News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Paul_Turner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Harry Colt
« Reply #200 on: December 18, 2004, 11:45:13 AM »
Blimey!  Can't we all just get along!

Like Tom states.  I have no real interest in minimising Crump's legacy. Although, I do sometimes feel this is a "battle" and I am advocating for my man Colt.  And it's an unfortunate fact, in this simplistic form of debate, that if you attribute something to one man, then you are, by implication, taking something from the other.  It would be disingenous for me to state otherwise, however bizarre that is.

I was only pointing out that there's a lot of legend surrounding PVGC and it's difficult to get to the truth.



can't get to heaven with a three chord song

TEPaul

Re:Harry Colt
« Reply #201 on: December 18, 2004, 01:21:39 PM »
"I was only pointing out that there's a lot of legend surrounding PVGC and it's difficult to get to the truth."

Paul:

That's a good post but I do not believe there's so much legend surrounding PVGC that it's difficult to get the truth. I believe the truth that the both of us have uncovered in this perhaps 1-2 year long excercise of what exactly either Colt or Crump individually did, on the one hand, and on the other hand what they very probably did together has come out now so much more than ever was known. We very much disagree however, on why this was never so well known. You and obviously Tom MacWood think it was blocked simply because Crump was so glorified so as to purposefully exclude others and frankly I know that's simply not the case because I do know PVGC, the club itself, so much better than either of you two do. The truth is not going to be that difficult to get to---and the only real reason it hasn't been gotten to before is simply because the creation and evolution of PVGC was massively complex with the unusual way it always was so collaborative due to the master hand of a man who was not a professional architect, he was the owner and the man who worked on it every day architecturally. He used many men obviously for ideas or whatever, primarily Colt in a professional sense (I don't believe he paid any other architect) and the fact is PVGC, the club, or anyone else, has simply never unraveled all the details and the way they all fit together of this incredible years long effort. It's definitely not because they're trying to exclude others to increase their glorificatoin of Crump. They just never knew how all those details fit into the huge jigsaw puzzle that was the creation of PVGC. We've gone miles down the road to fitting all those pieces together. There're a few more pieces to fit into place but I think we'll get there someday.
« Last Edit: December 18, 2004, 01:23:28 PM by TEPaul »

TEPaul

Re:Harry Colt
« Reply #202 on: December 18, 2004, 05:10:24 PM »
"I believe that Geoff Shackelford was under the impression that Finegan's routing attribution was accurate.  But to his credit, in his GCA interview, Geoff does mention the Carr article."

Paul:

Geoff may've thought Finegan's routing attribution was accurate back then but that was before the blue and red line discovery. As for the Carr article, I talked to Geoff today and he said he didn't realize or had forgotten that the Carr article was written in 1914. He understands now that Crump basically worked on the course for 3-4 more years after that and what that potentially means.

"PS
I am curious to know, in your opinion, what other areas am I overeaching in Colt advocacy, other than PVGC, eh!  Are you sure that isn't the proverbial pot and kettle syndrome."

I'm not aware of a single area or instance I would say that about you and any Colt advocacy. As you said earlier on here I agree that we're probably remarkably close on who did which holes out there in a routing sense. It's the reasons for this Crump glorification thing we don't not see eye to eye on but maybe that's just Tom MacWood and not you. I just can't understand why you or he imply that if the poor man shot himself that's going to be the reason the entire club and all his friends and those familiar with the place suddenly all got together in some unified campaign to glorify Crump's part in PVGC's architecture and minimize the part of others, including Colt. To me that's not only incredibly hard to do but it seems incredibly illogical to me. I believe all those people glorified him for what he did there, and not just because he died but it's obvious to anyone his premature death was a real shock to many and particularly to the club. It took the club a while after that to figure out how to proceed without him.

Tommy_Naccarato

Re:Harry Colt
« Reply #203 on: December 18, 2004, 05:43:26 PM »
What a train wreck......

