[TEPaul]

I would very much like to know WHEN Devereaux Emmet was first paid for anything he did with golf architecture. I think the question may've been asked before but I do not remember a credible answer, and I've certainly never known the answer.

Was it after the USGA finally instituted the so-called "Architect's Rule" to the "Amateur Status" Rules and Regulations thereby "exempting" professional architects from violating amateur playing status? I think that was done by the USGA in the early 1920s.

Emmet was a pretty good and enduring amateur player and I just don't remember his "amateur" playing status ever being questioned by the USGA even during those years when the USGA seemed to be most severe about amateur status and professional distinctions, particularly during the middle teens and the USGA presidency of Robert Watson.

[Robert Emmons]

I will check this weekend but I believe Dev was paid for his efforts to design Huntington in 1910...RHE

[Peter Pallotta]

TE -

I think there's a Golf Illustrated article from 1917 in which Emmet makes a very spirited defence of the professional architect.  Basically, he says that, CB Macdonald aside -- as there was "only one Macdonald" -- you couldn't expect men who were not making a living day in and day out as golf architects to be able to develop the experience and expertise to oversee the millions being spent in the design and construction of golf courses.

I know that it might've been several years later before he actually started charging for his services, but it seems that he was (in the context of the USGA debate) already thinking quite hard about the subject.  That's right, isn't it? I mean, he was still playing the high-level amateur tournaments then, and this was a few years before the USGA granted the exemption to architects, so I imagine he was only arguing for the principle at that point.   

Also, there's a Golf Illustrated article from March 1922 that says: "W. H. Follett, former Editor of GOLF ILLUSTRATED, is joining the forces on March 1st with Devereux Emmet in his golf construction work. Follett has been associated with Carters Tested Seeds Company for the last year and a half and has made a great success of his work with them. With Mr. Emmet he believes that he has a larger field of endeavor." 

Then, in late 1923, Emmet writes about the Queens Valley Course, i.e. "When the Queens Valley course…was laid out, great difficulty was experienced in assembling the various parcels of real estate that compose it. This land was very valuable. Assisted by the late "Pipe" Follett, I made many layouts which resulted in the end in one of the best I ever made. I consider it one of my best courses. There are some magnificent holes. I was fortunate in having the help of "Pipe" Follett. He was during most of his life a magazine writer and former editor of GOLF ILLUSTRATED, and during the last year or so of his life became associated with me as my assistant. He was a very fine golfer and a more genial soul and pleasant companion never lived…"

All of which to say, I'm guessing that if Mr. Follet was leaving a paying job to join Mr. Emmet, he'd also be getting paid there, as would Emmet himself -- which makes March 1922 the LATEST date possible for the "first time" Emmet was paid (unless I'm misunderstanding something...)

Peter

PS - Saw another very interesting article from early 1923 that was subtitled "Golf and Country Clubs Vanguard of Housing Development" (or something like that) -- basically talking about the growth of suburbs and the desire for city dwellers to get closer to nature and beauty, both in terms of where they lived and where they played golf.

Interesting times... 

[TEPaul]

Peter:

Thanks for that info.

One of the things I'm looking to determine is just how long some of those so-called "amateur/sportsmen" designers kept at projects for which they never took a fee. It also seems not exactly coincidental that none of them appear to have begun some of those long term projects for which they became famous much after the teens.

One reason could be that professional architects were getting much better organized at that time and devoting full time to architecture as opposed to those earlier "golf professional/greenkeeper/club-maker/part time architects generally from the old country.

Some of those early "amateur/sportsmen" architects were real old fashioned purists that way, most were pretty rich anyway and most all of them were good golfers and amateur tournament competitors at a high level and obviously did not want to violate their amateur status with the USGA until they were released from that problem eventually when the USGA instituted the "architect rule" exemption just after the teens.

But some got in trouble with the USGA that way in the teens including Travis, Tillinghast and Quimet. It seems like Emmet skated by during those tough times in the teens. One question I've always had was whether Emmet got paid for what he did originally at GCGC or the work he did in the decade of the teens and the decade before the teens. It seems pretty obvious at that time he was in that category of the so-called "amateur/sportsman" architect. I think that can be confirmed and proven by the fact that at that time (GCGA) he was actually part of the USGA board or nominating committee.

[Peter Pallotta]

Tom - that's one of the things I found interesting in the Emmet quote above about his work at Queens Valley.  He seems to stress the amount of time he spent there and the expense  (e.g. "This land was very valuable...I made many layouts") and then equates that extra money and time with quality work (e.g. "which resulted in the end in one of the best I ever made. I consider it one of my best courses").  I'm just thinking that, IF it was the first time Emmet was paid for his work, this is exactly the kind of thing I'd expect him to say...

Peter

[TEPaul]

Peter:

Another thing I'm trying to understand better or develop better is the differences in perception of the term "amateur" architect or "amateur/sportsman" architect back then compared to today.

It seems like there are some, seemingly a few on this website, who believe  or are under the impression the term or description "amateur" sort of denoted lack of experience and even lack of talent etc back then.

In my opinion, back then it did not denote and was not perceived that way at all with some of he really ones who became famous for even their first projects. All it meant was they did not accept pay.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()