross who made a documented site visit in 1946. McGovern then drew up plans, but much of that work was not completed until 1955 (by someone else) and some of the routing was never built. Since then, th following architects have done work at Hartford GC: William & David Gordon, RTJones Sr., Geoffrey Cornish, Al Zikorus and Stephen Kay.

Which Hartford GC are you judging? The Ross one that never fully was or the existing course after many different hands applied?

As for judging Ross as inferior to Flynn because Ross didn't get as much work in Flynn's hometown area - where Flynn had worked his whole career - that's ignoring the nature of a "satellite office."

[TEPaul]

JohnG:

Excellent post (#125).

Some of your remarks are indicative of what evolved too. That fescue to the right of #10 (and some other areas of it on the course) essentially caused the membership to freak out and react for the reasons you seemed to suspect.

Interesting what you said about drawn plans. Apparently Ross felt somewhat the same way as it appears he directed his estate or whatever to burn his records (which partially happened apparently). Luckily many survived perhaps mostly on the other end (at the clubs).

I hear what you're saying about those multi-set bunkers. Maybe the were considered sort of radical and cool. For some reason something, maybe what you just said, just jagged my memory about them. It may've been 6-7 years ago now and perhaps before I even got to know Ron Prichard, and Tom Elliott and I were riding around the course. I think it may've been during the very beginnings of Aronimink's restoration and a few years before the bunker project. Elliott pointed out to me how the bunkering on the inside right of the 6th hole (as in other areas) used to be multi-sets of three small bunkers and such.

I remember saying I thought that was pretty cool and unusual but he said they didn't seem like Ross to him and that they wanted to restore the course and the bunkers to Donald Ross. He said they had his original plans.

I'll ask Elliott about this whole thing someday but it seems like the club felt those Ross plans were valuable and they may not have understood all that's been revealed on here lately.

All I remember is how much they wanted to restore to Donald Ross. The fact that his bunkers in those drawings may've never originally been built out there may not have occured to them as it has to us on this werb-site. It seems the reason for that is his drawings were all they had from Ross himself and that just seemed really valuable then, apparently. If they had any change drawings from him I'm quite sure this whole thing would've been looked at much differently. Certainly there wouldn't have been any mystery at all about what happened.

In that sense, I'd say drawings really are valuable---sans other evidence they probably help indicate or confirm what an architectural evolution was all about.

[TEPaul]

As Ron Prichard has said many times, you never can be sure what actually gets built---even in the Ross organization. That seems to have been borne out at my course, GMGC.

I don't think anyone at my club is aware of it other than perhaps me and the super but it appears that Ross called for the alteration of our 15th green ten years after the course was built, and he either labeled it #16 by mistake or intended #16 to be changed and by mistake the club made the changes to #15. Personally I think he intended the changes to be on #15 but he just mislabeled the hole grid paper #16.

By the way the hole by hole alteration master plan I have from Ross is from September 2, 1927 and since Aronimink is only about five miles away and probably under construction then that certainly would logically place Donald Ross at Aronimink in September of 1927.

A connection to Aronimink doesn't stop there. For years I've always felt our 15th green is remarkably like Aronimink's #10 with the center swale and terrace on one side. My course was built about 10-12 years before Aronimink.

But our 15th green is really interesting because it's very different in shape and internal contour from any other Ross green on our course. It would be very interesting to know if Ross designed the 10th at Aronimink first or redesigned our 15th first. Anyone can see the similarlity though if it's pointed out. Ross may've been trying to hide the similarities because the diagonal orientation of the center swale is opposite and so is the terrace.

It's interesting stuff though and certainly takes you a little closer to how an architect like Ron thought at a particular time and place.

[TEPaul]

Brad Klein said:

"As for judging Ross as inferior to Flynn because Ross didn't get as much work in Flynn's hometown area - where Flynn had worked his whole career - that's ignoring the nature of a "satellite office."

Brad:

That kind of thing so far really is speculation, in my opinion. I think we on here have to be careful not to take the speculation we indulge in on here and let it slip out there into what's considered eventually as fact.

