HW Wind and our understanding of golf architecture history

[Tom MacWood]

Tom MacWood said:

“HWW is largely responsible for creating and publicizing the stories of Merion, PVGC and PBGL, at the expensive of people like Macdonald, Colt and Egan.

His Merion story suggested Wilson travelled abroad in 1910 prior to designing the course. He also made the point the course had nothing in common with the NGLA, evidently not knowing the course he knew was the result of more than a decade of remodeling. His account at PV has Colt designing one hole - the 5th. There is no mention of Egan's dramatic overhaul of Pebble Beach prior to the 1929 US Am.

He obviously felt the less help these fellows had the more interesting the story, unfortunately its not factual. And we have seen first hand what happens when some of these long accepted tales are challenged. If thats not an illustration of Wind's impact I don't know what is.”


and…


“I don't believe Wind wrote about Wilson visiting CBM, although he mentions Macdonald prominently, comparing their trips abroad and the contrasting results. Wind wrote Wilson was not impressed by the blind holes like the Alps. He also wrote Wilson's trip was 7 months long, which became part of the myth.


Tom:

I can’t speak on this regarding PB and Egan but I sure can with Merion and Wilson and PV and Crump.

I think I can agree with you that in a sense HWW did perpetuate a few myths or mistaken facts about Wilson and Merion and Colt and PV, but he did not create those mistaken facts (myths) which did become pretty much accepted for quite a time. All he did is just repeat them directly out of club history books to a far wider reading audience then those club history books ever could've or did reach.

Wind was a very good researcher. His ability to uncover information was far in advance of his contemporaries. I know he interviewed old timers at PV, I'm sure he did the same at Merion. He obviously had access to old golf magazines too. I'm certain he used a combination of sources. His New Yorker article on Merion was quoted in the Merion history books, so obviously he did not rely on those sources. His massive PV article was written in the early 50s and before any of the histories were written.

Of course I am speaking specifically about Wilson and the trip abroad in 1910 and Colt only contributing the 5th hole at PV or contributing only the fix of the 5th hole from what Crump had planned for that hole compared to how it was built with Colt’s suggestion. Why Colt got so much attention for that particular hole I think is pretty fascinating and actually very important in a pretty in-depth architectural sense.

As a journalist it was Wind's responsibility to check on the reliability and accuracy of his sources. His source for part of the PV story was Col Baker, Colt's friend who in his eighties. He said Colt was paid $10,000. There were numerous contemporaneous articles that reported Colt designed PV. One old article quoted by Tilly years after Crump died said Colt was only responsible for the 5th hole. Wind went with that story and the $10,000. Neither story makes sense, and they make even less sense together.

The important thing for us to know is both when those myths got created and how. I know that and in spades because I actually know or knew the people who were responsible for them and why. Those are some interesting stories and two out of three of those people know now how their mistaken interpretations of previously existing documentation created those myths. I spoke to two of them about it and how it happened. The third I knew and spoke to but he died before I could explain how his mistaken interpretation happened. Both when and how of those kinds of things can teach people on here who don't have much familiarity with these clubs a ton about how this stuff happens if they will just keep and open mind rather than defending such things endlessly as their uninformed pet conspiracy theories or whatever with far less than complete information from those clubs themselves.

We can speculate how it happened, but I'm more interested in why it happened. I believe it goes back to what Peter P. said, Wind was weighing the historical accuracy against entertainment value.

HHW just took those stories right out of existing history books. I know that because I spoke to HHW too. My approximately hour long conversation with HWW covered some pretty interesting ground that I may not have appreciated the significance of until now or recently. Almost the very same conversation happened with me as well on some of these same subjects with Geoffrey Cornish.

I give more credit to Wind's research abilities than you do. Plus Wind wrote the articles prior to the histories being published, but it is a logical assumption.

The problem as I see it with some of your thinking and your theories, and Moriarty’s too, is you two tend to take these kinds of few isolated examples that are no doubt interesting and you two tend to extrapolate them into some much larger theory that because a few mistakes of facts were made perhaps decades later about the likes of Crump and Wilson that everything that was said about them with those courses and their architecture by so many people who knew them and saw them and worked with them was wrong and mistaken too and that ultimately they never could’ve done what they have been given credit for doing for so long.

That is where I believe you make your mistake in analyzing the likes of Crump and Colt with Pine Valley, and Wilson and Macdonald or Barker with Merion East and even Leeds and Willie Campbell with Myopia.

I believe the reason you feel that way is because you don't have all the facts. If you had all the fact I'm confident you would draw different conclusions.

Again, I am very glad you started this particular thread and subject because this is precisely what I have tried to and wanted to discuss with you and flesh out with you for so long now but you always seem to try to avoid the subject and the discussion of it with me somehow.

So here we are----let's have a good, a civil and a productive discussion on it.

I always try to be civil.

[Michael Dugger]

It brings a tear to my eye to see you two playing nice.

[TEPaul]

"It brings a tear to my eye to see you two playing nice.     "



MichaelD:

Are you serious or are you just kidding around? Even I can't tell anymore with some of yuz guys. With MacWood I think there are some real possibilities of the two of us being nice to each other again! But with Moriarty, the case is lost and closed and colder than cold. I've got about four IMs from him I just noticed from about a month ago in response to me asking him to get over it and come to the Walker Cup at Merion and we will show him a good time. Would you like me to forward them to you or do you think that is one of those kinds of things where the old Grande Dames of Philadephia would say: "It's just not done, My Dear!" 

[SBendelow]

In reference to reply #50...
Can someone explain why Wind in his several editions of 'The Story of American Golf" omitted any mention of the contributions of architects like Wm Bell, Tom Bendelow, Wm Diddle, Alex Findlay, Robert Harris or Perry Maxwell?   These gentlemen collectively accounted for more than one thousand golf courses in the early days of American golf.  Surely their contributions were worth inclusion. ??   Or, as suggested earlier, should Wind's book be more appropriately titled, The Wind Story of American Golf" ??

[Jeff_Brauer]

My only guess on that is that it is and was a star system.  Wind was writing for publications and to sell magazines, even with serious historical content - he probably had to focus on writing about something that would sell a few copies.  Unless he could make the Bendelow story kind of sexy, or the Diddlel story sexy (hey, that name has more double entendre potential at least) it would be less likely to be included.

[Michael Dugger]

"It brings a tear to my eye to see you two playing nice.     "



MichaelD:

Are you serious or are you just kidding around? Even I can't tell anymore with some of yuz guys. With MacWood I think there are some real possibilities of the two of us being nice to each other again! But with Moriarty, the case is lost and closed and colder than cold. I've got about four IMs from him I just noticed from about a month ago in response to me asking him to get over it and come to the Walker Cup at Merion and we will show him a good time. Would you like me to forward them to you or do you think that is one of those kinds of things where the old Grande Dames of Philadephia would say: "It's just not done, My Dear!" 

I am absolutely being serious, in a kidding way.

As two people who love golf course architecture, I didn't like seeing you two hatin' on each other all the time.