News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


Phil_the_Author

Re:Arts & Crafts sidetrack
« Reply #500 on: December 29, 2005, 09:27:24 AM »
Tom,

You wrote, "This appears to be attempt at a gotcha...you called me on the carpet, well then I'll call you on the carpet...the least you could do is to bring something specific, something of substance to the table instead of generalities...like you did not prove anything."

There was NO reason for you to take my comments that way. In my post, that you take as a Tit-for-tat, I wrote the following that you appearedc to have missed completely, "The problem I have is NOT one of disagreeing with your premise; to the contrary, I can see the logic in it..."

I think that statement also answers your conclusion that, "It does not appear that Phil read my essay." If I hadn't read it, then why would I "see the logic in it?"

As I said, my problem with your post that I commented on was and is one of consistency. You don't demand from yourself what you demand of others and when it is pointed out to you, you attack what is said rather than considering its possibility.

In this discussion, when making a pronouncement of fact you use phrases such as , "If you accept... A commonly accepted fact... It is only logical... considering golf architecture had drifted so far away from its roots, in both an aesthetic and golfing sense... To think that..." without offering the prerequisite proofs for these statements when asked.

Now, to try one last time for you to understand both what I said and why regarding Old Tom's relationship with and influence on Tilly, you stated this, ""Some might argue for Old Tom Morris [you claimed Old Tom was the most influencial figure in N.American golf]." I did NOT EVER claim that Old Tom was... I stated that "some might argue..." This is not a staement of semantics.

I believe that Tilly was the most influential figure in North American golf for a variety of reasons that I won't go into here. My statement was to show that regardless of the person, many times there are those who turned them into a path or gave encouragement or fired their spirit from behind the scenes. I believe that Old Tom did that for a number of people who turned out to have an influence on the game. That is all I said.

You wrote, "It was during his second trip to St. Andrews in 1898 that Tillinghast came back enamored with the idea to design golf courses. It was Old Tom's influence that brought this about." Then you asked, "How do you know Tilly came back from Scotland 'enamored' with the idea of designing a golf course?" You also wrote, "There is no evidence Old Tom influenced anyone regarding golf design...much less Tilly."

Before Tilly went to Scotland in 1896, he played golf with father and friends only. It was his father who taught him to play and was a fine player in his own right, as his numerous trophies attest. He met Old Tom during this trip and made only brief comments about it over the years, but one that really stands out is, "When golf first made its appearance in America in the early [18]90s, we pioneers in this country spoke almost in muted tones of reverence when the name of Old Tom Morris of St. Andrews, Scotland, was mentioned. To us he was nothing less than the patron saint of golf. As a matter of fact Old Tom was also regarded thus in the old country. Consequently, when I soon after came in contact with him, face to face in his wee shop, just off the home green in the City, Auld and Gray, I really felt that I was standing in the presence of the High Priest in the Holy of Holies. This was about 1896 and I had not been so long in the game. Here was a man, in his eighty’s, who for a generation had been held in veneration throughout golfdom."

Note the sense of awe and almost worshipful reverence with which Tilly writes of Old Tom. Note also how he admitted that at this time he, "had not been so long in the game..."

That this had an impact on him as a PERSON is undeniable, as he began to work hard on his game and began playing in matches of any and all import after this return.

When he went on his second trip in 1898, he spent a great deal of time with Old Tom off the course and at his home. Tom spoke to him about any and all things golf and about Young Tom in ways that he did with very few, even allowing Tilly to enjoy holding his son's championship belt.

Is it mere coincidence that among the first things that Tilly did when he returned from this trip was to build the rudimentary course in Frankford on the Old Wister Farm and begin teaching the locals how to play? Could Old Tom POSSIBLY have helped ignite a flame of passion for the game within Tilly that wasn't there before? Why then if I use a phrase such as, "If you accept... A commonly accepted fact... It is only logical..." in regard to this it is poor ly thought out and mere conjecture and yet when you use these about a subject such as A&C and present no actual proof within the framework of the staements, it is a reasonable deuction that one should not challenge?

That is what you are doing Tom and you should realize it. I personally believe that you and what you hypothecize would be better accepted if you did.

Finally, you asked, "Where can I learn more about Old Tom's influence...his thoughts and ideas? Can we find Old Tom's influence within Tilly's work or within Tilly's ideas and philospies?" Where did I EVER state that he did anything other than INSPIRE THE YOUNG MAN?

History is filled with those of genius who would have pursued a very different life course but for that one person who made a difference.