Good examples of that in my mind would be things that've been mentioned on this site such as Donald Ross was kept out of contracts and projects in this town by the close camaraderie of the so-called "Philadelphia School of Architecture" (Crump, Wilson, Flynn, Tillinghast and Thomas). There seems to be the same speculation on here about the "National School" and Long Island regarding Ross.

While it may seem that way I've never seen any evidence of it although it certainly may exist somewhere. A year or so ago I got a call from Philadelphia Inquirer golf writer Joe Logan who swore he read something somewhere that Ross was upset he didn't get some significant Philadephia project, probably in the late 1920s. I'd never seen anything like that but Joe swore he read it, he just couldn't remember where. He told me he thought it may've influenced Ross on Aronimink. I told Joe if that were true I suspected in may've been Huntingdon Valley that Ross was upset over not getting. It went to Flynn.

But unitl we find that it's just speculation to me. Joe's pretty good that way so there's probably something in writing out there somewhere about this.

But I see Tom MacWood has said on here that the multi-set bunkering of Aronimink was unusual not just for the multi-set bunkers of 2s and 3s but because it was so sand-flashed faced. Tom MacWood stated that it was Ross's way of sort of doing the Philadelphia flashed faced bunker better and more elaborately than the Philly School.

First of all I would not say that the flashed faced bunker is a "Philly School" style although to some extent it certainly may be a Flynn style emanating out of the bunker look of Merion. And there certianly isn't anything I've ever seen around here that Ross intentionally tried to do some "Phialdelphia" bunker style better than the "Philadelphia School".

That kind of thing is pure speculation on Tom MacWood's part, in my opinion. But if he could find some written observation of that in the 1920s I'd sure change my mind.

We do need to be careful thought not to let our speculations on these kinds of thngs start to turn into accepted fact unless we can prove them first. If we aren't careful it just turns into revisionist history, in my opinion.

But there's probably little question that the world of golf architecture back then was every bit as competitive as it seems to be today.  

[Brad Klein]

TEP, how competitive?

I've just reviewed that b&w film of Ross at Aronimink. I think you've seen it. Not only is Dallin piloting, but Flynn is in the back seat with a gag poised to be put over Ross, and both Flynn and the Col. have backpacks with parachutes.

I think you understand the gravity of the intended scene, though obviously it did not come off as planned. If it had, Ross would have been rendered into oblivion and Flynn would have won the contracts for Seminole, the grass greens at Pinehurst, and, of course, ANGC.

[Willie_Dow]

Tom - I sense a similarity of greens @ #15 & #16 @ GMGC.

[TEPaul]

Brad:

Very competitive indeed. Post #135 is interesting. Imagine what would've happened if Dallin and Flynn had "done him in" that day.

Among other things you may've never written a book on Donald Ross, you may've been helping Wayne Morrison write a book on William Flynn and been doing one helluva lot better job of it than I am.  

[TEPaul]

"Tom - I sense a similarity of greens @ #15 & #16 @ GMGC. "

Willie:

You'd say that? I don't see that at all. But I'll show you the remarkable similarity of #15 GMGC and #10 Aronimink---at least in concept (I believe those architects really did try for the same concept but they did try to hide the visual similarity in various ways). It would be hard to miss and there's no question in my mind at all that Donald Ross was very much aware of that. I'd call it intentional on his part.

[wsmorrison]

"As for judging Ross as inferior to Flynn because Ross didn't get as much work in Flynn's hometown area - where Flynn had worked his whole career - that's ignoring the nature of a "satellite office.""

Brad,

I don't see where anyone is judging Ross as inferior to Flynn because of the amount of work he did in Philadelphia; there are other reasons for that conclusion

Rather I was pointing out to Tom MacWood that the value add of McGovern into a powerhouse duo didn't seem to materialize in McGovern's hometown.  I also pointed out that McGovern's solo efforts in the district are rather pedestrian and hardly the stuff of an architectural rival to Flynn or other of the greats of that era.

I guess the photo of Flynn and Ross at Boca Raton with Flynn giving Ross the rabbit ears was just silly pranks compared to the Flynn-Dallin conspiracy to waste the Scotsman in an airplane "accident."  

