MikeC:
On your post #167 I think I pretty much went through that whole "Merion" timeline in detail in post #136. My intention was to get this thread away from parsing the hell out of the meaning of just a couple of words in a newspaper article or newspaper article writers and to take it right into the recorded material fom Merion itself. Face it, the only possible place any credible newspaper article could ever come from anyway would be from the place and people from the place who were working on the project that was being written about.
Tom,
I agree and I prefer not to type out the timeline again but I do think it's important for making my next point that people understand when Macdonald was originally at Merion in June 1910 and what he did, when the Committee went to visit him at NGLA in March 1911 (and what was discussed), and when Macdonald returned for a day in early April 1911 and what he did at that time.
I say that because it occurred to me overnight that I think many folks here have interpreted the fact that there are/were a few template type holes at Merion as some proof that C.B. Macdonald had to be directly involved with the design.
Coupled with the fact that David's essay discovered that Wilson didn't go abroad until the spring of 1912, how possibly could Hugh WIlson and committee have already routed and seeded those template holes before he even went to see the originals unless CB Macdonald had done it for them?
It's a fair question, and on the face of it seems to make a lot of sense.
However, when one considers the fact that most of the holes as originally grassed in Sept 1911 were pretty much "blank pages", using only what natural features where available, and with very little in the way of bunkers, "mental hazards", or other man-made touches that would ultimately create the various strategies of each hole. Relatedly, if you think about the definitions of the Ideal Holes as identified by Macdonald, the vast majority are largely defined by their pre-prescribed bunkering patterns that serve to create the strategic choices and demands of each hole type.
Alex Findlay's June 1912 article gives us clear insight into the state of the course nine months after seeding when he states that it's too early to even comment on "the possibilities of the new course" and then mentions that it won't be until the late fall 1912 that Fred Pickering "will give it the finishing touches".
But, we also do know that the first iteration of Merion did have a few attempts at Template style holes in the style of CB Macdonald, including the redan 3rd, the Alps 10th, and the Eden green at the 15th.
How could those have been conceived or created by Wilson if he hadn't gone abroad yet?
Well, they likely came from Wilson and Committee's trip to NGLA in March 1911, after which the Merion minutes reflect;
"On our return, we re-arranged the course and laid out five different plans." Approximately a month later, on April 6, 1911, M&W came and spent a day onsite with the Committee and selected one plan in particular that they claimed would lead be equal to the seven best finishing holes on any inland course in the world.
That was the plan that went forward to the Merion board two weeks later, along with recommendations that they buy 3 acres near the railroad tracks to accommodate the proposed routing as well as purchase the land of the Francis Land Swap, which was necessary to get both the 15th green and 16th tee up in the northernmost part of the property.
The Merion Cricket Club minutes reflect that Wilson and the Merion Committee spent the first night of their visit to NGLA going over Macdonald's drawings of the great holes abroad, and then saw his representations of them the next day in person at NGLA.
I have to believe this spurred excitement and further discussion among the Merion group on their return such as "That mid-length par three we have to that high ridge over the barn as our 3rd hole on Plan 31 might be a lovely spot to try a redan, Rodney", or "Why, we have to climb up that hill for our 10th hole on Plan 17...might that be a whopping spot to try an Alps-green Dr. Toulmin?" I think the Findlay article gives us some very good insight when he states that the Alps Hole that Hugh Wilson "imagined" at Merion will "take a lot of making", even a full nine-months after planting.
And they clearly did try to build some template holes, and apparently not very well in terms of duplication. Just think about the subsequent discussions/arguments we've had here about whether or not the 3rd green was a redan, what with it's back to front slope and inability to permit a running shot. Or better yet, I don't think there's a person here who would argue that the original Alps 10th hole at Merion was either a) very much like the original, b) a very good golf hole, or c) aesthetically pleasing in the least.
Findlay clearly wasn't too keen on the whole "Alps at Merion" idea from his article, Tillinghast severely criticized the "Eden" 15th green, and even seven months after Findlay's article, it's interesting to read what "Far and Sure"(whoever he was) thought about other borrowed elements in his January 1913 article in American Golfer;
"It is too early to attempt an analytical criticism of the various holes for many of them are but rough drafts of the problems, conceived by the construction committee, headed by Mr. Hugh I. Wilson. Mr. Wilson visited many prominent British courses last summer, searching for ideas, many of which have been used. For example, an attempt to reproduce the Eden green at St. Andrews has been made on the fifteenth and, in my opinion, it has resulted in one of the few failures. The hole in question is a two-shotter and the sloping green is so keen and barren of undulations that the player is practically forced to "skittle" his approach in fear of getting above the hole. Many of the imported ideas of hazard formation are good, and the grassy hollows of Mid Surrey have been well introduced. On some of the sand mounds I noticed the growing of something which looked suspiciously like the bents of Le Touquet."
"However, I think that the very best holes at Merion are those which are original, without any attempt to closely follow anything but the obvious." So, it seems that Hugh Wilson and Committee were indeed absolutely inspired by what Macdonald showed them, and they clearly seemed to believe at least at first that creating some template holes was a good idea, but somewhere along the design/construction early evolution of the course this quickly morphed into just little "obviously stolen" touches here and there, such as the "Valley of Sin" in front of 16 green and away from wholesale semi-doppelgangers of "ideal holes" in the way that the Macdonald developed and popularized.
But, Tom Paul is right...the story of who was responsible for the design of Merion East is what it always was and exactly what Alan Wilson claimed...that Hugh Wilson and Committee designed the golf course with the great advisory assistance of CB Macdonald and Hugh Whigham who "advised as to
our plans.
Dave Schmidt and HenryE,
To a large extent I agree with both of your recent posts.
I'm very heartened that the tone here around this entire issues has improved considerably and I also agree that David's research and White Paper were well-constructed and ultimately served as the impetus for all of us going back and digging deep and ultimately learning much more about the origins and timelines of a most historic and beloved American golf course.