[Mike Hendren]

This quote from Brad Klein deserves its own thread. 

"... with good architects, nothing is accidental. Everything is intentional."

Discuss.

[Scott Witter]

Mike:

Brad's quote made me look a couple times too.  My interpretation...Architects, whether okay, good or great doesn't matter to me, may walk a site and find a great feature, or features, by 'accident' simply because the topo or aerial photo didn't show the detail before hand.  Then, the good/great architects intentionally make the best use of that feature and find a way to preserve it and incorporate it into the design when others may only log it as a cool feature, but not give it another look.  I think there is some wiggle room in Brad's quote, but he makes a good point and the last time I checked, Brad has a better way with words than I ever will have

[RJ_Daley]

Yeah, I can hardly construct a sentence either, let alone keep up with Brad... 

But, I also think he means that good archies become very familiar and intimate with the land before final design and construction, and everything is well thought out before earth is moved.  I also think that the concept of an accidental design feature would come from an archie/designer going off of a design where he wasn't completely familiar with the land before design (possibly after only cursory inspection and design off of a topo routing) and then stumbles into a certain land characteristic that plays pleasantly surprising.  But, a thorough archie wouldn't be surprised in the first place becuase he would have identified the issue and decided it should be in the design or out...

[Rick_Noyes]

I remember reading an article about a fairly well known architect.  A client was quoted in the article "He told us it was going to cost $7 million and it ended up costing $15 million, but we got a hell of a product".  Based on the above quote, is he a "good" architect?

[Kirk Gill]

It's a pithy quote, but without the context of the comment it's hard to say where Mr. Klein was going with it.

For example, in any artistic endeavor a creative person has to have their eyes open for the "happy accident" - something unanticipated and unplanned that works. The best GCA's may be open to that sort of thing, and be able to integrate it into their design. In that sense, a feature on a course might be considered Accidental by the architect, but the fact that they used it and intentionally left it might make others consider it Intentional...

More interesting, though, would be any cases that anyone can remember where, after a course has been built, something happened either with the ground or with some accident of nature that fundamentally changed a hole for the better, without the intent of the architect.  Seems like that would have had to have happened somewhere, sometime.........

[Jim_Kennedy]

Maybe Brad will tell us more but for me it said: if I went to Texas, bought a drilling rig and started looking for oil and found it, that would be accidental. It would be intentional for Occidental.

[Garland Bayley]

I am in agreement with Kirk. Even after the fact, any great architect will be able to come back to a course that has not been altered and find neat things that were purely accidental.

The quote from Brad is simple and succinct, but in fact not very realistic.

[rjsimper]

All actions may be intentional, but all outcomes cannot possibly be so.

[Pete Lavallee]

I've often wondered if William Francis Bell's perplexing green slopes at Torrey North or Palos Verdes were accidential or intentional; according to the Klein Theorum it must be the latter!

[JESII]

I've often wondered if William Francis Bell's perplexing green slopes at Torrey North or Palos Verdes were accidential or intentional; according to the Klein Theorum it must be the latter!

Do you think the greens provided as much confusion at 6 feet as they do today?

[Mike Sweeney]

This quote from Brad Klein deserves its own thread. 

"... with good architects, nothing is accidental. Everything is intentional."

Discuss.

The 10th at Merion will play as a 1 shot hole for the US Open, there is no way that was intentional, it is an accident of technology.

See the second hole at Mountain Lake, the hurricane blew out the second hole tree in the driving zone and completely changed the hole.

The tree at the 10th hole of Winged Foot West is gone and now the hole plays completely different.

The list goes on and on. Technology and nature changes, the architect can't possibly be expected to anticipate how these changes will change his final product.

[BVince]

When did Mr. Klein say this?  It may be because he is so impressed by working with the Doak/Urbina team and the thought process going in to the Old Mac course.

There is definately unintentional works of nature that influence a course.  Just look at photographs of many of the top courses then and now.  Then, the trees had little impact and some looked like bushes.  Now, you have huge trees that force shots to be shaped around them.  Like Mike said, the list goes on and on.

[Mike_Young]

Brad is speaking of macro not micro  IMHO

[Peter Pallotta]

I think you're right, Mike.

What's certainly intentional is intention itself; in other words, what's intentional is the choice of how you'll define your work, first to yourself and then to your clients. What's intentional is the decision about what the most important elements of your design approach and philosophy are, first in general and then in terms of a specific site. After that, I'd imagine the more happy accidents the better; or at least, the more happy accidents in line with your fundamental choices and decisions the better.

Of course, I might be flat out wrong, and even if I'm right it just took me a hundred words to say what Brad did in ten; but we have different approaches to posting...

Peter

[Don_Mahaffey]

Brad, I don’t know about that…
Lets say an architect communicates what he wants done, but while he’s away the communication gets garbled and something different than what he wanted gets built. Then he shows up and says, “That’s not exactly what I said, but I like it…”
It’s was built by accident, but intentionally left….the only difference is most architects would never share such a story. I think a lot of things happen by accident, but it is intentional that they don’t all get blown up.

[Jeff_Brauer]

There always are unitentional consequences (almost invariably) in every other aspect of life.  Why should gca be any different?

If Brad is talking macro scale, I think he is just about right.  As mentioned, something that happened accidentally becomes intentional the minute the decision is made to leave it.