Tilly had two people who exerted influence on the course he would end up taking in life. His father Benjamin Collins Tillinghast and Old Tom Morris. By the way, most people don't know that Tilly kept an ongoing correspondence with Old Tom till shortly before he died. Unfortunately, these letters, along with the bulk of his correspondences, papers, drawings, etc... were lost in a fire when his daughter's barn burnt down.
« Last Edit: December 29, 2005, 09:31:03 AM by Philip Young »

TEPaul

Re:Arts & Crafts sidetrack
« Reply #501 on: December 29, 2005, 09:37:47 AM »
"Which circles? Which art forms were uneffected?"

Tom MacWood:

Well, if you haven't figured out by now I'm talking about the incipient art form of golf course architecture I feel pretty damn sorry for you.

What other art forms were uneffected? Man, I don't know---was the A/C Movement and it's principles the primary influence on musicians, and actors, on cobblers, tailors and candlestick makers too?  ;)

T_MacWood

Re:Arts & Crafts sidetrack
« Reply #502 on: December 29, 2005, 09:44:06 AM »
Sean
Other than Rye, which was designed by Douglas Rolland with assistance from Colt, and Chicago, designed by Macdonald and completely revamped later on, the only architect you listed who was active in the 1890's was Tom Morris.

What differentiated OTM's 1890's designs from the designs of the 1880's and 1870's? Which OTM designs do you consider the begining of the golden age?

TEPaul

Re:Arts & Crafts sidetrack
« Reply #503 on: December 29, 2005, 09:44:16 AM »
"The more important question is what were the influences that brought about a architectural revolution in the heathland at the turn of the century."

Tom MacWood;

PRECISELY!! THAT is the question. That is the $64,000 question in this entire discussion and in this entire subject. To me, and taking from what has been written by golf architects and others both at the time of the Golden Age and later, the answers to that question is relatively clear.
« Last Edit: December 29, 2005, 09:45:05 AM by TEPaul »

T_MacWood

Re:Arts & Crafts sidetrack
« Reply #504 on: December 29, 2005, 09:58:41 AM »
Phil
Did you even bother to read my A&C essay?

If you did, what are the similarities between your conjecture that "It was during his second trip to St. Andrews in 1898 that Tillinghast came back enamored with the idea to design golf courses. It was Old Tom's influence that brought this about" and the fact that the aesthetics promoted by Ruskin and Morris (and the A&C Movement) were in fact the prevailing aesthetics of the period when the early heathland architects operated?

One is a complete guess; the other is documented.

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Arts & Crafts sidetrack
« Reply #505 on: December 29, 2005, 10:01:20 AM »
Tommy Mac

I don't consider any of OTM designs as the beginning of the Golden Era.  I consider TOC as the beginning of the Golden Era.  I would count OTM as a major influence on the Golden Era because of the totality of his career as player, greenkeeper, architect and sage.  While I hesitate to label OTM as the designer of TOC, I don't think it is a mere coincidence that he was at the helm when TOC first reached its great heights as the best course in the world.  

John Low is another chap sort of in an odd category.  He is influential mainly due to his writing (which was made possible because of the influence he had as a player and R&A member)rather than his ground work.  

Ciao

Sean
New plays planned for 2024:Winterfield, Alnmouth, Chechesee Creek & Old Barnwell

T_MacWood

Re:Arts & Crafts sidetrack
« Reply #506 on: December 29, 2005, 10:07:16 AM »
Sean
You listed OTM first...perhaps I misunderstood.

You said the golden age began in the 1890's. Which courses (outside OTM) in the 1890's began the golden age and what differentiated these designs from the designs of the 1880's and 1870's?

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Arts & Crafts sidetrack
« Reply #507 on: December 29, 2005, 10:26:51 AM »
Tommy Mac

I don't know of any courses that were nearly as influential as TOC.  So far as I know, when done by a proper architect,  most courses were nearly completely altered to emulate the strategic values inherent at TOC.  Sure, there are remnants of courses remaining from pre-1890ish, but very little and even less with clear documentation of changes.  

Ciao

Sean
New plays planned for 2024:Winterfield, Alnmouth, Chechesee Creek & Old Barnwell

Phil_the_Author

Re:Arts & Crafts sidetrack
« Reply #508 on: December 29, 2005, 10:26:54 AM »
Tom,

You asked, "Did you even bother to read my A&C essay?"

Yes, I did read your essay and have even excerppted parts that I intend to research because you fascinated me with it. Why is it that when I state not once but twice that, ""The problem I have is NOT one of disagreeing with your premise; to the contrary, I can see the logic in it..." that you keep missing the point that I had to have read it in order to say that?
 
To answer what you wrote next, "If you did, what are the similarities between your conjecture that "It was during his second trip to St. Andrews in 1898 that Tillinghast came back enamored with the idea to design golf courses. It was Old Tom's influence that brought this about" and the fact that the aesthetics promoted by Ruskin and Morris (and the A&C Movement) were in fact the prevailing aesthetics of the period when the early heathland architects operated? One is a complete guess; the other is documented."

