Arts & Crafts sidetrack

[wsmorrison]

I'm pretty sure the motto of Leith Links was "Far and Sure."

Flynn indicated a landing area in his 1916 drawing at the top of the slope on level ground from landing area to green with 135 yards or so in to the green.

I'd say the purpose of the massive berm behind the hole (early photos show the backside of the berm and it was big) was to shield shots from the first fairway.  Prior to the 1929 remodel the first was a dogleg left from near the circle on the driveway into the club.

[T_MacWood]

It's pretty clear to see there was no blind approach to the old 10th across Ardmore Ave at Merion.

TE
It is? From the photos, the mound looks fairly pronounced to me, even it was a modest mound it would obscure the green. Tillinghast called the hole an Alps...I'm pretty sure he knew what he was talking about.

[wsmorrison]

Pat,

I think the green also needs to be offset from the line of play.  The 1916 layout of the current third was not at all offset, it was straight away.  Today there is no left to right slope to the green.  I don't know if the green was altered from the time Lesley wrote his description but he got an awful lot wrong.  It is a bit odd that so much credibility would be given his description without considering if it was accurate.

I will now officially retire from this thread.  It has been a preasure and a plivilege.

[Patrick_Mucci]

DMoriarty,

It's interesting that CBM classifies the 3rd at Piping Rock as a simplified "redan"

It probably bears more resemblance to the original redan at North Berwick then the 4th at NGLA.

Does CBM provide any insight with respect to the term, "simplified" ?  Or, what it is about the 3rd at Piping Rock that differs from the 4th at NGLA ?

[paul cowley]

I guess I am finally back again and thank you Tom Paul for your kind comments in my defense .

I spent today designing and building a pergola complex with brick piazza as part of a 1.5 M clubhouse and settlement area, all part of a 'preserve community' of about 3,500 acres I am designing and developing....architecturally I loosely describe the structures stylistically as 'Adirondack meets the Lowcountry'....the Mission or A/C furnishings [probably more Stickley than anything], will all be purchased, although I will most likely build the hammered copper bar top myself to compliment the 16 ft rough slab trestle type banquet table.
The landplan I developed for the community will have no R/Ws but dirt road private easements and trails totaling 30+ miles with primarily passive amenities [I ruled out golf although the property sits on some of the best golf course land within 100 miles]....it is a true conservation sub-division with a twist, and when we donate 3,000 acs and 10 miles of pristine river and habitat to the state of Ga, I'm sure it will recieve some notice.....Tuesday and Wed I was in upstate NY hardlineing a master plan with an apple farming family, trying to best achieve their goal of diversification of the farm to include affordable golf with a limited residential component while still farming the remaining half instead of selling out for big bucks to very large offers made by the Mega builders...the farm has been in the family for 150 years and they still want to work the land in some way, but apples don't pay the bills anymore......Monday I sent out a conceptual land plan for a mountain resort community with 18 holes and a higher density 'new urban' hotel, spa, multi family core complex.

...so much for this week and I would have a hard time recalling the main details from the previous one.

The reason I have mentioned all this is to try to establish a few points about myself that seperate me a little from some who have posted in this lengthy thread

One, I am a designer and I don't pretend to be a historian for A/C or GCA.....I try to create, design and build things daily that if good enough, others might want to report on or even record historically.....the downside is if they are not, I  don't make a living.... I firmly believe someone is only worth what someone else is willing to pay you, but I'm doing   ;)K.

end part one.....I need more wine!

[Craig Disher]

Wayne,

Don't you have a copy of the photo on page 68 of GA? If so, why not scan the area around the 10th green at a very high resolution. I've looked at the photo in GA with a magnifying glass and it's just not very clear what's happening in that bunker.

[paul cowley]

.....One thing I do as a designer interested in advancing my skills and knowledge is to glean from the historical record of areas that pique my interest....not to report from, but to create from....and being one, I kind of I know how designers think and it is because of this I can realize how me and Tom[mee] Mac[gee] can be divergent.
I have read, studied and travelled extensively to pursue my interest in many architectural styles, with probably a major in the A/C traditions, although even within that area my design influences would be more from those on this side of the pond [Greene bros, Stickleys, Roycrofters, Praries, Olmsteads, the yada yadas etc,].....two years ago, when I first discovered and read TM's missive, I thoroughly enjoyed the read about A/C, but, expecting a tie in to GCA, I ended with a 'huh?' and little concern......but look at things now!

end part 2, need wine.

