Merion's minimal bunkering in 1915 and NOW: Seaview Origins

[Tom MacWood]

It was November 1909, not October...do you know what :- means at the end of a blurb?

[TEPaul]

"Thats true, but the other high profile Philadelphia courses, that opened around the same time (PV & Merion), had those involved in the design mentioned in those same major magazines. What made Seaview different? Of all people you would think Tilly would be sensitive to the crediting of an architect, or architects."




There is at least one on this website who asks endless questions such as the one above because apparently he can't even distinguish between the purpose of various articles written about various golf courses at various times and understand that the purposes of those various articles might be quite different. It seems the articles written by Tillinghast himself and by Tillinghast under the pseudonym "Hazard" about Seaview have to do with the opening of the golf course and the significant players/participants attached to that opening----eg extremely newsworthy in and of itself!

Other articles by reporters, including Tillinghast, were clearly done simply to review a golf course and its architecture and the purpose of an article like that would and generally did include who designed the course, and perhaps something about that architect.

A lot has gone on over the years at Merion, for instance, and every time something goes on there and is reported the architect is not necessarily mentioned unless of course the article's point and purpose is about the architecture of the golf courses.

But no matter the point of any article on any course, and how different that may be in particular articles, this constant questioner seems to assume that if the architect of record is not mentioned in every case and in every article that must mean there is some reason to suspect if the architect of record is actually historically accurate and to therefore it should be reasonable or worth discussing to open up the question of perhaps if it was someone else who may've been the architect, including some who were never really mentioned in regard to being the architect of record of that golf course.

[Tom MacWood]

Could you point us to any article or articles written by Tilly, at any time, that mentioned who designed Seaview?

[Phil_the_Author]

Tom,

Thank you for pointing that out to me, it is November. For some reason my database seems to be off by a month for several issues. I'll correct that

Here is one other for you. I chose it because it is right in the same basic timeframe. Tilly, writing as Hazard wrote this in "Eastern Pennsylvania Notes" in The American Golfer, May, 1913, No. 1, p. 34-39.

Note that he mentions EIGHT different courses that are currently under construction ranging from new  work to renovations without once mentioning the name of a single architect.

[Phil_the_Author]

"Could you point us to any article or articles written by Tilly, at any time, that mentioned who designed Seaview?"

Nope! All that means is that I can't think of any off the top of my head, though I'm inclined to think that he simply didn't. Can You?

[Tom MacWood]

It is true Tilly does not mention the architect/architects in that blurb, but the blurb isn't exactly comparable to an article is it? And I'd guess you could find other blurbs where Tilly mentioned the architect/architects of all those courses, couldn't you?

[Mike Cirba]

What reasons?

Tom,

At this juncture, it's probably beyond redundant for me to again point out that Hugh Wilson never sought the limelight, always was humble and non-assuming, probably didn't want to take the limelight off of his friend Clarence Geist and his giant 1/4 million project at Seaview, was almost the "accidental architect", as I'm sure his high-profile friends like Geist, Gimbel, Lloyd, et.al. sought him out more than he was seeking more pro bono work in golf architecture, always credited others before himself, and if that wasn't enough, all those years loomed the threat that those who designed golf courses might suddenly see their cherished amateur status being arbitrarily removed by the USGA.

This 1917 article found by Joe Bausch makes very clear that none of the men involved in architecture like Wilson were interested in much beyond designing and building good golf courses, and certainly not "name recognition", or product promotion.



Even by 1924, with the multiple changes Wilson had spearheaded over the previous dozen years to create a course much like we know Merion today, this article makes very clear that he wasn't a self-promoter, nor was he interested in anything but the excellence of the final result;







I really don't understand why you find all of this incomprehensible, Tom?

[Phil_the_Author]

Tom,

You're grasping at straws now. "It is true Tilly does not mention the architect/architects in that blurb, but the blurb isn't exactly comparable to an article is it? And I'd guess you could find other blurbs where Tilly mentioned the architect/architects of all those courses, couldn't you?"