You are incorrect. One is not a complete guess... it is based upon what Tilly wrote of these visits and the man and how his life course changed immediately following them and the relationship he maintained with him till he died.

You are correct in stating that, "the aesthetics promoted by Ruskin and Morris (and the A&C Movement) were in fact the prevailing aesthetics of the period when the early heathland architects operated..." is corrected and yet you keep missing what I am saying. NOT A SINGLE TIME HAVE I DISAGREED WITH THAT STATEMENT!

I have only asked that your conclusion that because of this that golf course architecture was directly effected by this and these people be DOCUMENTED! You demand that I and others do this, yet will not do it yourself when asked!

Now I believe that I have given documentation and proper at that for my belief about Tilly & Old Tom, and each time you have asked for some I have provided it.

You on the other hand always resopond by deflecting off what you are asked, in this case, to provide the documentation for your ascertion that directly links and states that the A&C movement influenced golf course designers. Please show me anything that states where an architect saw a garden or house or furniture ansd said, "Hey, now that's an idea that I need to incorporate into a golf course design..."

You ask that of me and THAT is the similarity between my conjecture and yours. That is all I have ever said.
« Last Edit: December 29, 2005, 10:29:41 AM by Philip Young »

TEPaul

Re:Arts & Crafts sidetrack
« Reply #509 on: December 29, 2005, 10:46:54 AM »
Phil Young wrote;

"You are correct in stating that, "the aesthetics promoted by Ruskin and Morris (and the A&C Movement) were in fact the prevailing aesthetics of the period when the early heathland architects operated..." is corrected and yet you keep missing what I am saying. NOT A SINGLE TIME HAVE I DISAGREED WITH THAT STATEMENT!"

Phil:

Why are you agreeing with that statement, and even if that were the case around the turn of the century what does that prove about the A/C movement as a primary or significant influence on the architecture of the Golden Age? What are you pointing to anyway that proves that statement is true? Do you happen to know other aesthetic influences from that time and how pervailing they may've been in Victorian society? What about the influence on Golden Age golf architecture of the aesthetics of the earlier English "naturalistic" landscape designers such as William Kent, Lancelot "Capabiltiy" Brown, Prince Puckler and Humphrey Repton who were specifically mentioned by some of the Golden Age golf architects as influential on Golden Age architecture)? Do you think they too were influenced by the aesthetics of the A/C movment? That would be a pretty neat trick, Phil, since they were all dead  anywhere from 50 to over 100 years.  ;)
« Last Edit: December 29, 2005, 10:55:23 AM by TEPaul »

T_MacWood

Re:Arts & Crafts sidetrack
« Reply #510 on: December 29, 2005, 10:54:45 AM »

What same principles? Below is what you describe. from your essay, as the “principles" of Morris and Rushkin’s “Arts and Crafts" Movement that primarily deals with decorative art objects (generally interior) and building architecture, as well as perhaps some form of landscape gardening;


"Another difficulty in defining the A&C movement was its universal influence on all artistic expression and design. It not only touched architecture, the Arts and Craft house being the supreme embodiment of the movement, but also garden design, furniture, fine arts, glassware, metalwork, ceramics and textiles."

What creative disciplines that involve design were not effected by the A&C movement?

‘The term Arts and Crafts, in its own era, signified a general association of like-minded artists, designers, manufacturers and crafts people. And although they were highly individualistic and could not be pinned to a definable style, they shared many ideals: honest construction and simplicity of form, fitness for purpose, harmony between the man-made and environment, the revival of traditional craft techniques and the inherent qualities of natural materials. If forced to pinpoint the four universal principals they would be -- design unity, joy of labor, individualism and regionalism -- these combined to create the Arts and Crafts approach.’

Was Willie Park Jr a ‘like minded artist' with the English painters and decorative art objects artisans and building architects and landscape gardeners of England who supported Rushkin and Morris’s A/C principles?


Yes. Willie Park would have been effected by the same influences that effected the others in and around London. Willie Park II, unlike many of the professionals who were his contemporaries and preceeded him, was a worldly individual. He was a very successful businessman and promoter. He had enterprises in Musselburgh, Edinburgh, London, Manchester and New York. He traveled extensively and befriended many within high society: Astors, Vanderbilts, Balfour, Talmedge, Webb, Havermeyer, Riddell and the daughter of the King and Queen of England to name a few. And don't underestimate the influence of TA Roberts.

I doubt that and you certainly haven’t proven that to be true other than implying he ‘crossed paths’ with some of those who supported those English artists, artisans, building architects and landscape gardeners.


Why would he be immune from prevailing societal and aesthetic thought?