[T_MacWood]

PC
No need to defend your craftsmanship to me or anyone else; I'm sure your work speaks for itself. You are a living example of how the crossover of disciplines works. I'm tempted to give some credit to your A&C base.

[paul cowley]

...bless you MacWood and to all a good nite....

[TEPaul]

",.....two years ago, when I first discovered and read TM's missive, I thoroughly enjoyed the read about A/C, but, expecting a tie in to GCA, I ended with a 'huh?' and little concern......but look at things now!"

Paul:

Me too, same thing, but it probably took me longer. I read it a couple of times and with the A/C-GCA tie in started to think, HuH?--like you did. But I read the whole thing again today with the "HUH?" in mind the whole time and it's pretty obvious. It's not just a stretch---it's close to a half dozen of them.

You see that Paul---the fact you're a bona fide golf architect, building architect, land planner, and perhaps a fine artist, you are now a full blooded, card carrying "Arts and Crafts" disciple who's doing his best to UNIFY all art forms as was William Morris's dream and goal. It's a bit more than obvious Tom MacWood shares that sentiment.    Bet you didn't know that any more than those great old "Golden Age" guys, huh? If anybody asks you about your family and your roots feel free to tell them Horace Hutchinson is your "Grandfather". Artistically speaking, that is.  

[paul cowley]

.....although you might give some credence to TP's and my earliest exposures to things A/C....my earliest are being drug, while still in my single digit years during the 50's, to various farm estate auctions in upstate NY....my mom was looking for 'morris' chairs among other things, of which were usually purchased for below $25.....a far cry from the $365,000 Barbra S paid for her Gustav Stickley sideboard in the late 80's...

[paul cowley]

....alright TomP, I'll close my eyes and go to sleep if you promise also....one, two, three......




















gotcha

[TEPaul]

".....although you might give some credence to TP's and my earliest exposures to things A/C....my earliest are being drug, while still in my single digit years during the 50's, to various farm estate auctions in upstate NY....my mom was looking for 'morris' chairs among other things, of which were usually purchased for below $25.....a far cry from the $365,000 Barbra S paid for her Gustav Stickley sideboard in the late 80's... "

And MacWood has the balls to tell us we don't know the "Arts and Crafts" Movement??  

What's happened here is somewhere along the road Tom MacWood got a bit confused about what William Morris was ultimately hoping his A/C Movement would do and what it did do.



TaTa

[Phil_the_Author]

Regarding Tilly & Alpinization...

He strongly believed and defended his claim that he was the first on this side of the pond to Alpinize golf holes, writing how, "The idea of grass hollows and mounds was conceived there [at Shawnee] three years ago, before the alpinisation at Richmond was known."

I think what is happening, and I could be wrong, is that the definition of "Alpinization" on a golf course is lacking, especially from the viewpoint of Tilly & others... What did THEY MEAN when they spoke of "Alpinization?"

Dave comes closest when he asks, "Did the "Alpinization" render all these holes blind, or is it possible that the term is being used to describe a rough diagonal carry hazard with peaks and hollows?"

The answer must be that no, there wasn't a need for it to be a blind shot, but that a variety of situations on a hole could make it be properly described as being "Alpinized" for lack of a better word.

Let's carefully examine several examples that have been brought up, one by TE & the other by Mac.

First, the 10th at Merion.

TE wrote, "It's pretty clear to see there was no blind approach to the old 10th across Ardmore Ave at Merion."

Mac responded, "It is? From the photos, the mound looks fairly pronounced to me, even it was a modest mound it would obscure the green. Tillinghast called the hole an Alps...I'm pretty sure he knew what he was talking about."

The problem is that both of you have definitions that "Alpinization" requires a mounding that restricts the sight line to the green, and in the case of this hole, are arguing over whether the mounding is, was or wasn't there. This clearly is NOT the definition that Tilly used.

Consider the third hole at Pine Valley.

TE, who knows the course and its history as well as anyone, has stated that, "Pine Valley's 3rd had alpinization around the right and back right of the green but it was removed pretty quickly. Tillinghast would basically be wrong about "alpinization" that had to be carried over in front of the green. He wrote that in March of 1913 and at that point the first four holes were probably in a state of what architects call "roughed in"."

