A Real Bird and Unctuous Self-Satisfaction walk into a bar...

[Ronald Montesano]

I sincerely hope that no one has posted on this before. What a read.


https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/06/24/inside-the-cultish-dreamworld-of-augusta-national

[John Kavanaugh]

I submitted clearly the wittiest caption in a New Yorker cartoon contest and was shut out. I shall not click their link.

[David_Tepper]

Great article. A different take than H.W. Wind, but very readable none the less.

[Peter Pallotta]

Strangely, I didn't like it very much, and got bored and stopped reading about half / three quarters of the way through. The *writing* is professional, one line flowing smoothly into the next, information dropped in casually at regular but appropriate intervals, a reference to Pinkertons here and a pay off there etc. But the whole of it was, well, facile -- as slick and self conscious and all about the surface as the picture of Augusta that it paints.

[Tom_Doak]

Peter:


Yes, possibly the author did not think about the similarities (if not overlap) between Masters patrons and readers of The New Yorker.  But he nailed the place.


My favorite line, about the gallery, was that they all had the feel of people who were used to telling other people what to do.

[Mike Hendren]

That gallery comment is an interesting take as it felt to me the hillbilly element was more prevalent in the gallery this year.  Trust me, it takes one to know one.

Perhaps it was just a numbers issue as the fast and cool crowd was hanging out in Berckman's Place

Bogey

[Gene Greco]

Strangely, I didn't like it very much,
..facile -- as slick and self conscious and all about the surface as the picture of Augusta that it paints.

Bingo


Perfectly stated (as usual)


Moreover, missing from the piece are words like “civility,” “respect,” “graciousness,” etc.


Though they may not be part of the writer’s lexicon, or his person for that matter..

[Ronald Montesano]

I do not agree with Gene and Peter, but out of deep and abiding respect for the drive-by photo shoot of Southampton on which the Doctor escorted me, back in 2013, I will abide by civility, respect and (fingers crossed) graciousness, in my effort to portray why I disagree.
[/size]
[/size]1. The writer is in love with language, particularly his own command of it. I don't believe that it impedes nor imperils the message that he wishes to convey, which I interpreted as: For those of you who are not golf addicts, this is what happens behind (and adjacent to) the scenes of the one golf event that you watch each year;
[/size]
[/size]2. As we know too well around this discussion board, some of us do elevate players, architects, and courses to a stature and status of enormous reputation. Sometimes, we miss the mark. Bobby Jones and the ANGC have been elevated in the same manner by (select your preferred order) Hollywood, the media, professional golfers, marketers, fans. It is understandable that an outsider might not understand the (perhaps improper) adulation and respect that certain, hard-core golfers hold for both;
[/size]
[/size]3. After opening with an informative paragraph on the sub-air system, utilized to perfection by the club, the writer sheds all trappings and hits with this sentence: It is by now hardly scandalous to note that Augusta National—called the National by its members and devotees, and Augusta by everyone else—is an environment of extreme artifice, an elaborate television soundstage, a fantasia of the fifties, a Disneyclub in the Georgia pines. Any hope for salvation is dashed-the writer has chosen his path, and follow him, we do. It's a harsh one, but I ask: with as much complaining about the changes to the course from its original, read on this DB, are we in disagreement?
[/size]
[/size]I'll hang up and listen for now. I hope that I've maintained the three tenets as established by TGD (the good doctor.)

[Joel_Stewart]

I enjoyed the article.


I laughed out loud when he met the podcast comedian who had previously called the club impersonating Bill Gates demanding a tee time during the tournament.

[Peter Pallotta]

As I say: I can't find fault with the writing, and indeed I envy the obvious talent.
But maybe because it felt like shooting fish in a barrel; or because I've outgrown the Letterman-style meanness that once passed for humour; or because it seemed continually clear that the unctuous self satisfaction the writer saw everywhere was also his own -- but for whatever reason, the whole, for me, was less than the sum of its parts....like a bloated 80s resort course with 2 signature holes and little else save for the pretty vistas that came with 18 (artificially created) elevated tees.
In short: for me the weakness of the essay was that 'it was all there in front of you'.

[Kalen Braley]

I'm with Pete on this one.

The writing style seemed self-serving with little meaty substance, instead opting for loquacious babbling in attempt to impress its haughty readership.

I'll give it a 5 on the DS at best....