Did Park Jr and his crews experience “design unity”, “joy of labor”, “individualism” and “regionalism” in what they did at Sunningdale and Huntercombe? To hear Willie Park jr explain the design and construction of Sunningdale it sounded a lot like a couple of years of backbreaking work to me (to clear the massive underbrush off the site and to construct the features of the course that was far more architectural design work and construction work than had ever been tried  before (the first comprehensive architectural construction in “inland” golf).


* honest construction and simplicity of form...affirmitive,
* fitness for purpose...affirmative
* harmony between the man-made and environment...affirmitive
* the revival of traditional craft techniques and the inherent qualities of natural materials...affirmitive
* design unity...affirmitive
* joy of labor....not sure, he appears to enjoy his creative endeavors
* individualism...Park II had disctinctive style...affirmitive
* regionalism....affirmitive, he was a product of links golf (Musselburgh) and produced designs that incorporated links golf inland.

Furthermore, what 'revival of traditional craft techniques' were Park Jr and his crews at Sunningdale and Huntercombe plying??

The use of natural features within a design...that was tradition of the first links makers. The rejection of Victorian design methods...ie the formulaic cop bunker method.

« Last Edit: December 29, 2005, 11:00:28 AM by Tom MacWood »

TEPaul

Re:Arts & Crafts sidetrack
« Reply #511 on: December 29, 2005, 11:15:38 AM »
""Another difficulty in defining the A&C movement was its universal influence on all artistic expression and design. It not only touched architecture, the Arts and Craft house being the supreme embodiment of the movement, but also garden design, furniture, fine arts, glassware, metalwork, ceramics and textiles.""

Tom:

Why don't you just stop spewing out that same phrase and the same old bullshit?? Plenty of us aren't buying it just because YOU say it. Building architecture, garden design, furniture, glassware, metalwork, ceramics and textiles (other than building architecture and landscape design, all "decorative art objects) SURE, nobody is denying that but GOLF COURSE ARCHITECTURE is not those things or those art forms!!!

How can it be that you can't recognize that or that you can't recognize sometimes huge DISTINCTIONS between various art forms? How can that be? Are you the type who has so little ability to deduce important distinctions in things, including various art forms, that all you can see is some universal influence and some universal commonality? To me this is both incredible and more than a little maddening, particularly if there is anyone who might take you seriously.

"What creative disciplines were not effected by the A&C movement?"

You already asked me that and I answered it in a post above.

And why don't you answer my questions to you about the specifically stated influences on Golden Age architecture of the likes of English natualist landscape designers such as Kent, Brown, Puckler and Repton? Obviously, you must be ignoring those questions because their influence could not have been assigned to the A/C Movement since their lifes and careers ALL PRECEDED the A/C movement by anywhere from 50 to over a century!!  ;)
« Last Edit: December 29, 2005, 11:21:26 AM by TEPaul »

Phil_the_Author

Re:Arts & Crafts sidetrack
« Reply #512 on: December 29, 2005, 11:33:57 AM »
Tom Paul,

When I stated that, "You are correct in stating that, "the aesthetics promoted by Ruskin and Morris (and the A&C Movement) were in fact the prevailing aesthetics of the period when the early heathland architects operated..." is corrected and yet you keep missing what I am saying. NOT A SINGLE TIME HAVE I DISAGREED WITH THAT STATEMENT!" all I was doing was stating that I have no problem with agreeing that at the time the heathland architects were working that the A&C era was in existence. Nothing more or less.

It's like a person saying that since Robert trent Jones Sr. designed courses during the time that Peter Max lived, he must have been influenced by him. I can agree with the part where they lived and worked during the same time, but not agree wor disagree with the supposition. That's all.

In fact, I never claimed that I agreed or disagreed with Tom Mac's premise that the two were interlinked. I am curious about the possibility and admit that his essay and this entire thread have me curious enough to want to research it when I have the time.

It is that part of the statement that I agree with. Thiose guys did live during the time when A&C as a design style was in vogue and growing. That has no bearing whatsoever with whether it actually influenced how golf courses were designed, but the possibility that it may have I find interesting.

All I asked for from Tom was the documented proof for the connection.

Now as for Sr. & Peter Max... who knows? ;D



« Last Edit: December 29, 2005, 11:36:30 AM by Philip Young »

TEPaul

Re:Arts & Crafts sidetrack
« Reply #513 on: December 29, 2005, 12:29:47 PM »
"Yes. Willie Park would have been effected by the same influences that effected the others in and around London. Willie Park II, unlike many of the professionals who were his contemporaries and preceeded him, was a worldly individual. He was a very successful businessman and promoter. He had enterprises in Musselburgh, Edinburgh, London, Manchester and New York. He traveled extensively and befriended many within high society: Astors, Vanderbilts, Balfour, Talmedge, Webb, Havermeyer, Riddell and the daughter of the King and Queen of England to name a few. And don't underestimate the influence of TA Roberts."

