The importance in understanding PERSPECTIVE in researching golf...

[Tom MacWood]

One of my dreams is to see the Palestra.

Maybe Wayne will take you to a Penn game! 

Mike
I'm not sure that would be such a good idea. Every time I get near a basketball court I have tendency to throw elbows; its not something I do consciously, but it happens.

[TEPaul]

"I think it confirms my theory that Philly guys don't care all too much about what outsiders "think"."


MikeS:

I don't think I would agree with that. I think Philadelphia golf (GAP) cares as much about what outsiders think as any other regional or metropolitan golf area in America like it, and probably quite a lot more than some care about what outsiders think such as Boston. But like any other area like it I don't think they think much of a few outsiders who claim they want to get to know more about the history of golf here and about the histories and architecture of some of our famous clubs and architects and then proceed to almost immediately try to challenge it as wrong and to try to revise and rewrite it on this website by claiming some of our famous architects contributions are "myths" and glorified and heroified and that other architects who came through here have had their contributions minimized somehow because of it.

[Peter Pallotta]

Phil - good topic, and a challenging one. Just one thought: that one of the most nuanced aspects of gaining a sound history/historical perspective is determining the, for lack of a better term, 'value-systems' of those involved in making and writing about that history originally; the hierarchy of values at play at the time.  I think the challenge comes from the fact that the original makers/writers weren't necessarily aware of their own hierarchy of values, and so were rarely expilict about it; like us, that value system often times lies behind what we think or write, but isn't itself what we think or write about. And then, to compound the problem, many of the makers/writers developed their ideas not in a vacumn, but in response/opposition to other people/ideas, people/ideas that, if they were on the 'losing end' of the argument we don't even know about anymore -- and people who themselves had their own (implicit) hierarchy of values.  (he did man things brilliantly, IMO, but I don't think he got a handle on that)

Anyway, sorry, I find that I'm rambling. Last night I was reading a very good history of medieval philosophy, and was struck by all that was involved in the present day writer trying to gain a sound perspective on the hierarchy of values of those philosophers 1500 years ago.

Edit: Phil, to try to connect this with gca, here's an example of what I'm trying to say. Take Tilly - I'd imagine there were lots of reasons why he designed golf courses, why and how he did what he did, e.g. to make a living;  to grow the game; to master a craft etc. You may well know, but I don't, which of these aspects he thought most important and which least. But maybe that heirarchy was something that Tilly never discussed, even with himself (if you know what I mean). And that's an interesting challenge for the historian...

Peter  

[TEPaul]

"So with all of that background, why, just 5 years after they opened Aronimink, did they began looking for a different piece of property? Why did Donald Ross, especially considering Tilly's background with the club, get the job as architect? There must be a good story behind that... "

I would wager there is a good story behind that even if none of us are probably likely to find it. I don't think it's any secret that both Tillinghast and Macdonald could be contentious in some ways and were obviously more than a little controversial with certain people and clubs perhaps because of that. The history of Macdonald and The Creek Club may be the best recorded example of that I know of.

[Phil_the_Author]

Peter,

You bring up a good point, "Just one thought: that one of the most nuanced aspects of gaining a sound history/historical perspective is determining the, for lack of a better term, 'value-systems' of those involved in making and writing about that history originally; the hierarchy of values at play at the time..."

The idea of a "value system," as you pu it, is really just the start of what I believe, that is, that one must understand the "whole person" before one can appreciate the individual acts of greatness that they accomplished. Consider the example of one of the most challenging golf course projects ever... Baltusrol.

At first glance you might think that is more than a pretty bold statement to make, but look at the project as a whole. Baltusrol had already held MULTIPLE USGA championships when they approached Tilly about designing a second course for them. How did he convince them to scrap that and let him design 2 new courses and to do so by scrapping the old course? And then the club one-upped Tilly by saying that they'd let him do that but ONLY if he could keep 18 holes open for play THROUGHOUT the project!

This project certainly has many layers of behind the scenes stories involving a number of very powerful and influential men... So WHAT was it inside of Tilly the man that would make him believe that he had the ability and skills to pull this off? WHY did he believe it? To know that requires an understanding of the "whole man" and not just the golf course architect...