But even micro things can be accidents. I recall raising a green back thinking I was helping to stop a shot a bit more on a long iron.  On opening day, a golfer applauds or critiques the tricky little downhill chip he had from just behind the highest point.  Almost any micro thing you do can affect play in ways that are hard to predict, providing a shot must be played from precisely a spot.  With rolling contour greens, a chip from left of a mound to a pin right might break hard and one right behind might go straight. 

Of course, in some ways, that is the point of gca - being just random enough that every shot plays a little differently.  How good would it be if we over planned those green side areas too completely?

Of course, Brad may have been thinking of a slightly different take on something.

If Brad thinks any gca considers EVERY square inch of a greens complex, I believe

[Brad Klein]

Of courses there are all sorts of surprises and unexpected twists along the way, but it's an architect's decision to go with them, accentuate or eliminate them.

Don,
I said all "good architects." I suppose what you're referring to happens, but more often the result of "go away and come back later" is that the architect overlooks something or fails to exercise proper control.

Pete,
I was referring to "good architects," which might not account for Bell at Torrey Pines.

Bryon,
Old Macdonald is obviously not my first experience of the design process. Nor of Doak & Urbina in the field. I've spent a lot more time with many other architects and am making a generalization based on many projects.

[JESII]

Brad,

How do you feel about an architect being judged on his courses as the game evolves? If a hole's strategic qualities are effectively changed as agronomy and equipment evolve is the architect really deemed to have "seen it coming"?

Donald Ross' Seminole might be a good example of a course whose qualities have shifted over these last 80 years or so...

[Don_Mahaffey]

Brad,
I never said anyone overlooked anything.

Does Doak stay at OM during the entire process and stop every shaper every 5 minutes to make sure everything is graded to the 1/10th of an inch? I doubt it, and that sure doesn’t mean he’s not exercising proper control as his record speaks for itself.  Proper supervision may mean just getting the right guys and giving them some freedom. When that happens, did the architect do everything intentionally, or was he just smart enough to surround himself with guys who understand what he wants?
The ideal that an architect intentionally directs every activity needed to construct a good golf course is absurd. It's just not possible.

[Brad Klein]

Don,

certainly not every second is spent overseeing, esp. when the architect has a crew he trusts and who know what he wants. But a good architect is on site enough to direct not just the shaping but also the pace of it so it doesn't get so far ahead that he can't go back and make adjustments or corrections if it were wrong.

On the other hand, there are many architects for whom, generally, "okay is good enough" or who aren't around enough to direct the process in much detail and who wouldn't make changes afterwards. It's done all the time, as much for budget reasons as because of the architect's work habits, and the result is mediocre work that looks like a dozer operator built it -- by speading a whole lot of dirt around and finishing the job quickly. 

[Don_Mahaffey]

Brad,
I think we're saying close to the same thing. A well-run construction is the cornerstone to a good finished product.
But, I do disagree that everything is intentional. I believe that sometimes things happen in the field where one may make a seat of the pants adjustment that may not be a part of the plan. Why was Dye quoted along the lines of "the village idiot is the best shaper"? We know that's not true, but what I think he's saying is improvisation and flexibility in the field may be important. Your quote seems to imply that everything is planned to the gnat's ass in advance; I'm saying that sometimes things take a twist, for the better. And it's hard to say that's intentional if you don't see it coming.

[Brad Klein]

Actually, it was MacKenzie who said that when he wants interesting greens, he hires the village idiot and tells him to make them flat -- in which case, he probably would hire Pete.

Here's the difference, Don. I don't mean to suggest that everything that results is the product of intentional forethought and planning before it happens. My point is that is that intention and decision guide every resulting line, shape, curve, even if only as a decision to leave it or enhance it after it's been stumbled upon.

For an extreme version, Jim Engh assures me that he hand-draws in advance every line, every shape and has it built to order. That actually explains a lot of his resulting look. It's exceedingly rare to be able to plan that much and make it look real. My own sense is that a freer process has more life and art to it, but that there's full planning and intention there that unfolds over time. Coore says that the most important element in design is time. By which I think he means, time to allow things to emerge and time to discover what's there.

[Dan Herrmann]

I'll give you a example of serendipity (after all, that's what "accidental architecture" is, isn't it?)

The fairway of French Creek #14 was cut out of pretty dense woods.  It travels essentially west until it drops and makes a 30 degree turn to the SW.

Anyway, today's view from 14 tee includes a virtually straight shot to #1 green - about 4/5 of a mile away across a shallow valley and wetlands.  We joke with first time players that the shot on 14 is actually to #1 green and they tremble in fear

Turns out that this illusion was serendipitous.  They didn't know the view would be so interesting until they opened up a corridor in the trees.

It's a very cool illusion, and completely "accidental".

[Tom_Doak]

Brad:

I was surprised to read your quote since you spent a lot of time with Pete Dye, and I remember him telling me on several occasions how different holes on his courses had resulted from accidents and misunderstandings that he adapted into their final form.  In the end, those things were all part of his intent, but he was open to the possibilities that came up in front of him.

So, intentional is indeed a matter of time.  The only quibble I have with your quote is that some might take it to mean that the great architects come up with their designs in full detail at the outset, and that is certainly NOT the case.

[Brad Klein]

Tom, that's basically the point I was trying to get to in my last post. And with Pete, I found out he likes to come off as the goofball, demented uncle type but he's incredibly bright just below that, even if he's not always clear or patient in articulating it.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()