The answer is NO. In the last article I posted, other than the Pine Valley mention, can you name any occasion where Tilly mentioned the architects of those other projects?

Take a good look at most of the articles posted on here and you'll see that the citations discussed are almost all "blurbs." Some mention names and others don't. The length of the article doesn't matter to the point you raised. Isn't that why you made an effort to prove that Tilly's NOT mentioning the name of an architect in his Seaview articles proved something?

Again, all the LACK of mentioning an architect by name proves or means is that the name was left out... nothing more...

[TEPaul]

"Could you point us to any article or articles written by Tilly, at any time, that mentioned who designed Seaview?"


MikeC and JoeB:

You guys seem both willing and more importantly able to point to at least the increasing and already long contemporaneous list of all the people and reporters who did mention who designed Seaview.

I suppose an appropriate subtext might also be what exactly the point was of any particular article written about Seaview, at any particular time.

[Tony_Muldoon]

I have tried to keep up but wonder if anyone has pointed out what seems as plain as the big chip on my shoulder to me...




A main reason why these gentlemen architects got the jobs to design the golf courses of the very rich, is in all probability because the very rich are tighwads, mean, close to a penny,  parsimonious, penny-pinching, scrimpy, sparing, stingy and tight. They love to get something for nothing.  Of course that may not be true for all of them, just the ones I've done business with.

[Sean_A]

I have tried to keep up but wonder if anyone has pointed out what seems as plain as the big chip on my shoulder to me...




A main reason why these gentlemen architects got the jobs to design the golf courses of the very rich, is in all probability because the very rich are tighwads, mean, close to a penny,  parsimonious, penny-pinching, scrimpy, sparing, stingy and tight. They love to get something for nothing.  Of course that may not be true for all of them, just the ones I've done business with.

Tony

Perhaps that is how they stay rich! 

Mike C

While I understand your idea of the template holes being defined by the hazards, I would disagree and suggest this is a simplistic PoV.  Just looking at the Redan hole one can see the bunkering is important, but not definitive.

Ciao

[Tom MacWood]

Tom,

Thank you for pointing that out to me, it is November. For some reason my database seems to be off by a month for several issues. I'll correct that

Here is one other for you. I chose it because it is right in the same basic timeframe. Tilly, writing as Hazard wrote this in "Eastern Pennsylvania Notes" in The American Golfer, May, 1913, No. 1, p. 34-39.

Note that he mentions EIGHT different courses that are currently under construction ranging from new  work to renovations without once mentioning the name of a single architect.

Are you sure that is the correct date? Tilly mentioned Colt & Crump at PV on numerous occasions; Tilly correctly mentions Bispham was responsible for the changes at Philadelphia; and I do not believe Overbrook, Woodbury and Manoa ever followed through on their contemplations therefore there was no architect involved. By the way it is silly to compare a one paragraph blurb to a full blown article reporting the opening of a new golf course.

[Mike Cirba]

Mike C

While I understand your idea of the template holes being defined by the hazards, I would disagree and suggest this is a simplistic PoV.  Just looking at the Redan hole one can see the bunkering is important, but not definitive.

Ciao

Sean,

That's ok...I understand your point philosophically, as well as your minimalist bent that looks first how a hole would perform without bunkers, and I'm gaining a greater appreciation of the same perspective each year.

I just think CB Macdonald would disagree with us.

CBM said: "Take a narrow tableland, tilt it a little from right to left, dig a deep bunker on the front side, approach it diagonally, and you have a Redan."

From a practical standpoint I also cannot stretch my mind around conceptualizing a road hole without a road hole bunker, or an eden without the Strath and Hill bunkers, or a short, without a fronting, nearly encircling hazard, or two side-strips of bacon along a biarritz that go together like ham and eggs, or a bottle hole without a diagonal strip of bunkers cutting through the fairway, or an Alps, without a cross-bunker across the front as Robert Lesley defined it, or a Sahara, without the need to carry a lengthy expanse of sand...and so on.