[RJ_Daley]

For you gents that have been pouring over these historical papers and articles, you must have some opinions of the "value systems" and the sway that the movers and shakers had related to how they knew and who they ran with, to make many of these golf course founding and expansion decisions, including picks of archies.  I found this history by Fred Byrod of Aronomink as having some comments by Byrod who was around long enough to have close understanding of many of the personalities and their 'value systems' to be able to explain such as related to the Aronomink story.  He knew these principles well.  Though he doesn't specifically say why they ended up with Ross over Tillie, he talks about Ross's motivation to come back an show the Philly guys a thing or two after being turned down by another Philly CC previously.  You gents that have the long hours of research into this millieu, must probably see things between the lines that we casual folk don't quite get.

https://aronimink.memberstatements.com/tour/tours.cfm?tourid=4597

But, it seems to me after reading the above Aronomink history, that Fred Byrod must have written much more on the Philly golf scene in the earliest days, and I don't recall ever seeing anyone point to his writing with any citations to bolster any of the previous arguments on the Merion thread.  Why is that..... or did I not read that week of debate?  

[TEPaul]

"But, it seems to me after reading the above Aronomink history, that Fred Byrod must have written much more on the Philly golf scene in the earliest days, and I don't recall ever seeing anyone point to his writing with any citations to bolster any of the previous arguments on the Merion thread.  Why is that..... or did I not read that week of debate?"

RJ:

I remember Fred Byrod well. I got to know him pretty well. He would come out to a few of the big amateur (GAP) championships around here probably because he was just interested. During my time the pimary golf tournament reporter was a fascinating guy named Mayer Branschein. Mayer covered all our GAP class A tournaments and his Inquirer reporting was good and comprehensive. I still have a whole drawer of all the clippings over about 20 years. It's not like that anymore in Philly----that paper hardly devotes anything to golf anymore and certainly not amateur tournament golf.

Mayer Branschein was amazing in how he took really comprehensive notes while on site at those tournaments. He did it all on a scorecard in handwriting so small I could never make any of it out.

Fred was old but he sure wasn't old enough to have been around until about 20 years after Merion East was created so Fred Byrod was not one of the Philly reports around for that. But we had plenty of other good ones back then most of whom Joe Bausch has now found.

[Norbert P]

  Hitler Saved My Life

   By Jim Riswold

http://www.esquire.com/features/essay/ESQ0905HITLER_164

and after you read that humorously tragic story, as all good comedy is, here is his reasoning from his perspective on how to deal with bad people.

http://creativity-online.com/?action=news:article&newsId=119094&sectionId=unleashed

[DMoriarty]

Mike Sweeney,

Your description of Philadelphia and the Philadelphia Syndrome reminds me of what we used to say about Butte, Montana, when I had the pleasure of living there in the 1980's, a few years after the Berkeley Pit was shut down.   But in Butte it was the Butte Irish brawling with the Butte Italians (or some other discrete and insular ethic group,) except when anyone from outside of Butte showed up.  Then it was just Butte against the World.   I'll steer well clear of any towns that are tougher than Butte.     You'd never guess it, but at one time Butte was a pretty important place, and a center for commerce, culture, and entertainment for a pretty large section of the the nation.  But when I was there, Butte had fallen from grace and had fallen hard.  Here is a pretty decent article that sets some of this out:  http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/magazine/ah/1997/2/1997_2_57.shtml

No doubt Butte was always a tough and independent town, but I cannot help but think that the chip on its shoulder had something to do with its fall from importance in the nation and the World.   Whether this is the case or not, Butte was a much different place in beginning of last Century as compared to the beginning of this century.   And it would be a mistake to equate the modern characteristics of Butte, Montana now with the characteristics of Butte, America then.

While Butte is an extreme case, alot has changed in all our major cities, including Philadelphia.  It is safe to say that, like Butte, Philadelphia occupies a very different place on the World stage than it did in 1910.  Surely attitudes have changed as well.  As Phil says, it is all about Perspective. 