You should all be ashamed of yourselves.

Paul_Turner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Harry Colt
« Reply #204 on: December 18, 2004, 06:48:10 PM »
Balderdash. This is one of the best threads ever.  What's to be ashamed of?

Tom Paul

You wrote:

"You probably are a bit too over-reaching on Colt advocacy, though, in some area, in my opinion, and I think PVGC is one of them."

I was just wondering, what other areas?



« Last Edit: December 18, 2004, 07:32:22 PM by Paul_Turner »
can't get to heaven with a three chord song

T_MacWood

Re:Harry Colt
« Reply #205 on: December 19, 2004, 12:51:22 AM »
"The connection between his death and/or the manner of his death and glorification that inspired historic revisionism is a stretch.  Tom, me thinks you are the one engaging in the revisionism."

Wayne
Inspired historic revisionism? His sudden death had to have an effect on his friends and aquaintances at the time...its only natural. Did JFK's death have an immediate impact on how he was viewed? Kurt Cobain? Jim Morrison?

What is the difference between correcting the historic record and revisionism? Should we sit on the fact that Colt was involved in the design of PVGC and Crump took his own life...for fear we are revisionists?

wsmorrison

Re:Harry Colt
« Reply #206 on: December 19, 2004, 07:12:03 AM »
"What is the difference between correcting the historic record and revisionism? Should we sit on the fact that Colt was involved in the design of PVGC and Crump took his own life...for fear we are revisionists?"

I am certain that everyone involved at Pine Valley and in our website community want to know the truth.  But taking it a step further to say that the truth about Crump's death in any way is involved in a cover-up of work attribution is a stretch.  If it is true that Crump did take his own life, it still has nothing to do with the recognition of the work he did at Pine Valley.  Of course there was an immediate impact on his friends and family.  That's what happens in tragedies (I'm only referring here to the tragedy of his early death).  

As to the historical perspective and analysis, do you think Kennedy is considered a greater president by presidential scholars for having been shot?  The general public certainly felt that way at the time and many do to this day.  But the light of history shines in many previously dark recesses of Kennedy's past and the perspective is pretty clear at this point.  

I don't think presidential scholars are swayed to this day.  Nobody is supressing the facts about Colt.  I don't know where you get that notion.  And I don't think golf historians nor the club are influenced to this day by the circumstances of Crump's death.  Again, if anything, the majority of people involved at the time were told (possibly the truth, possibly a fictional account) that Crump died of a brain abscess.  How would this influence people to advocate for Crump?  The fact remains that it did not.  Colt was long regarded to have routed the entire golf course.  What sort of impact did Crump's death have on people involved?  It wouldn't seem like very much.

Closer examination of documents and better informed people studying the materials are concluding that Crump had more to do with the routing of the golf course and thereby the overall effort than previously thought.  Is this because of the need to glorify someone or a result of a concerted effort to seek the truth?  Colt is getting his due.  It is an ongoing process but I fail to see a conspiracy preventing recognition of Colt's efforts.  I rather see an effort to find out the actual history of the design.  

I know this isn't nearly as sexy a story as conspiracies and hidden agendas.  But I think it is a lot closer to the truth.

Brian Phillips

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Harry Colt
« Reply #207 on: December 19, 2004, 07:52:34 AM »
I would love to know as much as I can about PVGC and it's history but I always have one lingering question in my head:

Do we as non-members have any right to be poking our noses in the history of what is a private golf club?

Brian
Bunkers, if they be good bunkers, and bunkers of strong character, refuse to be disregarded, and insist on asserting themselves; they do not mind being avoided, but they decline to be ignored - John Low Concerning Golf

wsmorrison

Re:Harry Colt
« Reply #208 on: December 19, 2004, 08:10:04 AM »
I guess only to the extent that we deal in publicly available information.  Any privately obtained information without proper permission should be off limits.