Tom Paul speculates that Flynn did go up with Dallin on ocassion as Flynn was quite the daredevil and liked thrills of that sort.  According to Flynn's daughter (Tom MacWood, feel free to discount this) Flynn would fly in anything he could get a ride on.

[TEPaul]

"Flynn would fly in anything he could get a ride on."

Wayne:

I wouldn't say he'd fly in anything he could get a ride on. I think Flynn limited his flying to any form of aircraft and maybe the semi-occasional scotch. I doubt he got into LSD or other such non-liquid mind altering substances like Desmond Muirhead did some decades later at Stone Harbor---not that far from Flynn's ACCC.

[Pat_Mucci]

Brad Klein,

Is the four minute film a promotional piece or a documentary ?

It seems odd to chronicle Ross supervising construction at just one of the many courses he designed.

It seems odder yet that he would be so surprised at the result if he was intricately involved in supervising the construction.

I've seen architects come on site, press the flesh, smile, speak and then leave without so much as examining what's transpiring on the golf course.

With the other work Ross had going on in 1928, in various locations, it would seem that he was spread a little thin.

Citing that film, and declaring that it is irrefutable evidence that Ross was on site, actively supervising construction, on an ongoing basis, during the buiding of Aronomink is more than a stretch by anybody's imagination.

Did Ross keep diary's ?

Did he maintain financial records ?

If these exist, it would seem easy to ascertain his whereabouts 365 days a year.

[Willie_Dow]

Tom

My recollection of #15 &#16 is a gradual slope from right to left and back to front.  I was thinking of size and surface character, not that it was an elevated green vs flat fairway approach.  Both are great greens with excellent cup locations.

[Brad Klein]

Q&A with Pat Mucci:

Is the four minute film a promotional piece or a documentary ?
-I don't know, it's a series of action scenes from the construction of Aronimink.

It seems odd to chronicle Ross supervising construction at just one of the many courses he designed.
-What can I tell you? I got it from Ron Prichard and I've shown it many times when I lecture. It's very interesting, and shows Ross in his three-piece suit hardly getting dirty while workers are working hard felling trees, laying mainline irrigation, digging trenches

It seems odder yet that he would be so surprised at the result if he was intricately involved in supervising the construction.
-I'm not sure what you mean by "surprised," and who said anything about "intimiate?" Ross visits, he watches, he leaves. He comes back, the course is great, he's thrilled, maybe even surprised. Happens a lot. Most of what happens on a golf course construction is problem solving. Anyone who thinks there is science, theory and grand vision has never been on a site. It's all very mundane, very slow.

I've seen architects come on site, press the flesh, smile, speak and then leave without so much as examining what's transpiring on the golf course.
-I won't comment on that one. This is not some Ross p.r. job. It's a guy with an 8 mm camera shooting some rare footage, that's all.

With the other work Ross had going on in 1928, in various locations, it would seem that he was spread a little thin.
-He made a living working that way throughout the 1920s.

Citing that film, and declaring that it is irrefutable evidence that Ross was on site, actively supervising construction, on an ongoing basis, during the building of Aronomink is more than a stretch by anybody's imagination.
-?

Did Ross keep diaries?
-Sort of. I had his phone book and calendar from the early 1900s in my hands, plus he kept many telegrams, travel receipts, train schedules, boat memorabilia and programs from his travels to Scotland, but a formal ongoing log of his work? No.

Did he maintain financial records ?
-Sort of. Much of his business notes and correspondence were burned (upon his instructions) immediately after his death by his sceretary, Eric Nelson. A lot survived, a lot did not.

If these exist, it would seem easy to ascertain his whereabouts 365 days a year.
-See above. I had to piece this together for parts of his trips here and there. I could do it for 2-3 weeks at a time of his work, but not for longer. I know of many of his extended itineraries and refer to them in my book, but a sustained, comprehensive chart or timeline is impossible.

[TEPaul]

Brad:

Fine reply there. Most all your answers should help some on here (not a chance with Pat or MacWood though) from treating this subject like some United States Congressional investigation or something which it is anything but!  

