Jeff, Peter et al,
Thank you for returning us to a worthy discussion.
For me, the game of golf is fundamentally about turf, ball and the interaction therein. So, the real question should be something like:
Do all architects, putting aesthetics to one side, place the same empathise on the interaction between ball and turf?
And if we were to disagree about the question in itself, wouldn't we in effect be fundamentally disagreeing about the essence of golf and therefore disagreeing about what a golf course architect should be trying to achieve? That, surely, suggests differences far greater than simply differences in appearance, no?