And through doing my best to look through the eyes of those who were there, I see no traces of what you call a Philadelphia Syndrome, at least when it comes to Early Merion.     
--  M&W didn't show up at Merion's door uninvited, Merion sought them out and were glad to have him.
--  The Site Committee Report from July 1, 1910 states that the land was chosen based largely on M&W opinions.
--  Wilson was going to him for advice from the very beginning of his involvement in the project.
--  I've seen no indication that Wilson and his Committee were cajoled into going to NGLA for help with the layout.   They seem to have gone voluntarily, and Wilson was very greatful for the help.
--  Merion even brought them back to the site to inspect go over the land again, and to chose the final routing.
--  We've been told that, again, in April 1911, the Site Committee present the plan as the one chosen by M&W.  Nothing apparently written that resembled 'screw that New Yorker; we're going with our man Hugh.'
--  Wilson continued to seek out his advice and help even after the course had been planned.

It hardly sounds like, at the time, Merion had an issue with going to a New Yorker for help.   

Additionally, Merion went to Washington D.C. and England for advisors on growing grass, found their course builder in Boston (but he had previously worked at NGLA)  found Hugh Wilson in Boston as well.   Found an early pro in North Berwick.  Wilson went abroad to learn.   

So whatever Philadelphia Syndrome exists now (and that is your description, not mine,) it is three or four generations removed from what was going on then, and those three or four generations obviously must have changed some things. 

[Norbert P]

 Excerpt from a blog at SnarkMarket.com    I believe by somebody named Robin.

" . . . Think of the "uniforms" of New York and Silicon Valley: suits vs. sandals. How do those divergent skins affect the way you think about yourself and your work? When you put on a uniform, official or otherwise, you're not just putting on a pair of pants. You're putting on an arsenal of signals and assumptions—many of them hard-won over decades or centuries by other wearers of the same duds.

When you put on a uniform, you're summoning some of that spirit to your side! Jeez, it's like a pagan ritual if you think about it that way. "O great god of hipster awesomeness, aid me this day. Lend me thy credibility.  . . . "

 

   My take: from one extreme to the other, behind our efforts to remain unique individuals, we all have subconscious goals of presenting our tribal endeavors of belonging and statusal* ambitions of winning.






* It's a word, now!

[Jim_Kennedy]

Why did Donald Ross, especially considering Tilly's background with the club, get the job as architect? There must be a good story behind that...-Philip Young

Wasn't J.B. McGovern an associate of Ross', and a member of the club at the time?

[Mike Sweeney]

At first glance you might think that is more than a pretty bold statement to make, but look at the project as a whole. Baltusrol had already held MULTIPLE USGA championships when they approached Tilly about designing a second course for them. How did he convince them to scrap that and let him design 2 new courses and to do so by scrapping the old course? And then the club one-upped Tilly by saying that they'd let him do that but ONLY if he could keep 18 holes open for play THROUGHOUT the project!

This project certainly has many layers of behind the scenes stories involving a number of very powerful and influential men... So WHAT was it inside of Tilly the man that would make him believe that he had the ability and skills to pull this off? WHY did he believe it? To know that requires an understanding of the "whole man" and not just the golf course architect...

Clearly Tilly was not limited by linear thinking. He could see a The Big Picture AND he was able to execute on a specific plan. My view is that Merion and Hugh Wilson had a similar perspective. The difference is Merion and Wilson only wanted to do it once. Tilly had to move around in order to execute on his visions for a career in architecture.

In that era, there appears to be a celebration for men who took on big diverse task. Today, we tend to celebrate the men who specialized or excels in one particular field. Whatever happened to the three sport athlete?

[DMoriarty]

Mike Sweeney, as I explained in my post above about what you describe as a "Philadelphia Syndrome" I think you may be projecting current perspectives back through time, at least with regard to Hugh Wilson.  The Hugh Wilson I have studied does not seem to be the man you describe.   Rather than taking it all on himself he (or Merion) was very aware of the importance using the top experts in their fields. He was also  aware of his own limitations and weaknesses, and was willing to defer to that expertise when it was greater than his own.   Initially at Merion, he seems to have done a lot of deferring, given that those experts around him knew much more than he did.   But he was a fast learner and over time perhaps he gained confidence and became more of an expert himself.   

[Mike Sweeney]

David,

I saw your post and I just have a different PERSPECTIVE than you, Tom Paul, Mike Cirba and Tom MacWood as none of you are from Philadelphia.

