[TEPaul]

"Mike sent me an article relevant to my thoughts.  I'm not much for reading golf literature, let alone quoting it.  The article is "Art in Golf Architecture" by Max Behr, from the Bulletin of Green Section of the USGA, dated May 16, 1925."


John Kirk:

What you should read next from Max Behr is his article entitled "The Nature and Use of Penalty (Golf is a Sport, Not a Game)". That one might fairly blow your mind. His take on how a golfer should look at "Penalty" compared to how a guy like Crane felt a golfer should look at "Penalty" is one of the all time "glass half empty/glass half full" arguments!

[Charlie Goerges]

CharlieG:

Are you aware of what Max Behr wrote about the difference of and for the golf architect as an artist compared to the paint artist, due to the vast difference in their "mediums?"

Unfortunately I am not. If I am simply doing an ignorant re-hash, let me know and I'll desist. However, I will say that I was calling out not the difference in media, but the different purposes to which the media will be subjected. A couple hundred acres might make a fine museum piece under the right circumstances.

[Adam Clayman]

It is just so interesting to me that you would say something like that about Behr. I'm not sure what exactly you mean by Behr's understanding of human nature, but I'm wondering, if, by chance, you mean his belief and contention that most all golfers would not criticize (and want to change) something in golf architecture they perceived as being natural or a damn fine man-made facsimile of Nature, while they would criticize (and want to change) something they preceived to be clearly artificial and man-made. No Tom, I was not thinking about that specific belief. In the first few Behr quotes JK put on this thread he describes an example of the nature of Man the designer, where, without the aid of a geologic (topographical) compass, is limited in his ability to create quality classic long lasting GC art. Golf's uniqueness is not only limited to the sport but also in the construction of the medium. Rules that apply to LA do not necessarily apply to GCA.

If that is the case, as much as I admire Behr and his writing and philosophies, that is the one thing I believe he pretty much missed the boat on and was wrong about.

The only reason I say that is because now we have over eighty years to see the reactions of Man the Golfer to various types and styles of golf architecture since Behr wrote what he did and I think it has been pretty plain to see that Man the Golfer either doesn't notice those things or just doesn't really care. At this point, I'm even willing to consider that there may be more golfers in this world who actually PREFER the look and fact of artificiality in golf architecture than those who don't. I interpret Max’s comments as warnings because he knew human nature all too well. It should be of no surprise that Man the golfer would prefer that which makes the sport easier (i.e. Soft Flat Canvas). Behr said, “the enfeebled skill rejoices” predicting that loss of sportsmanship by getting away from the naturalistic .
   
If that is the case (and I'm not exactly contending that it is) I suspect I may know the reason for it, and most ironically it just may be the ultimate analogy Behr attempted to draw (without actually specifically stating it) between Man's inherent relationship with Nature compared to Man's inherent relationship to Man himself, and all that that analogy and comparison may entail.

On the other hand, I'm the eternal optimist and I'm also willing to consider that perhaps Man the Golfer has never really been shown enough of the truly natural in golf architecture to be able to appreciate it as Behr apparently believed he would.

I’d agree that Man the golfer hasn’t grown up with too many spots on this earth where that’s been possible for the last 70+ years, however, those few spots, even here in America, have been cherished by those sophisticated enough to appreciate the difference and likely have full memberships and/or tee sheets. Certainly now, that some designers are building naturalistically sensitive courses, Man the golfer has a chance to experience it, if’n we can get them to open their minds and eyes. So there is more than hope, there’s Bill, Ben, Tom, Mike(s), Gil, Jim(s), Dan(s), Dave(s), and now Slag, etc…etc.

The film business is the only analogy I could try to relate this to. Was John Wayne a great actor? Ashton Kuchar?  Commanding the highest fees because they are commercial should never be confused with quality. The best films are not the big budget ones. For those who cherish the art of film, the blockbuster pays for the artistic, if the producer is altruistic and wants to gamble by putting money into pushing the envelope of the art.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()