TEPaul

Re:Harry Colt
« Reply #209 on: December 19, 2004, 09:01:30 AM »
"What is the difference between correcting the historic record and revisionism?"

Tom MacWood:

Correcting the historic record and revisionism is just about the opposite, I'm sure you know that.

"Should we sit on the fact that Colt was involved in the design of PVGC and Crump took his own life...for fear we are revisionists?"

It just really makes me laugh that you still think that anyone has ever sat on the fact that Harry Colt was involved at PVGC. The reason you probably still cling to that notion is you simply do not understand PVGC or what that club has thought for years about Colt's participation. You seem to draw your conclusions from a few magazine articles from the 1960s, 70s, 80s and 90s. This is the problem with the way you often analyze architecture, in my opinion---eg you form your conclusions completely from magazine articles only. What you should do more of is rely on others who really do know the golf clubs, the members and what they think and have thought. But that fact doesn't seem to fit into some of your scenarios, which in the opinion of some who really do know the golf club is revisionism of the club’s history. The reason you’re concluding Colt’s part in PVGC was minimized by the club is you’ve read a few magazine articles that apparently simply didn’t mention Colt enough for your liking!

Harry Colt was not minimized by PVGC. We've told you from personal experience that the club always felt Harry Colt routed that entire golf club. Is there some reason you're not willing to accept that fact? I'd say there is and that reason is the facts of how the club felt about Colt just DOES NOT fit into your scenario that the club has always tried to minimize Colt by glorifying Crump's part in the architecture. Also, you seem to be trying to float this story that since Crump committed suicide a glorification process began which is completely illogical, anyway. Tom, that notion, as Wayne mentions is simply a stretch---it just isn't the case no matter how much you're going to continue to cling to it! What you're suggesting is just not true and we're going to keep denying these things you say because it's historic revisionism. Perhaps, another reason you cling to your illogical idea of the glorification of Crump’s part in the architecture of the course because he committed suicide is because the last thing you ever seem to want to do is believe a single thing I might tell you about the course.

Why did the club and many others assume for so long that Colt routed that entire course when no one thought a Colt routing map existed (until the last few years!)? Simply because so many knew of that hole by hole drawing booklet which has always been in the archives! But very few ever saw that booklet although so many knew it was there.

Perhaps, you don’t realize this but most people don’t make the same distinctions we do on here between a topo routing map of the entire course and a hole by hole booklet of the course. There’s little question that Warner Shelly’s history book minimized Colt’s contribution. Shelly believed there was no whole course routing map by Colt of PVGC. The routing map that’s hung on the wall for so long was believed to be just Crump’s. Why was that believed? Because it says on it “Property of George A. Crump, March 1913”!! Shelly assumed that meant just Crump and so, unfortunately did Finegan! Shelly and Finegan may have been the only two who really analyzed that hole by hole booklet (Doak apparently looked at it too) to compare it to what the course was and both of them came to the conclusion that the hole by hole drawings had more differences to the course than similarities. Given that observation what do you suppose their conclusions would be? Simply that most of the rest (other than the well known Tillinghast contributions) were George Crump’s since everyone knows Crump worked on the architecture of that course daily for five years. For some really odd reason you, Tom MacWood, seem to have little understanding or appreciation for what that means regarding Crump’s part in the architecture of the course. If you don’t care to listen to me on that why don’t you just do as I suggested and call up an architectural analyst, Geog Shackelford, who knows more about PVGC history than you do and ask him about that fact?

The real irony here, though, is despite the fact that so many always felt that Colt had routed that entire course, we have now virtually proven (through the analysis of those two routing maps and the red and blue lines on one, as well as the analysis of the holes that Tillinghast described that were routed and partially built before Colt ever arrived. Those holes are the way the course still is! So that virtually proves they were Crump’s conceptions and not Colt's because Colt had never been to PVGC at that point!).