It is 1909 in Philadelphia, Shibe Park opens in Philadelphia. It is built by local contractor William Steele who by the way is now a fifth generation firm in Philadelphia. They were also the Architects. It cost over $450,000 and was viewed by many as the most luxurious baseball park of its day. The Philadelphia Athletics would go on to win the 1910, 1911, 1913 World Series. Steele arguably built the world first skyscraper too.



Penn won the National Championship* in football in 1908. "On Thanksgiving Day afternoon (November 28), a crowd of 25,000 turned out in Philadelphia to watch unbeaten Pennsylvania host unbeaten Cornell. Quarterback Albert Miller guided Pennsylvania to a 17-4 win. Though Penn "found the boys from the shores of Lake Cayuga a harder proposition than she looked for", wrote a New York Times reporter, they "closed the season without once drinking from the bitter cup of defeat, and to-night her followers are claiming at least equal rank with Harvard."

The 1908 Army Navy game is played at Franklin Field:



Philadelphia was on a sports role. It was my mistake to attribute Philadelphia Syndrome to you. What I believe is that there was and probably still is a quiet confidence about Philadelphia. Of course they will go out to ask advice from others, but in the end, they do it themselves.

It is my perspective and belief that this Philadelphia tradition continues at Merion. When Merion redid the bunkers did they not choose Lansdale native Tom Fazio?

Gil Hanse has been the other modern architect that has done work/consulted with Merion. Obviously you know where his office is located and who works for him.

[Tom MacWood]

Mike
Philadelphia also has a long history of producing great architects and architecture too, arguably more great architects over a longer period than any city in America. That being said I don't think Philadelphia is unique in relying on local talent; I think you will find that is true with just about every major city.

Let me add some historical perspective to what was happening golf wise in Philadelphia around 1910. Philadelphia golf was in a shambles in the early 20th C. They were being dominated by NY and Boston in the Lesley Cup, and unlike those cities, and you can add Chicago and Pittsburgh to the list, they had failed to produce a single golfer who could compete on a national level. There was a great deal of soul searching in Philadelphia at the time, and they came to the conclusion the quality of their golf courses was largely to blame, and those mediocre golf courses were built by home grown amateurs and local pros. It was only natural that they would look elsewhere for expert help: Barker (NY), CBM (NY), Travis (NY), Findlay (Boston), Colt (England) and Park (Scotland).

[TEPaul]

"They were being dominated by NY and Boston in the Lesley Cup,"


Tom:

That is true. Being the expert researcher you are do you know and can you tell us what Philadelphia did about that with the Lesley Cup? By the way, it wasn't Boston, it was Massachussets!

By the way, if any of you guys want to really understand the ethos in that early era that includes the golf and clubs of Philadelphia like Merion (MCC) just before and after the turn of the century you would do well to read some of the works of E. Digby Baltzell. Does anyone on here know anything about him, his works and career? Have you ever read Finegan's "A Centennial Tribute to Philadelphia Golf, Tom MacWood? Is that where you got your historical perspective of Philadelphia golf back then you felt constrained to inform us about?

[Mike Sweeney]

There was a great deal of soul searching in Philadelphia at the time, and they came to the conclusion the quality of their golf courses was largely to blame, and those mediocre golf courses were built by home grown amateurs and local pros. It was only natural that they would look elsewhere for expert help: Barker (NY), CBM (NY), Travis (NY), Findlay (Boston), Colt (England) and Park (Scotland).

Tom,

Is this a theory of yours or do you have evidence? One of us has lived there and one of us has not.

[Tom MacWood]

Mike
Its not theory. I presented some of the evidence in my George Crump essay.

TEP
It was Boston until 1909 when Philadelphia proposed the teams be expanded to Penn, Mass and NY. That is also covered in my Crump essay.

