Imaginary Conversations Between Green Committee Chair and Potential Restorer
Tom Doak: If the bunker is there, the ODG must have had a good reason to put it there so we are going to leave it there. But this is a helluva site. Interested in a new design?
Ira:
You have a healthy imagination. I've only done new designs over old ones at clubs that called me specifically with that in mind.
Years ago, perhaps about when Tom posted the 10% idea, I probably countered with an example from the old Woody Allen movie, where they run into the famous producer while in line at the movies, telling him how much they loved this or that and how did he ever come up with such clever ideas. His response was, "I was drunk that day and my assistant really did most of that work."
Or, as I said earlier, even gca's would love to have a mulligan on some holes they design.
While "experts" study the finished product to the degree that old photos and plans allow, a true study would find out which associate assisted on the project, what days Ross or whoever was actually there, who was the foreman, etc. As Brad Klein's book pointed out about the Ross schedule, even on projects he visited, he only visited most once or twice. And after finding out those details, you would still be making an educated guess as to what the intent was. And, I think you would find things like, "It's Friday afternoon, just finish that bunker up and go home so we don't pay overtime" or some such. I'm with Mike on this one. Trying to discern original intent is a very difficult and ultimately impossible task.
Of course, I don't blame anyone for trying, its sort of a subset of learning design theory. And, for those courses for whom retro rebranding works financially or just artistically, if you are going that route, I gather you should go all the way in, not just half in.