So, the irony is that we (probably mostly Paul Turner and me) have basically proven something that alters what so many have thought for years---and that is that Colt routed the entire golf course---we have now virtually proven that he probably routed less than half of it! So if there’s been some minimizing of Colt’s part in the architecture of the course it’s come in the last few years and it’s looks like it finally is the truth!

As to who designed the specific features of those routed holes (whether Crump's or Colt's) which includes bunker placements and shapes, fairways, green designs etc, the hole by hole booklet by Colt will show who did what by comparing again the similarities and differences of what’s in that booklet to how the course was actually built.

Geoff Shackelford made an excellent point to me on the phone yesterday about this discussion on here between some of us and you and Paul Turner. That point is why are you not as interested in Hugh Alison's part in the creation of the final phase of PVGC after Crump died as you are in the initial phase by Colt when Crump was alive? The obvious reason to me is that you two are simply Colt advocates and that seems to be about all you're concerned with here. Others of us are concerned with everything that went on down there in those 10-15 years.

That final phase, just before and just after 1921, involving both Flynn (Thomas) and Merion and Alison and the so-called "remembrances" of Carr and Smith (remembrances of what Crump wanted to do had he lived) and how it all merged into the so-called 1921 Advisory Committee which both completed construction, finished the details and polished off the remaining things to be done architecturally on the course is an important part of the architecture of PVGC, not to mention Perry Maxwell's part a few years later. But you two seem to be only interested in Colt. There was a lot more that went on down there over those almost ten and more years from beginning to final completion than just Harry Colt's part.

 
 

« Last Edit: December 19, 2004, 09:27:04 AM by TEPaul »

Patrick_Mucci

Re:Harry Colt
« Reply #210 on: December 19, 2004, 09:32:34 AM »


Why his friends covered up the cause of his death is one question.

I see that you've concluded that his friends covered up his cause of death.

I believe that falsifying the cause of death is a felony in the State of New Jersey.

Which of his friends committed this crime ?

And, why ?

Was there discussion on the matter ?
Did some of his friends balk at the idea ?
Who were the leaders of this conspiracy ?
What was the time frame between his time of death and the creation of official documents stating the cause of death ?

How were his friends able to influence the authorities in a jurisdiction outside of their centers of influence, or any jurisdiction, and alter his cause of death ?
[/color]

Another even more important question is why he took his own life.

What allows you to draw the conclusion that HE took his own life ?  

How do you know that it wasn't someone else that TOOK HIS life ?

If, as you allege, that his friends covered up the circumstances of his death, to what extent do you feel that the cover up exists ?

Are you suggesting foul play ?
That he was killed, and his death was made to look like a suicide, and further covered up by his friends to be the result of a brain abcess or brain aneurism ?
[/color]

* he was the inspirational and creative force behind the creation of PV
* PV was an awesome project...one golf's greatest accomplishments
* he sacrificed much of his personal fortune to build the place
* he made the ultimate sacrifrice...literally giving his life to PV

Why would a man with all of these things going for him, take his own life, before he completed his labor of love ?
[/color]

« Last Edit: December 19, 2004, 09:35:13 AM by Patrick_Mucci »

TEPaul

Re:Harry Colt
« Reply #211 on: December 19, 2004, 09:44:50 AM »
"How do you know that it wasn't someone else that TOOK HIS life?"

Pat:

That's a good one! Maybe we should start floating another rumor that it was Tom MacWood's grandfather that slipped into Crump's house in Merchantville and gunned him down for not giving enogh credit for the architecture of the course to Harry Colt. Tom MacWood's notions of what went on after Crump's death have pretty much entered into the comical, in my opinion. Do you think that'll ever get Tom MacWood to see the light and the truth? Personally, I wouldn't bet a nickel on it!  ;)

TEPaul

Re:Harry Colt
« Reply #212 on: December 19, 2004, 09:51:06 AM »
"...its only natural. Did JFK's death have an immediate impact on how he was viewed? Kurt Cobain? Jim Morrison?"