[Steve_ Shaffer]

Tom,

Wasn't the famous saying, "In Boston, it's what you know, in New York, it's how rich you are and in Philadelphia, it's who your parents are, " attributable to Baltzell, the long time University of Pennsylvania sociology professor. By the way, he popularized the usage of WASP and wrote many books:

Philadelphia Gentlemen: The Making of a National Upper Class (1958)
American Business Aristocracy (1962)
The Protestant Establishment: Aristocracy and Caste in America (1964)
Puritan Boston and Quaker Philadelphia: Two Protestant Ethics and the Spirit of Class Authority and Leadership (1979)
The Protestant Establishment Revisited (1991)
Judgment and Sensibility: Religion and Stratification (1994)
Sporting Gentlemen: Men's Tennis from the Age of Honor to the Cult of the Superstar (1995)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E._Digby_Baltzell

My theory on "Perspective" and even Moriarity's Quest is that he should have been a Penn or Princeton professor and his request for access to MCC's minutes probably would have been granted. He lacked proper "status."

[TEPaul]

MikeS:

There was a good deal of soul-searching about the lack of quality of the courses in Philadelphia in the first decade or so of the 20th century (it most certainly motivated Crump to do Pine Valley). However, most of the theme of the so-called "Original Philadelphia School of Architecture" (Thomas, Wilson, Crump, Flynn, Tilly) is they did pretty much the exact opposite of what Tom MacWood just said----eg they did not turn to outsiders to do it for them, they did it themselves right here in a remarkably collaborative way as they all knew each other so well and even played golf regularly with each other. Tom MacWood has something of a fixation that these local legends must have been "myths" so he constantly scratches around looking for outsiders who must have done it for them. Problem is about the best he could come up with on someone like HH Barker and Merion is a train trip from New York to Georgia in the beginning of 1910. That's some pretty powerful and conclusive evidence that Barker routed and designed Merion East, as Tom has been contending, don't you think?

[Mike Sweeney]

My theory on "Perspective" and even Moriarity's Quest is that he should have been a Penn or Princeton professor and his request for access to MCC's minutes probably would have been granted. He lacked proper "status."

Steve,

If David went to Haverford or Episcopal for high school, Princeton would probably be okay. Otherwise it is a litttttle too close to New York. 

Tom,

I am headed out for the weekend, so I can't review your Crump essay now. Unfortunately for you, my theory will probably only be strengthened this weekend after playing golf with three Philly guys at Hidden Creek.  They have absolutely no interest in who I play/lose to at Yale, but they sure are going to try and get me to pay for lunch after a match.

[TEPaul]

"Wasn't J.B. McGovern an associate of Ross', and a member of the club at the time?"


JimK:

McGovern was a well respected member of Aronomink (on the green committee too) when he became involved with Ross and Aronimink and became his Philadelphia associate.



"TEP
It was Boston until 1909 when Philadelphia proposed the teams be expanded to Penn, Mass and NY. That is also covered in my Crump essay."


Tom:

Actually, that's not true. The Lesley Cup was formally created in 1905.

This is not from your Crump essay but from William Quirin's history book on The Lesley Cup:

      "Lesley was an advocate of the highest standards of sportsmanship and looked upon the matches as an opportunity to bring together the best players from each district for high-level competition. He also wished to provide a forum for the exchange of ideas and information about the game, still in it infancy.
       Formal discussions among the three golf associations began in early 1905, and the rules governing the annual competition were formalized. The rules were ratifiedon July 15, 1905 by Daniel Chauncey, president of the Metropolitan Golf Association (New York), Samuel W. Heebner, president of the Golf Association of Philadelphia (Philadelphia), and G. Herbert Windeler, president of the Massachusetts Golf Association (Massachusets). The presidents of the tree associations were appointed Trustees of the Cup and, as a committee, had full power to make all arrangements for competition."



In your Crump essay you said this about the Lesley Cup:

"In the inaugural 1905 Lesley Cup, a tri-city match between New York, Philadelphia and Boston, Crump was once again representing his city."



Perhaps if you can convince Moriarty to shitcan his entire essay "The Missing Faces of Merion" and start all over again or just accept Merion's own history and Hugh Wilson's actual and factual part in it, he can get you to fix that mistake you made about The Lesley Cup being Boston instead of Massachusetts.