I must disagree with your analysis on this. In December of 1913, Tilly wrote, "December, 1913 – “It is quite impossible now to describe Pine Valley as a completed course, for many of the holes are in the embryo. Those which have been played are entirely satisfying. Not long ago the discoverer and developer of Pine Valley, Mr. George A. Crump, accompanied by Mr. Howard W. Perrin, Mr. Richard Mott and A.W. Tillinghast, played golf there for the first time… Mr. Tillinghast secured the first par, a 4 on the first hole played and likewise the first bird, a 2 on the third. To the same player must be given the rather doubtful distinction of slapping first into the lake in front of the fifth teeing ground, which he did to his great disgust on this history-making day."

Just a few months after writing of the alpinization of the hole, he records the first Birdie on it.These are finished holes at this time. Are you stating that between March & November the hole was radically changed to remove whatever "Alps" like obstacle was in front of the green? That might have happened, but without offer of concrete proof that it did in this time period, to state that "Tillinghast would basically be wrong about "alpinization" that had to be carried over in front of the green..." is at best a stretch that lacks all foundation. I'm not saying it didn't happen, just that it appears unlikely to have occurred at that time.

If this is the case, then the idea that "Alpinization" on the early courses of America required mounding to obscure the front of the green is incorrect!

So, I think the first given would be that Tilly clearly understood what "Alpinization" meant, and maybe some of those here do not.

Let's go back to what he wrote about his work at Shawnee in 1913. "The idea of grass hollows and mounds was conceived there [at Shawnee] three years ago, before the alpinisation at Richmond was known." Note his COMBINING the terms hollows and mounds. He clearly did not erect large dirt mounds that would mimic the famed "Alps", but rather, "the Mid-Surrey scheme of breaking up the fairway and rough into miniature ranges of mountain and valley."

This could easily have been accomplished by the use of low hollows and higher moundings, the hollows containing either grass or sand or scrub.

Take careful looks at the early photos of some of the holes that you are speaking about and you will see this to be the case. Dave's highlighting of the hole design from Shawnee would bear this out.

I think that if we look at the holes and courses where "Alpinization" was used, at least by Tilly, rarely if ever will one find examples of man-made towering obstacles used to present a completely blind shot into a green. His "Alpinisations" were subtler and appear to combine multiple features.

With this in mind then, both parties are correct in parts of their views and incorrect in others. I think it is time that TE, Mac, Dave and any others discussing this subject agree on a definition of "Alpinization" first, and then agree on the definition that architects that Tilly and others used for it, bfore they come to anymore conclusions.

Of course, I could be wrong here as well...

[T_MacWood]

I'd be glad to try to explain why and how that happened in your essay on the A/C movement if you'd like but this email about six months ago from one of the better minds on the history and evolution of golf course architecture should give you some indication:

"I read his "Arts and Crafts" piece and never saw a single link established between fine arts and golf architecture. Style parallels and aesthetic similarities, sure, but any link was purely hypothetical. He's one of those "researchers" who never knows what to do with his research. In academia we'd call (i.e. "dismiss") them as "positivists," searching for independent facts of their own accord, w/o any relationship or judgment."

TE
Who is this quote from?

[DMoriarty]

Phillip,

Here are a few photographs of the Alpinization at Shawnee . . .  Note the golfer in the right side of the photo for perspective.  

[Phil_the_Author]

Dave,

I have copies of them... that is why I question some of the statements that have been made. These and other photos show that "Alpinisation" may not be what some think and have a variety of features to them, including, but not being limited to Hillocks of a large nature.

[ForkaB]

Thanks for those pictures of Shawnee, David. I've never seen pictures of "alpinization" before.  Surely they prove that the "golden age" architects were just as capable as the "victorian" ones in creating GCA monstrosities. It's also hard to see any A&C influences in those hideous manufactured mounds.  Can anybody say (or even spell) Loxahatchetee(sic)?

[Sean_A]

I am with Rich on this one.  That mounding is ghoulish.  The B&W aspect of the photos don't help much.  

It seems clear to me that the approach wouldn't be blind unless the player hit into the mounds and drew a bottom of the hollow lie.  

Why did Tilly call this alpinisation?  It doesn't much look like the Alps hole at all.  Additionally, there is more strategy involved in the Tilly version as a player can avoid a blind shot.  At Prestwick blindness cannot be avoided.

Any of you AC folks come up with a pre-Industrial Revolution course that Golden Age archies could have been inspired by?  I would think finding architectural inspiration is a prerequisite if one is going to link the AC movement with gca.