Tom MacWood:

Did JFK, Kurt Cobain, and Jim Morrison's friends glorify them to minimize Harry Colt's part in the architecture of PVGC too?  ;)


Patrick_Mucci

Re:Harry Colt
« Reply #213 on: December 19, 2004, 10:11:56 AM »
TEPaul,

I hope he didn't fall for the same type of practical joke that is employed on April 1st.  The one where you receive a phone message to call 718-367-1010 and ask for Mr Wolffe.

They do that year round in Merchantville as SOP.

ForkaB

Re:Harry Colt
« Reply #214 on: December 19, 2004, 10:12:23 AM »
Out of curiosity, I dusted off my old (1976, 1st American edition) copy of the World Atlas of Golf, and it says the following about the design of PV:

" George Crump.....had the experienced guidance of HS Colt....  But it was Crump who drew up the first basic outline and the master plan.......  Colt simply added the final touches that made it into a masterpiece of the macabre."

I haven't really been following the minutiae of this debate, but this seems to switch the roles that some have implied above (i.e. Colt doing a "stick" layout and Crump doing the detailed design work).

TEPaul

Re:Harry Colt
« Reply #215 on: December 19, 2004, 10:20:35 AM »
Rich:

What Colt did on the topo map wasn't exactly a stick routing. He did draw in fairway lines, basic green shapes and bunkering. That was the topo routing. He also did a separate detailed hole by hole drawing booklet. The point here is that neither of those two things on Colt's part were his own ideas solely.

But I think the fact that you've quotet above and what it says about Colt's part is just another example for Tom MacWood and Paul Turner to digest that there never was this big campaign to glorifiy Crump SIMPLY to minimize Colt's part in PVGC as they seem to keep claiming on here there was.

I know Tom MacWood will probably continue to cling to that illogical notion despite the fact that we can all produce endless mention over the years of Colt's part in that course.

Paul_Turner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Harry Colt
« Reply #216 on: December 19, 2004, 10:26:33 AM »
The official face of the club (not all members) clearly wants Crump to be the sole architect credited with PV.  And it has been that way for some time!
can't get to heaven with a three chord song

Paul_Turner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Harry Colt
« Reply #217 on: December 19, 2004, 10:27:39 AM »
We're not interested in Alison.   What a load of bull!  This is getting crazier by the second.

I've mentioned Alison and the other architects plenty of times.  The title of this thread is "Harry Colt"!

Tom Macwood has written just about the only article on Alison in living memory.
« Last Edit: December 19, 2004, 10:41:05 AM by Paul_Turner »
can't get to heaven with a three chord song

T_MacWood

Re:Harry Colt
« Reply #218 on: December 19, 2004, 10:29:16 AM »
Wayne
"I am certain that everyone involved at Pine Valley and in our website community want to know the truth.  But taking it a step further to say that the truth about Crump's death in any way is involved in a cover-up of work attribution is a stretch  Of course there was an immediate impact on his friends and family.  That's what happens in tragedies (I'm only referring here to the tragedy of his early death)."

Who said that the truth about Crump’s death is part of some grand cover up? You’ve been reading too many mystery novels. Do you think it was unusual based up the social mores of that period to keep the cause of his death hidden? I don’t believe there was any thing sinister going on there, in fact it was completely normal at that time.

"If it is true that Crump did take his own life, it still has nothing to do with the recognition of the work he did at Pine Valley."

I agree with you….I don’t know what you problem is…you are extremely paranoid.

"As to the historical perspective and analysis, do you think Kennedy is considered a greater president by presidential scholars for having been shot?  The general public certainly felt that way at the time and many do to this day.  But the light of history shines in many previously dark recesses of Kennedy's past and the perspective is pretty clear at this point."  