[Mike Sweeney]

MikeS:

There was a good deal of soul-searching about the lack of quality of the courses in Philadelphia in the first decade or so of the 20th century (it most certainly motivated Crump to do Pine Valley). However, most of the theme of the so-called "Original Philadelphia School of Architecture" (Thomas, Wilson, Crump, Flynn, Tilly) is they did pretty much the exact opposite of what Tom MacWood just said----eg they did not turn to outsiders to do it for them, they did it themselves right here in a remarkably collaborative way as they all knew each other so well and even played golf regularly with each other. Tom MacWood has something of a fixation that these local legends must have been "myths" so he constantly scratches around looking for outsiders who must have done it for them. Problem is about the best he could come up with on someone like HH Barker and Merion is a train trip from New York to Georgia in the beginning of 1910. That's some pretty powerful and conclusive evidence that Barker routed and designed Merion East, as Tom has been contending, don't you think?

Just to add one last piece of PERSPECTIVE, here is Gil Hanse from his 2000 GCA interview:

___________________________________________________________________________

3. Why don’t the ‘other’ Philadelphia area courses (ie. not Pine Valley and Merion) receive more recognition?

I believe that the Philadelphia area is second only to the NY metro area as far as quality of golf courses is concerned. This may not even be a fair comparison in that the NY metro area draws from a much larger and more diverse area (Westchester, Long Island, and northern New Jersey) whereas the Philadelphia region is much more compressed. We are certainly blessed with a large number of great ’second tier’ clubs. Even in Philadelphia, when golf courses are discussed it is always prefaced with ‘aside from Pine Valley and Merion’. I also think that having two of the greatest golf courses in the world within such close proximity, tends to detract from the supporting cast.

The other factor that I think is at play in Philadelphia is the William Flynn factor. Philadelphia has tended to be very parochial when it comes to the design of its golf courses. Toomey and Flynn were responsible for the vast majority of the ‘other’ courses in Philadelphia. During the 50’s and 60’s, the Gordon’s and George Fazio designed most of the courses to come on line in Philadelphia during this period. More recently Tom Fazio has returned to his roots, and we have enjoyed a good reputation in our adopted home town. This factor I think has limited the variety of courses in Philadelphia, which may have hurt the overall perception of the courses in this town. While Flynn built many solid designs, none could be called spectacular in the vein of Pine Valley or Merion. This leads to a core group of solid ’second tier’ clubs that cannot fail to impress with their design integrity, and they provide the depth of quality in Philadelphia that is lacking in other metropolitan areas.

[TEPaul]

"By the way, he popularized the usage of WASP and wrote many books:"

Steve:

Digby didn't just popularize that term WASP, he invented it. Remarkably, while sitting in his cramped office at Penn back in the 1960s and while talking about that term he allowed as how he felt that the term should have been ASP and not WASP because he felt "White" and "Anglo Saxon" was pretty Goll-danged REDUNDANT!

My response to that was: "I don't know Digby, maybe you've never seen any black or yellow Anglo Saxons but I'm sure I have even though it was generally pretty late at night in NYC after some pretty serious partying!"

[Tom MacWood]

MikeS:

There was a good deal of soul-searching about the lack of quality of the courses in Philadelphia in the first decade or so of the 20th century (it most certainly motivated Crump to do Pine Valley). However, most of the theme of the so-called "Original Philadelphia School of Architecture" (Thomas, Wilson, Crump, Flynn, Tilly) is they did pretty much the exact opposite of what Tom MacWood just said----eg they did not turn to outsiders to do it for them, they did it themselves right here in a remarkably collaborative way as they all knew each other so well and even played golf regularly with each other. Tom MacWood has something of a fixation that these local legends must have been "myths" so he constantly scratches around looking for outsiders who must have done it for them. Problem is about the best he could come up with on someone like HH Barker and Merion is a train trip from New York to Georgia in the beginning of 1910. That's some pretty powerful and conclusive evidence that Barker routed and designed Merion East, as Tom has been contending, don't you think?

TEP
Let me interject some historical perspective to your Philadelphia School. Tilly made his reputation as a nationally prominent golf architect outside Philadelphia. The same is true with Thomas. William Flynn, who arguably produced more of Phildephia's top courses than anyone, is a Bostonian. He is charter member of the Boston School. Crump engaged Colt, the top architect in the world. And lastly Wilson did design the finest public course in America (widely acknowledged according to Mike), so I will give it to him.

In regards to Barker, correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't it reported in November 1910 that Merion had seccured him to design their new course? Do you know of any other similar reports?