In fact, it might be said that better, more compelling architecture is created where there is less of an egoistic desire on the part of the architect to compel a certain kind of play.
That is truly fascinating. Kirk, this is like how an architect might proceed if he accepts the notion of personal meaning, yes?
How else might a designer proceed if he operated with the goal of allowing for the emergence of truly personal meanings?
From your comment I feel that the idea of par-less scorecards is just scratching the surface.
Peter,
What the architect puts in the ground
creates the meaning...I think. But why should what he says about what he put in the ground take precedence over what meaning we develop.
There's definitely the potential for alternate realities here. I guess the challenge is, how can we develop personal meanings yet still learn from others -- i.e., from their personal meanings?
It's so hard today to approach anything the right way, the sorta tabula rasa way. There's so much marketing spew, information glut, tastemaker diktats...
And of course when someone develops a personal meaning that is really meaningful to him, he will want to share it. Like on this website. Which makes the challenge of developing our own personal meaning even harder.
So of course it's unrealistic to suppose we could turn off the bullhorns, the broadcasts, posts. We must find a way to develop personal meanings, to overcome the informational headwinds. Perhaps "negotiate" is a better word, though? As in negotiate a meaning that is personal, without shutting ourselves out like monks.
Still, wouldn't it be great if as Kalen says we could approach a course with no prior knowledge? I bet our lives would be enriched for the experience.
Interestingly, the life of the competitive golfer within might not be enriched, as he would not know how to play a hole before he played it...
Mark