Tom MacWood:

You have no proof whatsoever that Willie Park Jr was influenced by the A/C movement in any way in what he did in the English Heathlands. I think most of us are getting sick and tired of your constant refrain that anyone of any sophistication who was anywhere around London or the English country-side around London at that time was positively influenced by the Arts and Crafts Movement and particularly some of its principles, particular some of the principles William Morris tried to imbue in it and in English society of that time.

Your evidence that Park was influenced by it is no more than you stating in your essay that 'he crossed paths' with some people who may've had some interest in "Arts and Crafts" building architecture, landscape architecture or decorative products. BIG DEAL! That's a most tenuous connection, at best, to the A/C movement and it principles influencing Park jr.

You said:

"He traveled extensively and befriended many within high society: Astors, Vanderbilts, Balfour, Talmedge, Webb, Havermeyer, Riddell and the daughter of the King and Queen of England to name a few."

I'm sure Park jr did do that, and did travel with those people, but so what? A statement like that is beginning to show you have a whole lot to learn about the English society and some of its culture in that time. It probably shows you have things to learn about William Morris too and some of his beliefs and goals that obviously found their way into his "Arts and Crafts" Movement and its "principles".

Morris was a socialist, to say the least, and probably much closer to a comminist. He didn't believe in capitalism, He didn't even believe in the "profit motive". He probably opposed private ownership in business economics too. He apparently believed in some form of business "syndicalism" that he apparently felt was some reversion back to the system of Midaeval Guilds (the Gothic system) and worker ownership of the ways and means of production and business of various products!




   
« Last Edit: January 02, 2006, 01:00:31 PM by TEPaul »

TEPaul

Re:Arts & Crafts sidetrack
« Reply #514 on: December 29, 2005, 12:54:37 PM »
"All I asked for from Tom was the documented proof for the connection."

Phil:

Me too. But after all this time he just keeps handing us his same old saw that the A/C movement was so universal that it had to have influenced every aspect of social life, every art form etc, etc at that time!

BULLSHIT!!

That's the most flagrant and ridiculous stretch imaginable. If he wants to prove it he's going to have to do a whole lot better than that. Of course he never will because it isn't true. The primary and most significant influences on the golf course architecture of the Golden Age are known and have been known for years. It's all right there in their literature and in ours.

I can't help it if Tom MacWood gets curious, begins to explore some "theory" of his, writes it, puts it on here as some novel and heretofore unrecognized primary and significant influence on the Golden Age of Architecture to such an extent the era should be renamed "Arts and Crafts Golf", and a writer for Country Life magazine should be labeled the "Father" (later demoted to "Guide" ;) ) of all of golf course architecture!

Maybe some did buy the accuracy of his "premises" (more likely they didn't even notice he invented them) and bought his conclusion, but the point is some didn't, they questioned him on it all and it's been more than shown to have come up sorely lacking in historic accuracy.

But I guess that's just the risk one runs when one tries to make a name for himself as an 'expert researcher/writer' (read; "historian")  by floating his own "novel" theory ;) on the viewing and reading public!
« Last Edit: December 29, 2005, 12:56:31 PM by TEPaul »

ForkaB

Re:Arts & Crafts sidetrack
« Reply #515 on: December 29, 2005, 01:30:35 PM »
Tom and Phil

Give up the ghost.  Tom MacW is never going to answer your questions for the blatantly obvious reason that he does not seem to have the answers!  Please leave him (and the rest of us) in peace with our own theories and fantasies.  There are far, far better things to talk about on this forum than insolvable riddles.

TEPaul

Re:Arts & Crafts sidetrack
« Reply #516 on: December 29, 2005, 02:14:55 PM »
"Tom and Phil
Give up the ghost.  Tom MacW is never going to answer your questions for the blatantly obvious reason that he does not seem to have the answers!  Please leave him (and the rest of us) in peace with our own theories and fantasies.  There are far, far better things to talk about on this forum than insolvable riddles."

Rich:

The most significant influences on the Golden Age of golf course architecture are anything but riddles. And the influences on the GA has definitely been written, and many times both by architects of that time and historians and others later. It's not a riddle at all.

I realize Tom MacWood is never going to answer our questions. All he will ever do is just continue to spew the very same things he always has with little to no proof, and the very same things we've been constantly questioning him about. And yes, of course the reason is blatantly obvious. I'm sure he knows that at this point and he won't really answer because he knows he doesn't have the answers and that the ones he gave in his essay are nothing more than a series of fabricated "premises" on his part that he tried to pass off as fact.

But I don't mind continually questioning him about it because when I do more and more people can't help but notice that he has no answers and that his thesis has no real validity.