Ciao

Sean

[DMoriarty]

The 9th green in 1916.   Isnt that the 10th in the background, or am I turned around?

[ForkaB]

Thakns again, David

I will defer to any more experienced Merion buffs, but to me, the 10th was due north vis a vis the picture.  Today it is more at NNW, near the white house in the distance.

Two things are interesting to me:

1.  the 9th green has a huge pinnable space in the front--unlike today, due to the decades of sand buildup.
2.  To right of the picture, those look suspiciously like Reesian/Fazian containment mounds, probably protecting players on the 10th from wayward tee shots from the 11th.  I vaguely remember their vestiges from my one visit there four years ago.

Edited to refer to the 10th.

[wsmorrison]

There are no greens visible in the distance.  I will scan and enlarge the photo that Craig sighted after I take the dog for a walk and after I return from taking my kids to breakfast.

One thing Craig and I noticed from a careful examination of the aerial photograph in Geoff's book is the way the current 4th green and apron had a false front nearly into Cobb's Creek (aka Baffing Brook).  I'll post that photo enlarged as well.

[TEPaul]

That's a neat photo. You rarely see one of the 9th from that angle looking up the old 10th towards Ardmore Ave. Generally it's looking over the beginning of the 10th in the background with the middle of the 11th behind that.

[wsmorrison]

A photo enlargement showing the new 10th green (middle left) and the original green (top left) and new 12th green (top right) in 1924:



A photo enlargement showing the current 4th green (and 9th on right) without the bunkers fronting the green.  Notice how the green and apron just fall right into the creek.  That would be an intimidating visual!  Notice, too, the funky little bunkers flanking the 4th green.  I believe there were small mounds behind them...I'll have to check.

[Phil_the_Author]

Sean & Rich,

This is EXACTLY why I made the statement that the problem with this discussion is that neither of our esteemed Toms were DEFINING "Alpinisation" from the perspective of those who lived then, especially as pertains to Tilly.

Sean, you asked, "Why did Tilly call this alpinization?  It doesn't much look like the Alps hole at all.  Additionally, there is more strategy involved in the Tilly version as a player can avoid a blind shot. At Prestwick blindness cannot be avoided."

The answer is found in your own question where you say, "At Prestwick... "The key to understanding is that Tilly followed, in his OWN WORDS, " the Mid-Surrey scheme of breaking up the fairway and rough into miniature ranges of mountain and valley..."

At this time Tilly and others were imitating MID-SURREY and NOT PRESTWICK!

If you visit the Royal Prestwick web-site you will be treated to a photographic view of each hole. A careful look will show what the written description details, an example of this being of the second hole, "An equally straight long shot is required to avoid the trouble in the form of J H Taylor's 'humps and hollows'."

Taylor designed low humps and moundings throughout the course, and THIS is one of the "Alpinisation" scheme that became imitated over here in the states by Tilly and others.

Humps and hollows... and isn't that what Tilly wrote when he wrote, "The idea of grass hollows and mounds was conceived there [at Shawnee] three years ago, before the alpinisation at Richmond was known..."

Note how he even states that others were trying to take credit for designing with this scheme of alpinisation as being first in the U.S. to do it, but that he laid claim, and quite proudly, to being the first.

Rich, you wrote, "I've never seen pictures of "alpinization" before.  Surely they prove that the "golden age" architects were just as capable as the "victorian" ones in creating GCA monstrosities..."

They may be viewed by many today as "monstrosities" but back then, they WEREN'T! Remember the times and the limitations from a machinery standpoint. This scheme of Alpinisation probably came about in an attempt to bring a taste of seaside dunes and mounding into parkland courses. That is why it became popular to imitate it over here, since so many of the courses being constructed at that time were inland, parkland courses.

Just as we recognize how someone who lived in 1880 to 1920 would be astounded and lost if suddenly dropped into our time, I believe that we fail to recognize that despite having a large amount of written records and photographic evidence, the mistakes that many a historian makes is that he/she is constantly assuming that being forward in time means that they should and do have an innate understanding of the times and people he is looking back at.

This discussion would bear that out.

So again I ask, especially after the directions it has now gone in, before one makes pronouncements that a hole has a certain feature or not & discuss/argue vociferously over it that by properly defining the parameters of the thing being discussed/argued a less adversarial exchange might take place.

Then again considering those who discuss things out here, and that includes myself, that might be too much to ask for...