I think Kennedy was a charismatic figure who was president for 2.5 years. He had a number of accomplishments and a number of failures in a relatively short period (and evidently a few personal issues). I’m not a presidential historian and I personally love his image, but my guess his presidential record would place him some where in the middle of other presidents (and that might be generous). Despite some of the recent revelations (historic revisionism perhaps in your opinion) it would be completely ignorant to claim the circumstances of his death didn’t have a major impact on his image and people’s perceptions of the man (including some historians). It is human nature.

"Nobody is supressing the facts about Colt.  I don't know where you get that notion.  And I don't think golf historians nor the club are influenced to this day by the circumstances of Crump's death."

You obviously haven’t read the articles written about Crump and PV from the 1920’s and 1930’s--the years immediately after his death. You can’t help but come away being impressed with the affection they had for the man. This is how one article began in the 1920’s : ”The romance of the Pine Valley Golf Club of Philadelphia clusters about the life and charming personality of the lamented George W. Crump, a Philadelphian whose memory his former golfing confreres delight to honor.”

They obviously loved him, and no doubt they should have honored him and his great accomplishments at PV. Unfortunately there is absolutely no mention in this article of Colt (or Alison for that matter...good luck trying to find his name anywhere in any article). Some of these articles have brief mention of Colt (sometimes referred to has Holt or HC Colt), others no mention at all. As the years go by, the articles that do mention him, relegate his accomplishment to the 5th. Do I think it was deliberate slight? No. It happened because of the circumstances.



"Closer examination of documents and better informed people studying the materials are concluding that Crump had more to do with the routing of the golf course and thereby the overall effort than previously thought."

Better informed than who? Could you point to where it says in any of the club’s official histories that Colt routed the golf course…based upon the official written record it is difficult to conclude anyone other than Crump routed the golf course

"I know this isn't nearly as sexy a story as conspiracies and hidden agendas.  But I think it is a lot closer to the truth."

What conspiracy theory? All I'm hoping for is that Colt get his due...the reasons he hasn't to date are not imprortant to me.

It is reactionary comments like this that illustrates your level of paranoia. Its unhealthy and makes getting to the truth difficult.
« Last Edit: December 19, 2004, 08:55:58 PM by Tom MacWood »

Paul_Turner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Harry Colt
« Reply #219 on: December 19, 2004, 10:37:12 AM »
For the record the routing as it stands is:

Crump: 1,2,3,4, (half of 7),13 (with Tillie),14 18

Colt:  5,6,(half of 7),8,9,10,11,12,15,16,17

Colt pulled the whole routing togetherinto a cohesive and great 18 holes; isn't that the finest art of routing?  It's much easier to string a few great holes together.
can't get to heaven with a three chord song

TEPaul

Re:Harry Colt
« Reply #220 on: December 19, 2004, 11:27:59 AM »
"All I'm hoping for is that Colt get his due...the reasons he hasn't to date are not imprortant to me."

Tom MacWood:

Maybe, it's time you stop all this garbage. This thread is replete with the record of the creation of PVGC, why some things may not have been as well known as they should have been but particularly why they are becoming much better known now---and that very much includes Harry Colt.

You want to see Colt get his due? Well, what do you think that is? Have you noticed on this thread that the club and others that know and knew it always felt that Colt had routed that golf course and that now it's virtually been proven that that was not the case? You want to see Colt get his due and it seems that his due will be less than what many felt it was. The history books of Shelly and Finegan did not give him his due---those two histories gave him less credit than the long time feeling that he routed that course had been.

Both that feeling that always surrounded the club that he routed the whole course and more recently the reporting that he did not are all part of the reasons that he got more due than he deserved and then less due than he deserved recently from Shelly and Finegan. If all those reasons are important to you then read what they were and are on this thread and you should be satisfied that Harry Colt is now getting his due and the correct credit for doing exactly what he did do, and no more and no less.
« Last Edit: December 19, 2004, 11:31:45 AM by TEPaul »

TEPaul

Re:Harry Colt
« Reply #221 on: December 19, 2004, 11:40:46 AM »
Paul Turner:

I do not necessarily agree with that list of holes, the routing of which you credit to Colt. The reason is if they were both out there together how can you just assume that Colt is the one who conceived of them? Clearly you can't do that. Examples are #7, #8, #12, #15 or even #16. I don't really give sole credit to Colt for #17 because all he may've done (if we assume that first routing was Crump's) is move the green and the line of the hole over about 40 yards from where Crump had it. Other than that the holes were virtually the same configuration and of the same length. The length of Colt's hole is not the same as the one that was built by Crump, by the way. The reason for that is the green site of #16 and the water-works that was built by Crump directly behind #7 tee well after Colt. Those things did not exist and had not even been conceived until well after Colt left for good.

You'll notice I'm not solely attributing the routings on those holes mentioned above to Crump and frankly you can't prove they were solely Colt's either. So why try? There are some holes out there that will probably never be able to be pinpointed as to who conceived of their routing. Unfortunately there's never been a record of that week or two they were together out there---again, the only time Colt ever was at PVGC. It's my sense that there are a number of holes that can definitely be attributed to Crump simply because it's provable they were done before Colt arrived. For the rest it would probably be more honest to both of them to give them virtually equal credit for some of the others no one will probably ever be able to pinpoint as to one or the other.

There's something else that both you and Tom MacWood seem to be curiously silent about that I've mentioned a number of times. That is that so many for so long always assumed Colt routed that whole golf course. Neither you nor Tom MacWood ever knew that did you?
« Last Edit: December 19, 2004, 11:51:32 AM by TEPaul »

wsmorrison

Re:Harry Colt
« Reply #222 on: December 19, 2004, 11:49:02 AM »
Tom,

You are convincing me that you are certifiably NUTS!  I'm paranoid?  Come on, you are the one that thinks there's some systematic effort to credit Crump with Colt's efforts.  I don't see it and I'm the one that's paranoid.  

Your perspectives seem to be wholly based upon your readings.  The membership isn't editing everything that's been written for the last 90 years.  Come on, writers don't always get it right.  Look at the Shinnecock Hills club histories and tell me they got it right.  First thing you should consider is don't believe everything you read.  Your problem is that that is basically all you do.  Your field studies are far from robust.   Maybe then you wouldn't have these suspicions that something nefarious has been going on all these years.

Crump was adored by the members and the golfing community in general.  So what?  What the hell does that have to do with attributions?  Charming personality or not, it has nothing to do with anything.  So what if he was loved.  That means a priori that there is an effort to deny Colt something?  Man are you whacky!  I'm taking a passive approach here in case you hadn't noticed.  I say nothing was going on that systematically denied the truth and sought to glorify Crump.  And I'm the one being accused of paranoia and unhealthy behavior!  You better watch your accusations and take a look in the mirror.

Don't you think that the efforts of Tom Paul and Paul Turner are getting to the bottom of who did what?  Yet you maintain that you hope that Colt gets his due someday.  Seems to me you should climb down from your spot on high, oh wise guru and get in the field to find out what's what.  You just can't seem to get it that Colt was credited with an awful lot to do with the course, as were the Wilsons, Alison, Frederick Taylor, Thomas, Tillinghast and Flynn.  Whose work has been minimized?  Just because it isn't in every magazine and newspaper you have read?  Does that mean it doesn't exist at all?  

You are the one that counters most published accounts of Crump's death and says that his suicide helped glorify his efforts at Pine Valley to the detriment of the record.  I am not the only one that feels the need to see if what you say is true.  But I maintain that it has nothing to do with changing the architectural attributions.

I have other matters to attend to and my energies would be better spent not arguing with you any longer--you are hopeless.  However, I will pursue the facts about Crump's death and see if you were right or not.  Despite the fact that it has little to do with anything other than my determining your skills as a researcher.  
« Last Edit: December 19, 2004, 11:52:02 AM by Wayne Morrison »

TEPaul

Re:Harry Colt
« Reply #223 on: December 19, 2004, 12:36:06 PM »
Tom MacWood:

Wayne Morrison said;

"If it is true that Crump did take his own life, it still has nothing to do with the recognition of the work he did at Pine Valley."