The primary influences on the Golden Age lie elsewhere and for other reasons, many of which have been given, and for years.

And furthermore, if some of the people who Tom MacW claims still endorse his "Arts and Crafts" movement influence theory, still do, I don't mind saying that I'm pretty shocked by their gullibility and a bit more than a little disappointed in their unwillingness to intelligently look into and question someone's "out of the Blue" and completely novel theory of a movement's significant influence on GCA, particularly when history tells us that particular movement had very little to do with it or with golf architecture's art form.  
« Last Edit: December 29, 2005, 02:27:49 PM by TEPaul »

T_MacWood

Re:Arts & Crafts sidetrack
« Reply #517 on: December 29, 2005, 06:20:57 PM »
"Which circles? Which art forms were uneffected?"

Tom MacWood:

Well, if you haven't figured out by now I'm talking about the incipient art form of golf course architecture I feel pretty damn sorry for you.

What other art forms were uneffected? Man, I don't know---was the A/C Movement and it's principles the primary influence on musicians, and actors, on cobblers, tailors and candlestick makers too?  ;)


Which circles?

Not so much of an influence on the performing arts....although A&C nostalgia revived foms of tradtional folk music, country dancing, maypole dancing, medieval pagents, etc. Charles Ashbee was a member of the Elizabethan Stage Society which produced Elizabethan and Jacobean plays 'according to their original convention.' Looking back to a better time...all consistant with the A&C ideal.

Fashion was definitely apart of the A&C movement, and more candlestick makers than you can shake a candelstick at.

T_MacWood

Re:Arts & Crafts sidetrack
« Reply #518 on: December 29, 2005, 06:51:51 PM »

Why don't you just stop spewing out that same phrase and the same old bullshit??

No need to blow a gasket. I was simply correcting your comment about the A&C movement only dealing with decorate art objects and architecture.


Plenty of us aren't buying it just because YOU say it. Building architecture, garden design, furniture, glassware, metalwork, ceramics and textiles (other than building architecture and landscape design, all "decorative art objects) SURE, nobody is denying that but GOLF COURSE ARCHITECTURE is not those things or those art forms!!!

Textiles, clothes, painting, graphics, jewelry, book arts, photography, golf architecture...all decorative art objects (generally interior)?



How can it be that you can't recognize that or that you can't recognize sometimes huge DISTINCTIONS between various art forms? How can that be? Are you the type who has so little ability to deduce important distinctions in things, including various art forms, that all you can see is some universal influence and some universal commonality? To me this is both incredible and more than a little maddening, particularly if there is anyone who might take you seriously.

This illustrates your lack of understanding....no wonder you are unable to comprehend my premise. After all this time you obviously still have never bothered studying the A&C movement, and its basic ideals that crossed-over diverse disciplines.


And why don't you answer my questions to you about the specifically stated influences on Golden Age architecture of the likes of English natualist landscape designers such as Kent, Brown, Puckler and Repton? Obviously, you must be ignoring those questions because their influence could not have been assigned to the A/C Movement since their lifes and careers ALL PRECEDED the A/C movement by anywhere from 50 to over a century!!

The reason Behr and Macdonald mentioned Repton and some of the others was because they obviously had some influence upon them. They also mentioned the links courses as an influence and Hutchinson and Low as an influence, Mother Nature as an influence....

There were many excellent golf architects of the golden age, and like most artists, everyone these men had the own unique set of influences (some they shared, some they did not share). Is that surprising?

TEPaul

Re:Arts & Crafts sidetrack
« Reply #519 on: December 29, 2005, 08:53:51 PM »
Tom MacWood said:

"Which circles?

"Not so much of an influence on the performing arts....although A&C nostalgia revived foms of tradtional folk music, country dancing, maypole dancing, medieval pagents, etc. Charles Ashbee was a member of the Elizabethan Stage Society which produced Elizabethan and Jacobean plays 'according to their original convention.' Looking back to a better time...all consistant with the A&C ideal.

Fashion was definitely apart of the A&C movement, and more candlestick makers than you can shake a candelstick at."

Tom MacWood:

Uh, huh, I see, of course, I forgot the A/C Movement influenced every aspect of social life, all art forms, all culture etc it was so universal even if few knew it's name or that it was the primary influence on so much and so many. What could be more understandable and logical than that?

TEPaul

Re:Arts & Crafts sidetrack
« Reply #520 on: December 29, 2005, 09:02:35 PM »
Tom MacWood said;

"Textiles, clothes, painting, graphics, jewelry, book arts, photography, golf architecture...all decorative art objects (generally interior)?"

GOLFCLUBATLASERS, tell me the truth, can a single one of you actually take something like that remark even remotely seriously??

Come on Boys, don't be shy. Can a single one of you be gullible enough to even remotely accept a statement that illogical and that historically inaccurate?

