Firstly, what an excellent interview. I learned a great deal. The text reinforces something foreign to me but seemingly ever-present in those that succeed at the highest echelons of their profession; an ego of ultimate self-belief no matter the circumstance. Doubt doesn't seem to impede Jack Nicklaus, nor does reflection upon impetus or inspiration. In this way he is very similar to Tiger (or I should say Tiger to him).
I read a specific paragraph that had equal parts of positive and negative. I'd like to break it down.
I think we have to be careful at times when labeling people minimalists. You can’t confuse a look with actual minimalism. My feeling is that minimalism is finding a golf course and utilizing the property almost 100 percent...
What a fantastic way of describing the modern minimalist movement. It is NOT about furry bunker edges. If the goal is to break down what the modern golden age of design has wrought, I think one of the last aspects of the study should be the aesthetic.
...as we did at Dismal River. We moved virtually zero dirt at Dismal River and in the end, unfortunately got much criticism because the greens were too severe. The greens were what was there. That was minimalist. I was then asked to adjust the greens and that, to me, was still minimalistic but it definitely required moving some dirt.
Jack starts off giving a fantastic definition of minimalism only then to pigeon-hole its tenets into the movement of material. This shows a lack of care for the design tenets of minimalism. I would've liked to have seen a more nuanced version of this discussion from him. Especially with his and his crew's involvement with Renaissance at Sebonack.
I’ve seen many of the guys call themselves minimalists, yet they have moved a great deal of dirt to create the look of a minimalistic golf course. I’ve done many, many golf courses that are far more minimalistic than what some of the minimalists do.
This strikes me as simple gamesmanship from a sporting great. It still undercuts and marginalizes what the great practitioners of the minimalist movement have done. If Jack wants to define what minimalism is versus his competition, that's his prerogative. However, there is an intellectual hazard in marginalizing and attempting to define minimalism when his own "minimalist" courses look more contrived than his contemporaries. He owes no answer to any of us, of course, but it seems he is just defending his own brand rather than reflecting upon how his attempts at minimalism actually worked.
On other occasions where it is necessary to move dirt to create a golf course, that’s OK. Because your objective is not to make sure that you don’t move any dirt; the objective is to produce a good golf course for your client. Sometimes you can find it and sometimes you have to create it, or a combination thereof.
Thus ends the shit sandwich that is the modern style of negative information delivery. Jack starts us off with a generic but wonderfully salient version of golf course architecture minimalism. The two middle stanzas make a concerted attempt to defend his work alongside the contemporaries of the minimalist movement. I think he fails in this defense. It serves to highlight what I would call a failure of his firm to understand minimalism. It defines that failure as a willingness to not move material and then defines the work as "far more minimalistic than what some of the minimalists do." As mentioned previously, I would like to read a more detailed transcript of Jack's comments regarding the best sites he's been given. The paragraph ends with another well-worded and concise explanation of how minimalism
should work.
I understand he owes no explanation to us, but I think he contradicts himself in the paragraph. The tendency to defend against perception and criticism (a trait of competitiveness) overwhelms what could and should be easy self-reflection. I was disappointed not only with his reactions to a line of questioning on minimalism, but also to his aloofness to inspiration. To say that he wasn't thinking of any specific traits of classic golf holes when he designed certain elements of his own golf holes strikes me as arrogant.
All-in-all, a great get by Ran and something that members of the site should be proud. This little grouping of internet trolls looking to make a difference in the golf architecture world is big enough to attract the best player of all time. Well done.