And you responded:

I agree with you….I don’t know what you problem is…you are extremely paranoid.

I really don’t know why you keep saying Wayne or I are paranoid about something to do with PVGC. All we’re doing is telling you why much of your conjecture about Crump, what you call his glorification and what you call the minimizing of Colt’s roll is simply not the case following Crump’s death.

You said;

“Under the circumstances it is understandible why they would focus on Crump (I don't believe Paul or myself have ever said Crump doesn't deserve tremendous credit), but in that process Colt's role was minimized...early on, I doubt minimizing Colt was a deliberate effort. And as the years have gone by and the legend has grown, I think there is natural tendency not to alter the legend, to protect it, for fear it might affect Crump's status and indirectly affect PV. I personally don't believe it would have any affect on either....if anything, it might elevate both, if that is possible.”

Colt’s roll was not minimized early on and it was certainly not a deliberate effort on the part of Crump’s friends following his death. I'm glad you admit that part. We’re not paranoid, merely telling you that you continue to be wrong with an interpretation like that one of yours above that Colt's roll was minimized. The only minimizing of Colt's roll I can see is in the history books of Shelly and Finegan and the reasons for that (not deliberate, in my opinion) are all very much part of the record in this thread. You should look at them again.

You said in an earlier post;

“Are you certain Crump wasn't in a hurry? It appears to me that the length the project took had nothing to do with Crump's patience. Did he have unlimited funds? Didn't he face numerous unexpected hurdles? Didn't his fiancé die during the project? Depending on the accuracy of some reports regarding the circumstances of his death, it appears he was at the end of his rope.  If the reports are true, he was in many ways a tragic figure and I don't think Finegan was able to capture that important aspect.”

From everything that’s part of the record of PVGC Crump certainly seems to not have been in much of a hurry. 5-6 years on a project that wasn’t even finished when he died certainly doesn’t appear to indicate a man in a hurry. We know Merion East was initially constructed in about 6 months and let grow in for a year to be opened for play. That was a year earlier and very fast. Crump’s project was nothing like that. As far as Crump apparently taking his time over the years comes his now rather famous remark when asked when he finally planned to finish PVGC. His famous reply was "NEVER!" Does this sound like a man who was building a golf course to Harry Colt's hole by hole booklet that has been part of the PVGC archive from 1913?

Did Crump have unlimited funds? I’m sure they weren’t unlimited but they certainly were enough to finish PVGC apparently. I've never seen anything anywhere that Crump was personally running out of money. Have you? You asked if he faced numerous hurdles? Not really. PVGC certainly wasn't the easiest site to build on---clearing trees and pulling up and disposign of stumps was certainly time consuming.

He faced a virtual shut-down on construction during the WW1 time which he died in just about the middle of the USA's 19 month participation in WW1. Victory gardens and such were planted on parts of the course under construction such as #12. For you to assume that Crump was at the end of his rope is simply a real stretch in light of everything that his friends knew about him until the day he died. I believe you’re illogically speculating on both the cause of his death and what that meant to other events. I don’t believe you should or can accurately and truthfully do that----but I have very little doubt you’ll just keep on trying.

Paul_Turner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Harry Colt
« Reply #224 on: December 19, 2004, 01:14:09 PM »
No, I believe there was a minimising of Colt's role (and other architect's) after Crump's death.  It was a by-product of the glorification of Crump.  

Before Crump's death there is plenty of public documentation (magazines etc) by people in the know, in the PVGC area , stressing Colt's role.  After Crump's death, I've only seen one, by Jerome Travers.  And certainly nothing by the official face of the club (no matter what the rumours among the members were).
« Last Edit: December 19, 2004, 01:14:41 PM by Paul_Turner »
can't get to heaven with a three chord song

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back