A golf course is a "decorative art object" (generally interior)???

Jeeeesus, Christ, what kind of BULLSHIT is this guy going to come up with next?   ;)

T_MacWood

Re:Arts & Crafts sidetrack
« Reply #521 on: December 29, 2005, 09:11:04 PM »
You have no proof whatsoever that Willie Park Jr was influenced by the A/C movement in any way in what he did in the English Heathlands. I think most of us are getting sick and tired of your constant refrain that anyone of any sophistication who was anywhere around London or the English country-side around London at that time was positively influenced by the Arts and Crafts Movement and particularly some of its principles, particular some of the principles William Morris tried to imbue in it and in English society of that time.

You might be getting tired of it, but it is true. You just said you accepted the historical fact that the aesthetic principles of the A/C Movement were quite visible in some circles in and around London. Willie Park was at ground zero of the A&C aesthetic in the suburbs of Surrey and Berkshire.

Not only that he mingled with high society on both sides of the Atlantic and was exposed to more in the way of aesthetic tastes than most. Hell on his first visit to the US he stayed with Webb's at Sherbunrne Farms...one of the great works of Shingle Style architecture and the grounds designed by FL Olmsted. Mrs Webb was outspoke fan of Gertrude Jekyll by the way.

Back in England, Mr. TA Roberts built a large Edwardian cottage at Sunningdale. Roberts was a fine amateur golfer in London circles and a friend of Hutchinson, Low, Darwin, Fowler and other top amatuers. He was the one who dreamed of the possibilities of building a golf course on that rugged heathland property outside his cottage.

People told him he was crazy....you can't build a golf course on that God foresaken land, but he a lot of friends, who had a lot of money. He hired Park and the rest history (it was such a difficult job it took nearly two years to complete). Roberts was also the Chairman of the Chiltern Estate company (and an investor) that developed Huntercombe. (On a side note Willie and his brother Mungo lived in a home called The Nest when Huntercombe was being constructed.)

Roberts also hired Jack White and Harry Colt at Sunningdale. His good friend HH Longman (the publishing magnate and R&A stallworth) was the club's first Captain. Longman's published the Badminton Library and the collective works of William Morris. A bright and intelligent man like Willie was bound to be influenced by the company he kept...see the Heathland breakthrough.

Morris was a socialist, to say the least, and probably much closer to a comminist. He didn't believe in capitalism, He didn't even believe in the "profit motive". He probably opposed private ownership in business economics too. He apparently believed in some form of business "syndicalism" that he apparently felt was some reversion back to the system of Midaeval Guilds (the Gothic system) and worker ownership of the ways and means of production and business of various products!


Morris was a socialist, but it was his aesthetic philosphies that had the profound influence, not his politics. Many associated with A&C movement rejected his politics. He was an extremely successful capitalist...which is one of the ironies of the A&C movement (which I explained in my essay).

Some of those people you mentioned as those who Park jr knew and hung around with and perhaps counted as his friends and acquaintences and perhaps some influence on him were some of the world's greatest capitalists at that time. Men like Havemeyer and particularly the likes of Vanderbilt and Astor. The last thing they would've endorsed is the goals and principles of a man or his movement like William Morris who was nigh onto a communist and about as anti-business and anti-capitalist as a man could get at that time.


What are you talking about...anti-business? What was Morris & Co?

I ought to know what I'm talking about, Tom MacW, as my great great grandmother's (Mrs James W. Paul) daughter, one Mary Dahlgren Paul, of Villa Nova Pennsylvania, married the sole heir of the "English" side of the Astors. William Waldorf Astor was believed to be perhaps the richest man in the world at that time and believe me, the last thing he would've been interested in is the goals of some guy and his movement who was "anti-capitlist" and a proponent of socialism or communism. I'm sure the same went for Havemeyer, Vanderbilt and the rest.


Another in a long line of Holiday Inn Express references.
« Last Edit: December 29, 2005, 09:57:03 PM by Tom MacWood »

TEPaul

Re:Arts & Crafts sidetrack
« Reply #522 on: December 29, 2005, 09:13:58 PM »
Quote from: TEPaul on Today at 11:15:38am
"How can it be that you can't recognize that or that you can't recognize sometimes huge DISTINCTIONS between various art forms? How can that be? Are you the type who has so little ability to deduce important distinctions in things, including various art forms, that all you can see is some universal influence and some universal commonality? To me this is both incredible and more than a little maddening, particularly if there is anyone who might take you seriously."

Tom MacWood's response:
 
"This illustrates your lack of understanding....no wonder you are unable to comprehend my premise. After all this time you obviously still have never bothered studying the A&C movement, and its basic ideals that crossed-over diverse disciplines."