Frankly, I don't think that Hugh Wilson or Alex Findlay or CB Macdonald or any of these guys could either and that's what is germane to our proper historical context and understanding.

I think these guys also saw that bunkering as fundamental to those hole definitions, and Macdonald and Raynor sure seemed to think those bunkering schemes to be fundamental and sure repeated it on their respective courses.

[Tom MacWood]

I found this blurb in the Philadelphia Inquirer 4/9/1916...I believe the author was Joe Bunker.

It appears the theory that Pickering was brought over by Wilson to construct Seaview is a false one. Apparently Pickering ran a foul at Seaview as the greenkeeper later on.

[Mike Cirba]

I found this blurb in the Philadelphia Inquirer 4/9/1916...I believe the author was Joe Bunker.

It appears the theory that Pickering was brought over by Wilson to construct Seaview is a false one. Pickering ran a foul at Seaview as the greenkeeper later on.

Tom,

It looks like Pickering perhaps came over after Connellan left?   I posted that article earlier in this thread and asked if anyone had the date.

btw...is there a theory you'd like to advance, or some meaning you're constructing from the articles you posted with no attribution?

This might be a good time to spell out where you're going if you have an alternative viewpoint.

We seem to be circling in the water here a bit pointlessly at this juncture, and I for one am not looking for another interesting thread to go down the drain like the recent one detailing more of Crump's involvement at Cobb's Creek.

Thanks for keeping it moving ahead, please.

[Tom MacWood]

Yes, my theory is whoever originally designed the golf course in the spring of 1913 was not associated with club when it opened January 1915.

[Phil_the_Author]

Tom,

You asked, "Are you sure that is the correct date?"

Yes, it is the correct date.

"Tilly mentioned Colt & Crump at PV on numerous occasions;"
 
That is why I ALSO mentioned "In the last article I posted, other than the Pine Valley mention, can you name any occasion where Tilly mentioned the architects of those other projects?"

"Tilly correctly mentions Bispham was responsible for the changes at Philadelphia;" Yet he DOESN'T attribute the architectural design to him now does he? He simply states that Bispham, "has been personally directing the work..." This sounds more like he is overseeing the ongoing construction...

"and I do not believe Overbrook, Woodbury and Manoa ever followed through on their contemplations therefore there was no architect involved." Actually Tilly himself was invovled in a number of course designbs in the pre-WWI era which he mentioned in blurbs like this that either didn't take place or only did so a number of years later. So the act of not following through on plans doesn't have any bearing on whether plans were ever made and an architect was ever invovled.

"By the way it is silly to compare a one paragraph blurb to a full blown article reporting the opening of a new golf course... Again, that is simply your opinion. I disagree as the above blurb of my own shows that Tilly DID on a number of occasions mention new work being done and NAMED the architect in the BLURB...

[Mike Cirba]

Yes, my theory is whoever originally designed the golf course in the spring of 1913 was not associated with club when it opened January 1915.

Well, Tom...it's tough for me to understand that one when we know construction started in June 1913, and in October once the course was seeded it was reported that Hugh Wilson had been Geist's right hand man and had laid out the course.

Unless you have some further proof of someone actually designing the course instead of Wilson, I for one don't want to go down the road that Hugh Wilson was brought in simply again as construction foreman, as you tried to advance with your Merion theories.

I'm always interested in any other evidence you find and appreciate your level of research and enjoy engaging on productive discussions with you.   This probably isn't going there, however, unless you have additional information you'd like to present.

[Sean_A]

Mike C

While I understand your idea of the template holes being defined by the hazards, I would disagree and suggest this is a simplistic PoV.  Just looking at the Redan hole one can see the bunkering is important, but not definitive.

Ciao

Sean,

That's ok...I understand your point philosophically, as well as your minimalist bent that looks first how a hole would perform without bunkers, and I'm gaining a greater appreciation of the same perspective each year.

I just think CB Macdonald would disagree with us.

CBM said: "Take a narrow tableland, tilt it a little from right to left, dig a deep bunker on the front side, approach it diagonally, and you have a Redan."

