Why do I like one course better than another? As I understand it, that question is one that caused many participants on this site to become interested in the topic of GCA. I struggle to answer that question.
My recollection of the Fazio courses I have played is pretty consistent. I usually enjoy the day, but have little positive or negative reaction to the course.
My view seems to contrast with the public, which generally holds him in high esteem. While views on this site about Fazio's work vary, it definitely tends to be negative.
I spent a little time looking for commentary from this site on his work in order to better understand it. From Ran's profiles of Fazio courses and Nacarrato's posts, there are many thoughtful points. I thought I would share what I collected (minus some of the inflammatory stuff). I would be interested in any other views on his work.
From World Woods Profile
“Tom Fazio has made quite a name for himself in the last dozen years. He brought a softer, more artistic approach to his designs. They are pleasing to the eye; particularly the big, bold bunkering that could be singled out as the common feature of his courses. Much of his commercial and critical success is owed to the backlash against the 'contrived' harsh courses of the 1980s. His courses are almost entirely without controversy as he gets the fundamentals right.”
From Victoria National Review
“As a result of their existing friendship, Fazio devoted plenty of personal, on-site time to this project, something that has been distinctly missing in the last five years of his work. After several first-rate courses from the late 1980s and early 1990s (Wade Hampton, Shadow Creek, the Pine Barrens Course at World Woods), Fazio had become inundated with projects to the point where he couldn't possibly spend enough time at each site. A direct consequence was that an innovativeness was lost as his projects started to take on a similar feel. While his courses remained artistically appealing, they had lost their edge, with too much emphasis on 'playability' and not enough on strategy.”
From Forest Creek Profile
“First, other than the construction of several elevated teeing areas, Tom Fazio draped the holes across the land in such an appealing manner as to require little dirt to be moved. Thus, the course enjoys an unforced, natural appearance as it weaves through the broad corridors of pine trees. The other big name modern architects including Jack Nicklaus and Rees Jones have failed to deliver such a pleasing natural appearance with their efforts in the Pinehurst area. Indeed, Fazio himself couldn't live up to the standard that he set for himself at Forest Creek, as both Pinehurst No. 8 and the remodeled Pinehurst No. 4 are obviously more manufactured.”
From Naccarato Posts:
Most Architects frame golf holes in many aspects. Where Barney is confusing it is that the Tom Fazio-brand of framing utilizes pre-made/templete-like scenes that have proven to be successful for him in the hearts and minds and pea-brained like visions of the Ooooh's and Aaaaaw's crowd.
Good for Fazio is that he does utilize some really topsy turvey greens--sometimes..... Unfortunately, the majority of them don't work very well with the strategies presented off the tee, thus revealing a less then enthusiastic, rendition of Vanilla Snow Cone w/ extra vanilla flavoring.
To reiterate what others have said here, Yes, the man-made--built into the design containment on a Fazio course is well very impressive for its magnatude, it just isn't artisitc in any sense because ultimately and in many cases it doesn't work with the neighboring terrain. It all looks fake and constructed. It simply doesn't tie-in to anything natural because he has already eliminated anything natural from the site itself. . . .
. . .
This is because Fazio merges the two, (well sort of) Fazio frames with containment mounds, trees, lakes, ponds and creeks; gimmicky stuff that never existed in that particular of any given hole before. His containment is tied into that framing. Nobody hides containent better then Fazio, but to me Containment is bad when it is designed, and not part of the terrain. When an architect forces his control on a golfer in the extreme with containment, the golfer will become defiant. They may like the way the course looks and plays at first, but they eventually do lose interest.