Tom MacWood:

At this point, I'd venture to say that I legitimately know more about the Arts and Crafts Movement and the truth about its history and the entire truth about its proponents and leaders than you do.

But the real point of this subject and these discussion is I know what the real influences were on the "Golden Age of Golf Architecture" and it's best architects, and apparently you don't and it doesn't look much like you ever will.

T_MacWood

Re:Arts & Crafts sidetrack
« Reply #523 on: December 29, 2005, 09:19:36 PM »
"All I asked for from Tom was the documented proof for the connection."

Phil:

Me too. But after all this time he just keeps handing us his same old saw that the A/C movement was so universal that it had to have influenced every aspect of social life, every art form etc, etc at that time!

BULLSHIT!!

That's the most flagrant and ridiculous stretch imaginable. If he wants to prove it he's going to have to do a whole lot better than that. Of course he never will because it isn't true. The primary and most significant influences on the golf course architecture of the Golden Age are known and have been known for years. It's all right there in their literature and in ours.

I can't help it if Tom MacWood gets curious, begins to explore some "theory" of his, writes it, puts it on here as some novel and heretofore unrecognized primary and significant influence on the Golden Age of Architecture to such an extent the era should be renamed "Arts and Crafts Golf", and a writer for Country Life magazine should be labeled the "Father" (later demoted to "Guide" ;) ) of all of golf course architecture!

Maybe some did buy the accuracy of his "premises" (more likely they didn't even notice he invented them) and bought his conclusion, but the point is some didn't, they questioned him on it all and it's been more than shown to have come up sorely lacking in historic accuracy.

But I guess that's just the risk one runs when one tries to make a name for himself as an 'expert researcher/writer' (read; "historian")  by floating his own "novel" theory ;) on the viewing and reading public!


Easy. No need for the profanity. You don't believe Horace Hutchinson was a profoundly influencial figure? A lot of noise there, but little to no substance.

We are still waiting for your well researched essay...or should I say counter-essay. Perhaps you should start by proving the Arts & Crafts movement never occured. I suggest you use smiley faces as well.
« Last Edit: December 29, 2005, 09:20:53 PM by Tom MacWood »

TEPaul

Re:Arts & Crafts sidetrack
« Reply #524 on: December 29, 2005, 09:25:14 PM »
"Quote from: TEPaul on Today at 12:29:47pm
You have no proof whatsoever that Willie Park Jr was influenced by the A/C movement in any way in what he did in the English Heathlands. I think most of us are getting sick and tired of your constant refrain that anyone of any sophistication who was anywhere around London or the English country-side around London at that time was positively influenced by the Arts and Crafts Movement and particularly some of its principles, particular some of the principles William Morris tried to imbue in it and in English society of that time.
 
From Tom MacWood;

"You might be getting tired of it, but it is true. You just said you accepted the historical fact that the aesthetic principles of the A/C Movement were quite visible in some circles in and around London. Willie Park was at ground zero of the A&C aesthetic in the suburbs of Surrey and Berkshire.

"Not only that he mingled with high society on both sides of the Atlantic and was exposed to more in the way of aesthetic tastes than most. Hell on his first visit to the US he stayed with Webb's at Sherbunrne Farms...one of the great works of Shingle Style architecture and the grounds designed by FL Olmsted. Mrs Webb was outspoke fan of Gertrude Jekyll by the way.

Back in England, Mr. TA Roberts built a large Edwardian cottage at Sunningdale. Roberts was a fine amateur golfer in London circles and a friend of Hutchinson, Low, Darwin, Fowler and other top amatuers. He was the one who dreamed of the possibilities of building a golf course on that rugged heathland property outside his cottage.

People told him he was crazy....you can't build a golf course on that God foresaken land, but he a lot of friends, who had a lot of money. He hired Park and the rest history (it was such a difficult job it took nearly two years to complete). Roberts was also the Chairman of the Chiltern Estate company (and an investor) that developed Huntercombe. (On a side note Willie and his brother Mungo lived in a home called The Nest when Huntercombe was being constructed.)

Roberts also hired Jack White and Harry Colt at Sunningdale. His good friend HH Longman (the publishing magnate and R&A stallworth) was the club's first Captain. Longman's published the Badminton Library and the collective works of William Morris. A bright and intelligent man like Willie was bound to be influenced by the company he kept...see the Heathland breakthrough."

Tom MacWood:

That entire response on your part is just beyond belief. Are you alright? I'm beginning to get concerned about you, you've become so illogical, so narrow minded and fixated, I'm afraid you may not even see the ludicrousness of what you've been saying lately.

BTW, I made a mistake in my quote above. I should not have said "...anyone of sophistication..", I meant to say, "...EVERYONE of sophistication..."
« Last Edit: December 29, 2005, 09:27:26 PM by TEPaul »

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back