From the Mayan Palace yardage book:
“Many golfers have heard of the Redan Hole, which was made famous by the original Redan, the 15th at historic North Berwick in Scotland. It is a concept that has inspired countless par-3 holes around the world, and in its simplest terms, means a hole that is protected on three sides.”
That is freakin' brilliant!
____________________________________________________
I think the 17th at Sawgrass is protected on 3 sides. Is it a Redan? The 16th at Crail Balcomie is protected on 3 sides but not a fourth (the right). Is it a Redan?
Because it is protected the fourth side as well the 17th at Sawgrass must be a Redan Plus. Or a Redando Magnifico in Latin.
________________________________________________
I don't think the Redan can be defined with one. two or three elements. Its a very complex set features which come together to make the hole what it is. Perhaps this is why there are very few, if any, true copies of the hole.
Ciao
Sean, I am glad you chimed in here because I felt like we had hijacked that other thread so I stopped posting. I'll gladly hijack one of Bill McBride's threads because he probably has it coming anyway.
There is a hole called "The Redan" at North Berwick and it is famous and I have heard it is great, and it was used liberally in America as an example of a great golf hole. But those who have studied the hole have abstracted from the actual hole a number of principles, concepts, and characteristics that they believe make the hole great. (Or, more likely, they already understood that these principles, concepts, and characteristics could make a hole great and were using the hole at North Berwick as an example to convey that information to an audience who had not been exposed to great golf design.
The brilliance of applying abstract principles instead of trying to physically reproduce a certain expression of those principles, is that, while a reproduction will necessarily fail as different from the original as a result of the different setting, the application of the abstract principles has a chance of succeeding in a variety of settings and circumstances, whether they end up the same as at NB or not.
And this I think is what you are missing. You say you realize that CBM and others were not trying to build replicas of NB's Redan, but then you condemn these holes for being called "Redans" when they fall short as replicas of North Berwick's Redan. But the abstract "redan concept" (as CBM and HJW sometimes called it) has applications in "infinite variations" on any course. The word "redan" was not a "homage" to NB's Redan, but a word representing
the abstractions which underlie it.
Another way to look at it is that N.B.'s Redan is just another unique expression of the strategic concepts which exist as abstractions separate from that tangible hole. (For example Mackenzie writes of designing a hole with very similar strategic concepts before he ever saw or studied NB's Redan.) The application of these Redan concepts is called creating a Redan Hole, and these are called the redan concepts because NB's hole called the Redan was a famous, a terrific hole, and the one CBM and others used to express the concepts underlying its greatness.
An example of how the concepts underlying something tangible can be applied in a very different situations with different results, yet the name can remain the same:
North Berwick's Redan Hole. As I am sure you know it was reportedly named after a great Russian-held fortress at Sebastovol during the Crimean War, a fort that was eventually taken by the British and French but only after a year's fighting and at great loss of life. Here is a rendering of part of the interior of the Redan, copies of which are for sale at
www.altair.co.uk/printspre1900pg4.html:
And here is the description and attribution:
Interior of the Great Redan. A view of a portion of the interior. The Redan and was shaped with flanking parapets extending from each extremity. Each side was 225 ft. in length, and mounted nine 68 pounders, there was also one 68 pounder in the angle, and five in each of the flanking parapets, in all 29 guns. The exterior parapets was averaged from 30 to 35 ft. in width along the entire front, and was from 8 to 10 ft. in height, and was formed of sandbags, gabions, fascines, new trees and poles tied together in bundles. The lines in the background show the trenches and approaches of the allies. Engraved by H. Bibby from a photograph by Robertson of Constantinople. London Printing and Publishing Company 1856. Steel engraving, sheet size measuring approximately 10.5 x 7 inches. £25 Not much like NB's Redan, is it? Sure there are some similarities - for examples, the location on top of a plateau and the 8 to 10 foot parapets extending out to protect the fortress. But would you argue that North Berwick's "Redan" shouldn't be called a "Redan," because it is not an accurate copy? To name just a few differences, it is not the same size as the original, the original sits up much higher, and of course their are the 29 canons for protection.
For that matter, the famous Redan at Sebastovol wasn't really technically a Redan either, because the term described only a particular type of escarpment in a fortress, not an entire fortress. So should we quit calling it the Redan? ( I think that the military definition of the term is useful to understanding the essence of the greatness of the concepts, but that is beside the point.)
Or closer to Golf,
how about the CAPE HOLES. The original was "
called the Cape Hole because the green extends out into the sea with which it is surrounded upon three sides. It is today one of the most individual holes in existence and there is probably not another like it anywhere." (CBM, 1914) But almost immediately the meaning changed to also refer to holes without water on three sides, where their was no "cape" at all. Sand substituted, or other types of trouble. And soon after its creation the original "Cape Hole" lost its "cape" but kept its name, and eventually the term "cape hole" came to be associated with the condition of the drive and not the condition of the green. Like the Redan Hole, a combination of a number of different strategic characteristics underlied the greatness of the hole, and it has been the strategic characteristics that have been carried forward with the name, not the exact specifications of the original.
Bottom line is that with golf holes their are no Protected Designation of Origin rules like with wine. And at least with regard to the old holes, designers are free to use the underlying ideas and concepts however they like, and even to use the names of the originals to explain the concepts. I'd argue that this was very positive and necessary at the time these holes were being built, because the common reference point "the Redan" was an effective means of conveying abstract concepts that are crucial to quality golf. For you to claim that they weren't really building Redans inaccurately describes their method and purpose, and used the term in an inconsistent manner from the way they used it themselves. It is not for to define for them what a Redan was. It is up to us to learn what they meant by the term.