From a practical standpoint I also cannot stretch my mind around conceptualizing a road hole without a road hole bunker, or an eden without the Strath and Hill bunkers, or a short, without a fronting, nearly encircling hazard, or two side-strips of bacon along a biarritz that go together like ham and eggs, or a bottle hole without a diagonal strip of bunkers cutting through the fairway, or an Alps, without a cross-bunker across the front as Robert Lesley defined it, or a Sahara, without the need to carry a lengthy expanse of sand...and so on.

Frankly, I don't think that Hugh Wilson or Alex Findlay or CB Macdonald or any of these guys could either and that's what is germane to our proper historical context and understanding.

I think these guys also saw that bunkering as fundamental to those hole definitions, and Macdonald and Raynor sure seemed to think those bunkering schemes to be fundamental and sure repeated it on their respective courses.

Mike

I don't disagree with anything you wrote above.  But stating that the template holes are defined by the bunkering is not nearly the same thing as CBM's quote: "Take a narrow tableland, tilt it a little from right to left, dig a deep bunker on the front side, approach it diagonally, and you have a Redan."  Fundamental and definitive are two related concepts, but not interchangeable.

Ciao

[Mike Cirba]

Sean,

Agreed, thanks.

Tom MacWood,

Who do you think asked Colt to inspect Merion and Seaview in May 1913?

[TEPaul]

"I have tried to keep up but wonder if anyone has pointed out what seems as plain as the big chip on my shoulder to me...

A main reason why these gentlemen architects got the jobs to design the golf courses of the very rich, is in all probability because the very rich are tighwads, mean, close to a penny,  parsimonious, penny-pinching, scrimpy, sparing, stingy and tight. They love to get something for nothing.  Of course that may not be true for all of them, just the ones I've done business with."


Tony:

Not only is that true in many cases with people like some of these mentioned here but in the overall case of the Wilson brothers, P&O some counterparts around the country from the USGA and their efforts in the area of golf agronomics and to set up the USGA Green Section was actually an effort to save American golf perhaps up to 15-20% of its over-all annual outlay by creating better economic efficiencies, as well as trying to prevent the commercial seed merchants from ripping off golf. Those so-call "agronomy letters" show that loud and clear.

An exception to that amongst that Philadelphia group seems to have been Geist who was known to be fairly "splashy" and that's probably one of the reasons for his well-known reputation as being gauche and originally as an "outsider."

[JESII]

I don't think these "Amateur Architects" were chosen to save a buck...in Wilson's letters to Oakley in November 1913 and March 1914 he clearly says Geist will pay whatever it costs...

I think these guys were chosen because they were going to be around to oversee the course(s) evolution...and I think that's invaluable.

There was even a thread on here not long ago about modern GCA's and how pretty much each individual's highest regarded course was (by coincidence?) the beneficiary of more time on-site than normal.

If you were building a course today, wouldn't you prefer the architect were around for several years as opposed to being finished with the task once the first shot was struck?

[Tom MacWood]

Sean,

Agreed, thanks.

Tom MacWood,

Who do you think asked Colt to inspect Merion and Seaview in May 1913?

Colt's 1913 trip was organized by Carters; every course he visited was a Carters customer, including Seaview.

[Tony_Muldoon]

Colt's 1913 trip was organized by Carters;  

Tom what evidence do you have of that?   That would mean he was working with Carters outside of Europe, where he was working against them.  Further he did not inform Suttons of that which seems out of character.

 every course he visited was a Carters customer, including Seaview.

Pre WW1 Suttons were not very active in the states.

[Mike Cirba]

Tom,

In that vein, were Merion and Seaview the only two courses in the Philadelphia/NJ area using Carter's and the only courses in the region he visited or were there others?

I'm guessing he had a pre-planned itinerary if it was a company-sponsored trip.   Could you tell us all of the courses he visited and I guess the obvious question would be how he let himself get waylaid from his purpose for a week to spend it at Pine Valley?

Thanks

[Tags:]

Tags: