Prodigy versus Master

[Ian Andrew]

A prodigy is someone who is blessed with a clear artistic vision from a very early age. This is not to be confused with knowing that you want to be an architect since about half of all current architects talk about wanting to design holes from a young age. The prodigy is the artist who at an early age possesses a clear vision of what they are trying to do. They are often the ones who talk about what they don’t like and see themselves as the ones to bring change to the status quo. The wonderful aspect of a prodigy is they tend to acquire the skills they need at an early age and through the clarity of their vision often have great success right from the outset. A prodigy is the artist that we tend to pay the most attention to, particularly while they are alive, because they excite us through their personality and work. The prodigy has the rare ability to create and “walk away” without much backward reflection on the work. They see each built vision as a perfect expression of that moment and appreciate for what it is.

Golf architecture has almost no prodigies.

Most great architects are Masters. The Master is equal to the prodigy in terms of talent. But their route to a successful expression of that talent is much, much longer. Like the prodigy they also know what they want to accomplish, but unlike the prodigy they rarely understand how to get there. They usually begin the journey without clarity and much of the early work is setting the table for what is to come in the future. They obtain clarity through exploration. They learn, work, experiment, seek new ideas, create, assess, refine, create and so on, often for decades until through determination and inherent ability they find what they are looking for. The main reason for this drawn out approach is they seek perfection. Even upon the completion of their most successful work they will often be surprisingly self critical of what they have created. It’s the determination to find perfection that drives them to the heights of expression that we admire.

Golf architecture has had a series of Masters.


Art forms like painting have see many prodigies like Picasso burst upon the scene and blow the art world away at a very early age, yet golf architecture sees so few.

Is it the cost of the canvas? The size of the canvas? A larger learning curve? Or simply that many of the greats didn’t begin with the profession and turned to golf design as a second part of their life?

[Mac Plumart]

I think it is based on the fact that painters can put their art into practice and create a piece and then sell it, while golf course architects need to first get hired and funded before they can even begin to break ground and create their masterpiece. 

Also add in the fact that the golf course is usually the centerpiece of a business operation rather than a frivilous add-on accent piece to a room or decor and you've got apples and oranges.

Thoughts?

[Tom_Doak]

Ian:

I think Mac's got it, mostly.  You can't be a prodigy in golf without a client [although I've heard a couple of sons of architects, such as P.B. Dye, make some pretty fun claims about what they were able to do when they were teenagers].

The other part is, nobody really can build a golf course all by themselves.  I tried, my first time out, and did okay ... but I realized that the more help I got, the better it could turn out.

[Kalen Braley]

I always figured it was The Prodigy that turned into The Master.

Something along the lines of how it was portrayed in the movie "Amadeus" where young Mozart was brilliant from day one, and Antonio Salieri realized his "mediocrity" after all the hard work, blood, sweat, and tears...as his work didn't have the genius of Mozart

Everyone else is just at some level of mediocre I suppose...

[Peter Pallotta]

Ian - I think being a prodigy is mostly a matter of technique, while achieving mastery is a more a matter of temperament. 

A prodigy requires talent -- that can be in-born, or, if it is solely a matter of technique, acquired fairly quickly. A master requires talent, yes,  but also ideals and experience, and that requires time.

Peter

[Ian Andrew]

I think being a prodigy is mostly a matter of technique, while achieving mastery is a more a matter of temperament. 

Peter,

I found that very interesting to read and something I'll think about some more.

[Ian Andrew]

The other part is, nobody really can build a golf course all by themselves. 

Tom,

They can still lead a team of people and make all the decisions.
We have quite a few examples of people building their own courses without any previous experience.

Or are you saying that novice still requires experienced people just to get something in the ground?

[Mac Plumart]

The other part is, nobody really can build a golf course all by themselves. 

Tom,

They can still lead a team of people and make all the decisions.
We have quite a few examples of people building their own courses without any previous experience.

Or are you saying that novice still requires experienced people just to get something in the ground?

Ian...

I put this post up on the "Business and Golf Architecture" thread.  Perhaps we are touching on similiar concepts. 

...it seems like a lot of golf's timeless gems were built by non-professional golf course architects... Leeds, Emmet, Fownses, Macdonald, Wilson, Crump, Thomas, Behr et al. They didn't really care what the entire world of golfers thought about what they did because ultimately they weren't doing it for them.

Are these guys prodigies in your mind?  They were not subject to the business pressure side of the equation and built works of art.

[Tom_Doak]

The other part is, nobody really can build a golf course all by themselves. 

Tom,

They can still lead a team of people and make all the decisions.
We have quite a few examples of people building their own courses without any previous experience.

Or are you saying that novice still requires experienced people just to get something in the ground?

The novice still requires experienced people just to get something in the ground.  Unless he is going to get on the bulldozer himself, he's going to be influenced by the guys on the machines, or the guy who brought them to the party.  If you look back at all those examples of people building their own course without any previous experience, in 95% of them, you can find someone with experience -- the greenkeeper who helped Mr. Fownes, Crump's laundry list of experienced friends, and so on.

[Peter Pallotta]

Ian - thanks, but you probably don't need to think about it anymore, because, from what i know about you (from your posts), you're actually living it, whereas I'm only talking about it.  I don't mean to flatter or embarrass you -- but it was you I was thinking of when I wrote that post.  A devoted and respectful student who, with time and effort and experience and maturity, has arrived at a place -- and a temperament -- where he is ready to take on the mantle and the responsibility of mastery/being a master. You will probably demur and say that you're not there yet, but then I'd ask "where is there?" and "compared to whom'?  Mastery I think is a subtle and personal form of expression, and it takes many forms. Part of mastery is the self-confidence and peace of mind to embrace it.

Peter

[Carl Rogers]

In the world of building design, mine, the time it takes to become comfortable and knowledgeable in a very high information environment is formaidable.
In my anecdotal view of this world, it is the ability to read & experience sites in their primeval form (suggesting what to do and what not to do) that appears the most daunting.

[Ian Andrew]

In the world of building design, mine, the time it takes to become comfortable and knowledgeable in a very high information environment is formaidable.
In my anecdotal view of this world, it is the ability to read & experience sites in their primeval form (suggesting what to do and what not to do) that appears the most daunting.

Carl,

But there are facinating examples like Moshe Safdie who built Habitat 67 - his thesis - at the age of 24.

It does happen outside of the arts.

[Garland Bayley]

I think being a prodigy is mostly a matter of technique, while achieving mastery is a more a matter of temperament. 

Peter,

I found that very interesting to read and something I'll think about some more.

I think Peter has hit upon the explanation of why many prodigies fade away and never become masters.

[Ben Sims]

From my standpoint, it's always fascinated me how willing the military world is willing to entrust massive quantities of equipment, money, and people to relatively young individuals.  Average age of a crew (aircraft commander, first pilot, 2 loadmasters) on a $230 million C-17?  Around twenty-six years old.  Are our ranks filled with prodigies?  Hardly.  It's just a mindset of the system.  

Architecture isn't life or death--at least from a golf perspective.  Youth should be appreciated more.  I'd love to know what established fuddy duddy's were saying around the dinner table about Tom Doak in the early 90's.  

[Brett Hochstein]

From my perspective, I can add some thoughts to the "learning curve" point.  The primitive sketches I put on computer paper at age 5 are almost laughable, and I would say that nothing I drew was really any good until high school.  Even those had way too much modern/major championship influence though.  It wasn't until the end of high school and start of college that I really started to know what I liked and what I wanted to do.  Since that sort of epiphany, it has still been a constantly evolving refinement of those new-found ideals, and I am convinced that the evolution will never stop, as you can always learn more and strive for more in this line of design.  I have already spent 20+ years learning what I like and want to do, and who knows how many more before I get my chance to put it all into the ground, but I am sure that when I do, the learning will be amplified to yet another level.  I think that is realistic and not a bad thing at all.

There is just way too much to learn and understand in golf architecture to be a prodigy from birth, and I am not even talking about the business side, ROI, construction management, permitting, client input, agronomy, etc. 

[Tom_Doak]

From my standpoint, it's always fascinated me how willing the military world is willing to entrust massive quantities of equipment, money, and people to relatively young individuals.  Average age of a crew (aircraft commander, first pilot, 2 loadmasters) on a $230 million C-17?  Around twenty-six years old.  Are our ranks filled with prodigies?  Hardly.  It's just a mindset of the system.  

Architecture isn't life or death--at least from a golf perspective.  Youth should be appreciated more.  I'd love to know what established fuddy duddy's were saying around the dinner table about Tom Doak in the early 90's.  

Ben:  re: your last sentence, it was a very mixed bag.  Some people were just amazed at what all I had seen by the late 1980's; others insisted that none of it mattered if I hadn't spent years in training with another architect.  Looking back, what I can tell you is that the design ideas haven't changed very much in that time; all I needed then was more experience out in the dirt to understand how to build the things I wanted to build.  It took a few years to get that experience, because I was only working sporadically; from that standpoint, I'd probably have been better off staying and working for the Dyes a bit longer if I could have.  From the business standpoint, though, striking out on my own so young was a risk that paid off.

I do agree with you that youth has an important role to play.  We've always tried to include some young fresh faces on our projects, for their ideals and their enthusiasm [and their willingness to work 70 hours a week!].  I was really worried about not having room for any of them when business started contracting -- that's one of the reasons that I cut back my staff a bit when I did, to keep some room open for new blood.  But I can tell you from experience that projects like Long Cove and Riverdale Dunes [when I worked for the Dyes], and Black Forest and Barnbougle Dunes among my own work, are better than they have any right to be, judging by the resumes of their respective crews before those jobs started.  Youthful enthusiasm lifted them each to a higher level.

[Joe_Tucholski]

In my mind most prodigies are musicians, painters or mathematicians.  I think they are considered prodigies because they are able to reproduce complex compositions, images or equations at a very young age.  A recent show I was watching labeled Stephen Wiltshire (http://www.stephenwiltshire.co.uk/) a prodigy in the art world.  Something is clearly different with regards to the way his brain operates and I would consider him a prodigy and he could clearly reproduce a great golf course on paper if he saw one. 

My mom is a special education teacher and I remember one of her students would reproduce credits from movies she saw (most would say that doesn't equates to prodigy status).  When she saw the Disney movie Mulan and the credits were in Chinese characters she still reproduced the credits without knowing what the meaning was.  In order to design a great golf course you need to understand a golfer and then produce a course that satisfies the golfer.

To break that down I think a prodigy is someone who is able to innately reproduce with astounding capabilities but a master is someone who understands what they are producing (which in my opinion is something learned).

[JMEvensky]

To break that down I think a prodigy is someone who is able to innately reproduce with astounding capabilities but a master is someone who understands what they are producing (which in my opinion is something learned).

Clearly out of my depth,but...

From memory,the violinist Midori was taught by some method which enabled her to become highly skilled technically at a very young age.However,I think the rap on her playing was that she lacked the life experience to extend past proficiency--she had no "soul".

Would this be an example of your summary above?

[Garland Bayley]

To break that down I think a prodigy is someone who is able to innately reproduce with astounding capabilities but a master is someone who understands what they are producing (which in my opinion is something learned).

Clearly out of my depth,but...

From memory,the violinist Midori was taught by some method which enabled her to become highly skilled technically at a very young age.However,I think the rap on her playing was that she lacked the life experience to extend past proficiency--she had no "soul".

Would this be an example of your summary above?

Or, Peter's "matter of temperment" == "soul"

[Peter Pallotta]

Thanks, Garland - and yes, that's the word for it, but I preferred 'temperament' to get more non-demominational (for lack of a better word).  I think of the old wood-workers or furniture makers: their patience, their 'one-ness with the wood/materials', the way their tools were extensions fo their hands, the simplicity of their intentions, their quiet assurance of/confidence in their own abilities, their love and dedication to the craft....all these I think reside in the realm of soul/temperament.

Peter

[Colin Macqueen]

Ian,
You write "Golf architecture has almost no prodigies."  So it does have some?
Once this thread runs its course I would like it if you could reveal who you think they might be. I just think that prodigies by default are young and too much experience is required through time in golf course architecture for a prodigy to be apparent.

Cheers Colin

[Brett Hochstein]

My mom is a special education teacher and I remember one of her students would reproduce credits from movies she saw (most would say that doesn't equates to prodigy status).  When she saw the Disney movie Mulan and the credits were in Chinese characters she still reproduced the credits without knowing what the meaning was.  In order to design a great golf course you need to understand a golfer and then produce a course that satisfies the golfer.

To break that down I think a prodigy is someone who is able to innately reproduce with astounding capabilities but a master is someone who understands what they are producing (which in my opinion is something learned).

 Another thing I take from this--how do preconceptions or lifetime understandings effect new production and understandings?  For example, any of us would have a difficult time reproducing the Chinese characters since we have a lifetime of usage and understanding of the written alphabet.  But if you are a child or someone who has never been exposed to the written word/character, then it can be much easier to interpret new languages due to looking at it from a clean slate.  Strong familiarity with one thing causes interference in trying to use or understand another, whereas oblivion or a fresh mind can make it easier to understand something new without the old understanding getting in the way.  This could effect golf design as well.  Strong familiarity with styles, methods, or ideals might make it more difficult for a seasoned designer (a master) to understand or produce something different to them, while a newbie (a prodigy) can come in and quickly learn anything thrown at them without constantly questioning why they aren't doing it another way.  This can be the advantage of the prodigy, though as it is said, they may not totally "understand" what they have just learned or done.  After they do though, they are a step closer to becoming a master, but at that point, have they lost some of that ability to learn something new?

[Joe_Tucholski]

To break that down I think a prodigy is someone who is able to innately reproduce with astounding capabilities but a master is someone who understands what they are producing (which in my opinion is something learned).

Clearly out of my depth,but...

From memory,the violinist Midori was taught by some method which enabled her to become highly skilled technically at a very young age.However,I think the rap on her playing was that she lacked the life experience to extend past proficiency--she had no "soul".

Would this be an example of your summary above?

Yes...sounds like that is right in line with my thoughts on prodigies but have to say I have not heard of Midori.