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.


George Pazin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Originality vs. Different to be different
« on: January 22, 2007, 05:51:06 PM »
I've been reading posts about how architect XYZ's courses all look the same for pretty much the entire time I've been on this site.

And, contrary to popular opinion, virtually everyone is included in this particular criticism, favored and non-favored sons alike.

What I would like to know is how being different simply for the sake of being different advances the art (or science) of golf course design in any way.

I'd like to know if Tom D building circular or symmetrical bunkers like some others, or the others' builing hairy bunkers like Tom or C&C allegedly always do, would make them better designers.

Several of the posters fortunate enough to play a wide variety of courses and designers lament that the latest and greatest from any particular designer "doesn't go beyond what they've done before", or other such drivel.

Explain to me why it's bad to have a style.

Explain to me why it's bad for one guy to build circular bunkers, and it's equally bad for another guy to build hairy bunkers.

Explain to me your criteria for why one guy is doing something new, original and GOOD, versus another guy doing something different just to be different.

These are NOT rhetorical questions, though they may be taken collectively somewhat as rants. I am truly interested in hearing how posters define new, original, unique, whatever.
« Last Edit: January 22, 2007, 05:52:09 PM by George Pazin »
Big drivers and hot balls are the product of golf course design that rewards the hit one far then hit one high strategy.  Shinny showed everyone how to take care of this whole technology dilemma. - Pat Brockwell, 6/24/04

Mike Nuzzo

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Originality vs. Different to be different
« Reply #1 on: January 22, 2007, 06:08:26 PM »
I would stay away from bunkers in this discussion and prefer to talk routing strategy.

For me it would be easier to see why I'd want to be different when routing a golf course, as it would lead to more original holes.

I think it would be bad to have a style...

of having all the par 3s play to the most dramatic land form.  
of playing holes in the valleys
of returning nines
of elevated tees
of par 72, 7200 yard courses

If the different works well from a playability standpoint, I'd say bravo.

Thinking of Bob, Rihc, Bill, George, Neil, Dr. Childs, & Tiger.

George Pazin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Originality vs. Different to be different
« Reply #2 on: January 22, 2007, 06:14:58 PM »
Thanks for the response, Mike, I am especially hoping to hear from the architects on board.

As for the bunker comments, I just used that as a simple example. Tom D has said on here that we are unnaturally obsessed with hairy bunkers, so I thought it was a good, clear starting point.

But I like your comments on routing, which happens to be one of my most favored topics (at least in terms of reading, not so much in posting).

Thanks, I look forward to hearing more from both the architects and their critics.

 :)
Big drivers and hot balls are the product of golf course design that rewards the hit one far then hit one high strategy.  Shinny showed everyone how to take care of this whole technology dilemma. - Pat Brockwell, 6/24/04

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +3/-1
Re:Originality vs. Different to be different
« Reply #3 on: January 22, 2007, 06:47:49 PM »
George:

I've always said I didn't want to have a recognizable "style" of bunkering, because I don't think the same style can be taken to every site successfully.  Trying a new style just to be different is one thing, but doing your best to make the most of a different site is another.  

As in all other forms of learning, I think that getting outside your comfort zone is a good thing.  A lot of architects stick to the stuff they do well, and that's their prerogative.

That said, there are some things I am pretty sure I'll never build, because I don't like them.  Symmetrical forms of bunkering or round shapes don't do much for me because I don't think they do much for nature, and I like to build things that look natural.


Steve Burrows

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Originality vs. Different to be different
« Reply #4 on: January 22, 2007, 07:07:56 PM »
Artists throughout the ages have deleloped and sustained styles that work for them quite well, even over the course of many years.  Writers and painters, for one, have successfully done this for thousands of years, and this has done no dis-service to anyone.  Indeed, would we even know Monet if not for his impressionistic style of furious and thick, though controlled, brush strokes?  Would we know Hawthorne if not for his fictional documentation, and seeming obsession, of the secret sin that lives within us all?

Of course, as Tom Doak has mentioned, perhaps this may not work so well with golf courses, as each site is different, and might therefore be treated different, unlike the same-ness of blank pages or canvases of the writers and painters.  

But, like he also said, it is every designers prerogative to stick with a given style, or to branch out.  And further, I don't think either decision is bad.  Let them make a hundred courses that feel the same, if they choose (and, more importantly, if clients desire them to do so).  They are entitled to make a living, so let them do what they are good at.

But, we also know that there are a lot of other designers out there who are doing different things than him, and therein lies the diversity.  The differences may not be within each individual designers work, but within the entire profession, there are nuances enough to provide for a wide range of golf experience.  Maybe that is what should be celebrated?
...to admit my mistakes most frankly, or to say simply what I believe to be necessary for the defense of what I have written, without introducing the explanation of any new matter so as to avoid engaging myself in endless discussion from one topic to another.     
               -Rene Descartes

Andy Troeger

Re:Originality vs. Different to be different
« Reply #5 on: January 22, 2007, 10:39:43 PM »

But, we also know that there are a lot of other designers out there who are doing different things than him, and therein lies the diversity.  The differences may not be within each individual designers work, but within the entire profession, there are nuances enough to provide for a wide range of golf experience.  Maybe that is what should be celebrated?

Steve,
Without meaning to stray too far from the original topic and questions, I think this really is where the differences come in. Everyone has their own philosophy on what is good in their artistic discipline. There can be a little or a lot of variance depending on the architect and the sites worked upon, but some of the philosophies and themes are bound to be the same.

I looked at my list of the top sixty courses I've played, and realized that there are 39 different architects (or teams or architects in some cases) represented. Only Pete Dye (9) had more than 3 courses on my list. At least personally, that speaks to the variety of artists whose works golfers can sample. That also makes me uninformed as to repetition by specific architects as I don't have much of a sample from any one person!

George Pazin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Originality vs. Different to be different
« Reply #6 on: January 23, 2007, 11:33:06 AM »
Thanks for the thoughts, everyone.

To me, a lot of this boils down to how someone chooses to define same or different.

I'm still waiting to hear from those critics who continually criticise architects for not stepping beyond, or doing anything original.

You likely know who you are, don't make me name names!

 :)
Big drivers and hot balls are the product of golf course design that rewards the hit one far then hit one high strategy.  Shinny showed everyone how to take care of this whole technology dilemma. - Pat Brockwell, 6/24/04

Andy Troeger

Re:Originality vs. Different to be different
« Reply #7 on: January 23, 2007, 11:50:47 AM »

To me, a lot of this boils down to how someone chooses to define same or different.

George,
This is it in a nutshell. Having played a fairer sample of Pete Dye than any other architect, there are obvious trends that go through his courses. However, there's still a lot of variety looking at places like Blackwolf Run, Whistling Straits, Crooked Stick, The Golf Club, and Harbour Town. Maybe Dye has done a better job than some at evolving and changing--there were many years between TGC and WS for example, but I've never gotten bored playing those courses or some of his lesser known ones generally.

George Pazin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Originality vs. Different to be different
« Reply #8 on: January 23, 2007, 02:39:48 PM »
I'm still waaaaaaaaaaaaiiiiiiiiiiittttttting for those critics to chime in.

And he's not the only one....
Big drivers and hot balls are the product of golf course design that rewards the hit one far then hit one high strategy.  Shinny showed everyone how to take care of this whole technology dilemma. - Pat Brockwell, 6/24/04