News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


T_MacWood

A&C redux
« on: August 05, 2005, 08:52:17 PM »
“Regarding the A/C movement or its philosophy, perhaps those who basically promoted it such as Morris would LIKED TO HAVE SEEN it become the primary influence on aesthetic thought or any other kind of thought (IN ALL ART FORMS INCUDING GOLF COURSE ARCHITECTURE) but that did not happen and I don't mind reminding you of it whenever you say that.”  ~~TEP

Is that right? Often time is the friend of a historical figure. Time gives historians time to study, evaluate and appreciate in hindsight the impact of important person. There was no need for long contemplation when measuring Morris’s impact.  William Morris died October 3, 1896. This is an expert from The Times right after his death…not in the section devoted to death notices, but on the editorial page.

“The death of Mr. William Morris, which we regret to say, took place shortly after 11 o’clock on Saturday morning at Kelmscott House, Hammersmith, after a long illness, removes from the world a man whom we do not hesitate to call a great artist. A poet, and one our half dozen best poets, even when Tennyson and Browning were alive; an artist whose influence is visible almost everywhere; a craftsman who devoted himself, in a commercial age, to the union of arts and crafts, it may be said of him, with little or no exaggeration, that he adorned all he touched. And, if another famous epitaph may be allowed to suggest itself, we should say that, while his best work—a poem of his own, or a volume from the Kelmscott Press—is often present on our bookshelves, most of us find something in the nature of monument to Mr. Morris in the better tastes of domestic surroundings. It is seldom, indeed, that an Englishman is an artist of this type…

…It must be allowed, however, that Morris’s actual work was far more practical than his doctrine [Socialism]. The factory that he established more than thirty years ago in conjunction with such artists and kindred spirits as D.G.Rossetti, E. Burne-Jones, and Ford Maddox Brown, was at first an experiment, but soon became a commercial success, and ultimately worked something like a domestic revolution….Whether this improved state of things is permanent or not, and whether Mr. Morris’s admirers and customers follow him with much conviction and intelligence, may be left as questions. What is evident is that we are not at one with our fathers in matters of taste, and that our present ideas on such subjects have been mainly been influenced by Mr. Morris and his school.”

This was The Times judgment the moment his life ended, little did they know there was to be another two decades or more of A&C dominating aesthetics in the UK, Europe and America...in fact it continues to impact us today.

Here are few more respected sources that appear to be in conflict with your view:

“The public demanded these columns, pilasters, cornices and moldings, so these architects provided them. But toward the end of the nineteenth century an increasing number of people became aware of the absurdity of this fashion. In England in particular, critics and artists were unhappy about the general decline in craftsmanship caused by the Industrial Revolution, and hated the very sight of these cheap tawdry machine-made imitations of ornament which once had meaning and nobility of its own. Men like John Ruskin and William Morris dreamt of a thorough reform of the arts and crafts, and the replacement of cheap mass production by conscientious and meaningful handiwork. The influence of their criticism was very widespread even though the humble handicrafts which they advocated proved, under modern conditions, to the greatest of luxuries.”
                 ~~‘The Story of Art’, EH Gombrich 1995

“So it is that the two decades 1890 to 1910 mark the high tide of the Arts and Crafts Movement, one which equally spread to the regions. In 1890 the Birmingham Guild of Handicraft were created, Finally the Movement’s message was taken into the art educational system. In 1896 the Central School  of A&C opened, providing what was the most progressive education and training in design in Europe. At the Royal College of Art, WR Lethaby was appointed first Professor of Design, thus reinforcing the notion that handicraft was its basis.

The Movement effected what was a revolution in living style by whole swathe of the educated middle classes. The revolution had already begun under the impulse of aestheticism in the 1870’s. The home was now the apotheosized as the house beautiful, a temple to art.”
                 ~~’The Spirit of Britain: A Narrative History of the Arts’, Roy Strong, 1999

Widely influential late-C19 English movement that attempted to re-establish the skills of craftsmanship threatened by mass-production and industrialization…The chief legacy of the movement to architecture was the appreciation of the vernacular leading to elements derived from them being widely used in the Domestic Revival…Finally, the movement was in the vanguard of recording, studying, and preserving old buildings, and argued for careful conservation of ancient fabric rather than wholesale or drastic ‘restorations’. Morris himself founded the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings (SPAB) which has been an influential agent ever since.”
               ~~’Oxford Dictionary of Architecture', 1999

TEPaul

Re:A&C redux
« Reply #1 on: August 06, 2005, 12:43:28 PM »
Tom MacWood:

Thus far this thread hasn't appeared too popular in the way of posts in response, has it? I guess this website really is worn out by our discussion on this subject of the A/C movement and its influence on golf course architecture---an influence, I might add, that was and apparently still is considered by you to be golf architecture's PRIMARY influence, at least on the "Golden Age" of golf architecture which was undeniably your final conclusion on your five part A/C Movement series posted on this website in the "In My Opinion" section.

But somehow I'm quite certain you were certain that at least I'd be on here responding to this thread.

Thanks so much for all those interesting quotations from so many who were so aware of the extent and impact of the Arts and Crafts Movement basically contemporaneously.

Nothing I can imagine could better make my point to you than every single one of those quotations about why you've so misconstrued the influence of the A/C Movement on golf course architecture.

What have I always said to you on those A/C threads? I've said the primary influence of the A/C movement was in the area of the building arts----building architecture both residential or commercial, as well as a perhaps large variety of related arts and crafts and so-called handcrafts of all types related to domestic and even perhaps commercial building art and architectural forms. And that the primary influence on golf architecture, particulalry of the "Golden Age" was just something else entirely.

That fact is mentioned more than clearly in almost each and every one of those quotations. But where is there a single mention by any of those who apparently (as you’re rightly claiming) knew the Arts and Crafts Movement so well and appreciated it so much of the INFLUENCE of the MOVEMENT on GOLF COURSE ARCHITECTURE??? That’s the mention of any influence at all on golf architecture, not to even mention the fact that there’s never been a mention by anyone ever that the A/C movement was golf architecture’s PRIMARY INFLUENCE??? Not a single mention of that from all those knowledgeable opinions on the A/C movement! One really does wonder not only why you can’t seem to ask yourself why that is but particularly why you can’t seem to grasp the significance of it when it’s pointed out to you why that is----such as the primary influence on golf architecture of that time just happened to be something else altogether that those who knew golf architecture then did not remotely hesitate to say and chronicle.

It's just not there, the mention of it---not a single time! Isn't it obvious to you by now why that is? Apparently it’s not obvious to you, matter of fact it doesn’t seem to even occur to you, and that really does begin to lead one to conclude that Pat Mucci is correct in saying to you that you’re really just a researcher whose attempting to make a spot for himself of having discovered something historically accurate and interesting when in fact you’ve failed to do that on this subject and issue. And it supports the opinion of another on here that your modus operandi in this manner is that of the academic “positivist” to simply throw reams of apparent facts (background bios, all kinds of trivial details et al on your subject) that do not and cannot support your assumptions and conclusion. Another contributor on here called this technique of yours on your A/C "essays" ‘fire and fury and no substance at all’.

But thanks again for all those quotations of those who knew best and appreciated most the A/C movement and what it did influence, and where and over what time span.

I have seen this quite clearly in my own life and times and where I’ve come from and been. I've known of the A/C movement for years, particularly in this country and it's emanations from England. My own mother was perhaps one of the biggest and most active Anglophiles and all that went with it I've ever known. As I mentioned Country Life and it's entire history was with her until the day she died. My family lived in Maine in the summer in a virtual textbook example of an A/C movement community but that doesn’t seem to interest you as to what I've known about the movement and its influence, where and how. All a two-bit positivist like you seems to be able to do in response is ask these ridiculous questions of what I've read and whether I've read what you have on the subject. I probably should collect and list all I've read and been aware of on the A/C movement over the years but what's the point of that with someone who reacts to it and me as you do? I doubt there's anything I could ever say, or anyone else could ever say that could matter to you that doesn’t suit your “positivist” agenda on this subject, the conclusion of which is found in your five part article on this website.
« Last Edit: August 06, 2005, 12:46:51 PM by TEPaul »

TEPaul

Re:A&C redux
« Reply #2 on: August 06, 2005, 01:07:05 PM »
On the other hand, there are numerous other things about golf architecture, particularly today, that I think have similarities to the A/C movement's original philosophy of regionalism and hand-crafting and personal expression despite the fact there is no real connection directly to the A/C movement. Those are subjects I'd like to discuss with you on here, not the least reason being there are some very interesting ironies about the way you view this subject and the way you seem to view the subject of restoration and some restoration architects, particularlly Ron Prichard.

There is also the more general but no less interesting subject of the benefit or even the function of attempting to unify various art forms in some way or even in any way, particularly aesthetically, which was apparently the dream of William Morris, and perhaps even you.

And lastly, there's the subject of how best to portray, explain and view history, particularly golf architecture's history, and for what purposes.
« Last Edit: August 06, 2005, 01:07:25 PM by TEPaul »

T_MacWood

Re:A&C redux
« Reply #3 on: August 06, 2005, 10:52:48 PM »
TE
What have you always said on those A/C threads? You’ve said a lot of different things. For three plus years you were one of the most vocal promoters of the essay and its theories.

You’ve said the A&C Movement was primarily an architectural movement. You’ve said that since Morris and Ruskin didn’t play golf their ideas couldn’t have affected golf (they weren’t architects either, funny how their primary effect was on architecture). You’ve said since buildings bare no resemblance to golf courses that refutes the message of the essay (buildings don’t resemble lamps, chairs, jewelry and gardens either). You’ve said since no golf architect cited the A&C movement it couldn’t have had any influence (not understanding that the movement has only recently been recognized…in fact when I studied architecture in the 80’s none of the text books mentioned it…and you won’t see any mention of the A&C movement from Wright, Lutyens, Stickley or Jeckyl).

And just recently you’ve said that “the A/C movement or its philosophy, perhaps those who basically promoted it such as Morris would LIKED TO HAVE SEEN it become the primary influence on aesthetic thought or any other kind of thought (IN ALL ART FORMS INCUDING GOLF COURSE ARCHITECTURE) but that did not happen.” The Times and most historians would disagree.

“ I've said the primary influence of the A/C movement was in the area of the building arts----building architecture both residential or commercial, as well as a perhaps large variety of related arts and crafts and so-called handcrafts of all types related to domestic and even perhaps commercial building art and architectural forms.”

…that covers about everything in the world that was designed…including golf architecture. Maybe not golf architecture…for some reason golf architects were immune from its influence.

“That fact is mentioned more than clearly in almost each and every one of those quotations. But where is there a single mention by any of those who apparently (as you’re rightly claiming) knew the Arts and Crafts Movement so well and appreciated it so much of the INFLUENCE of the MOVEMENT on GOLF COURSE ARCHITECTURE???”

Good luck finding any mention of golf architecture in any book devoted to architecture or the arts. Golf architecture is not on their radar. It falls somewhere in between knitting socks and creating wooden prosthetics.

Golf architecture is an art. The process of building golf courses is a craft. Golf architects of that era considered themselves artists. As artists they would have been affected by prevailing aesthetic and artistic tastes.

“That’s the mention of any influence at all on golf architecture, not to even mention the fact that there’s never been a mention by anyone ever that the A/C movement was golf architecture’s PRIMARY INFLUENCE??? Not a single mention of that from all those knowledgeable opinions on the A/C movement! One really does wonder not only why you can’t seem to ask yourself why that is but particularly why you can’t seem to grasp the significance of it when it’s pointed out to you why that is----such as the primary influence on golf architecture of that time just happened to be something else altogether that those who knew golf architecture then did not remotely hesitate to say and chronicle.”

You won’t find any mention of the A&C movement in Morris’s obituary either. Like many movements it was identified long after it ended…the complexity and universality of its influence contributed to the delay IMO.

“It's just not there, the mention of it---not a single time! Isn't it obvious to you by now why that is? Apparently it’s not obvious to you, matter of fact it doesn’t seem to even occur to you, and that really does begin to lead one to conclude that Pat Mucci is correct in saying to you that you’re really just a researcher whose attempting to make a spot for himself of having discovered something historically accurate and interesting when in fact you’ve failed to do that on this subject and issue.”

I don’t worry too much what others think of my motives. My research is a product of my curiosity and desire to discover what happened and why. Any personal desire I have in making “a spot for himself of having discovered something historically accurate and interesting” dwarfs in comparison to your desire to prevent it.

I believe Pat first made that accusation when it was uncovered I was planning to write an essay on Crump that included the cause of his death. Ironically that was the same time your admiration for the A&C essay turned to contempt. You sent me a private message asking me if it was OK if you presented your case why the thrust of the essay was false.

With all due respect I don’t think your summering in a A&C inspired Maine cottage and your mother’s subscription of Country Life from the 1940’s onward would give one an insight into what happened in late 18th C. and early 19th C. England. Now if you had stayed in a Holiday Inn Express….

TEPaul

Re:A&C redux
« Reply #4 on: August 06, 2005, 11:28:55 PM »
Tom MacWood:

Regarding your post #3---I rest my case.

"With all due respect I don’t think your summering in a A&C inspired Maine cottage and your mother’s subscription of Country Life from the 1940’s onward would give one an insight into what happened in late 18th C. and early 19th C. England. Now if you had stayed in a Holiday Inn Express…."

As regards to what you think insight into this subject is, you  will always be an inadequate observer looking into a subject the influence of which you do not understand well at all. My sense is that will not change as your last few posts are more muddled and even less convincing than anything to date.


« Last Edit: August 07, 2005, 07:48:45 AM by TEPaul »