[Pat_Mucci]

Brad Klein,

From your observations why do you think that Ross wanted personal records and pertinent information destroyed upon his death ?

[Brad Klein]

There was certainly no scandal. I tried to find out the answer to that, Pat, and never could. Eric Nelson's son didn't know, but I gather it was not uncommon for businesses to do so. In any case, much survived - what was in the possession of others, plus much of Ross' own material that had been scattered in various offices.

[Pat_Mucci]

Brad,

Do you think it's possible that he didn't want anyone to copy his work, methodology or business model such that his work would endure above the others ?

[Brad Klein]

No.

All of these efforts to attribute motives, grandiose plans, secret schemes and desires upon the golf course architecture and business world are basically speculative at best, more likely simple nonsense.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Brad Klein,

It seems counter-intuitive that a man who spent a lifetime designing golf course all over the country, was famous and a prolific designer would want his records destroyed at his death.

It's an unusual request from an artiste, don't you think ?

[T_MacWood]

Pat
What happened to MacKenzie, Colt and Tillinghast's papers?

[TEPaul]

"Brad Klein,
It seems counter-intuitive that a man who spent a lifetime designing golf course all over the country, was famous and a prolific designer would want his records destroyed at his death."

Pat:

Things like that may seem counter-intuitive to us today half a century and more after the fact but one needs to look more carefully at the times and the atmosphere things liike that actually happened in.

The truth of it is that a man like Ross in 1948 just may not have thought records like that were worth the space needed to keep them in. How did a manuscript of his end up in a drawer unnoticed for decades? How did all Flynn's plans end up viturally forgotten in a box in a barn in Bucks county (All Flynn's business records were lost with his secretary)? How did so many of Macdonald's NGLA records end up in a auto air-conditioning shop in Long Island? Why did NGLA just throw out what they had of the history and evolution of the club in the 1950s or 1960s? Why did Van Gogh never sell a painting in his lifetime?

It wasn't counter-intuitive. It's simply that back then these things were looked at much differently than we look at them now. The very first step in understanding the history of it all is to first understand that.

Even a modern architect like Michael Hurzdan was telling me in the last few month that he wonders if he should keep all the plans and paper-work he generates. Does someone care that he does now? Will they care half a century from now? It's probably no different with Ross or any of the rest of them in their own times.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat
What happened to MacKenzie, Colt and Tillinghast's papers?

Did all three request that all of their records be destroyed at their respective deaths ?[/color]

TEPaul,

Prior to microfilm and other document retention methods, the written word was THE method for recording events, and as such it was recognized for its historical value.

Perhaps Ross's written records were so voluminous that he felt their retention would be a burden to his heirs and thus requested that they be destroyed.

Ross was tremendously successful during his lifetime whereas Van Gogh wasn't.  In additon, Ross's hearing was excellent, as was his ability to visualize routings and hole designs at a glance.

What surprises me about Ross is that he was prolific and well regarded and one would think that he would want to preserve his legacy in writing (history) as well as in the ground.

[TEPaul]

Pat:

Regarding Ross's direction that on his death some of his records be destroyed, perhaps I'm wrong but it appears from those I've spoken to about that occurence who would probably know best such as Kris Januzik---it was not considered an unusual thing to do back then. It seem that occurence was not considered suprising until relatively recently. It seems that occurence was hardly even noticed until perhaps the last 10-15 years.

And furthermore the fact that it was not considered surprising until recently or even really known until recently tells us a good deal about how Ross and his courses were looked at back then compared to today. None of it was viewed back then the way we view it today and that also explains how and why even our own fathers were so willing and able to change those courses before the relatively recent phenomenon of what we refer to as "restoration". If your Dad had to do with what went on at those clubs before something like restoration became popular as my Dad did you'd understand that the idea or even the word "restoration" did not exist in that time and not until the last 15 or so years.

At least you should be willing to admit that historic reality. If not just name me a single restoration project that took place in America on a pre WW2 course before perhaps 15-20 years ago.

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

The reason that there were few if any restorations prior to WW II is that those golf courses had yet to be disfigured, and thus, didn't require a restoration