[Anthony Gray]

 Is land their canvas?


 Are they inspired by their predecessors?


 Are they free to let their creative juices unleashed?


 Can they develop their own style?


 Do they want to cut their ear off so they can’t hear the criticism?


 What are the pros and cons with commission work?


 Is there pressure to be different?


 Do they see flaws in their work?


 Do they want to be left alone with their work?


 Are they better appreciated when they die?


 Do they want apprentices?


 Do they have an obligation to help to younger ones that come behind them?


 Do they drink too much?


 How much do they care about criticism or praise?


What percentage of GCA is art or business? Can the two be separated?








 


 

[Tom_Doak]

Anthony.


Some are, some aren’t.  Same thing down the line, for most of your questions.


It’s possible to keep art and business mostly separate - if you only work for clients who are agreeable to that, which is itself a business decision.

[Jeff_Brauer]

 Is land their canvas? Yes


 Are they inspired by their predecessors? Yes


 Are they free to let their creative juices unleashed? Yes, but more often, No.


 Can they develop their own style? Yes


 Do they want to cut their ear off so they can’t hear the criticism?  Yes, no that one is a myth that creative people are crazy enough to cut off their ear, just because Van Gogh did.  Few people are really okay with criticism no matter what their personality type.


 What are the pros and cons with commission work? Yes, but like musicians or other artists, it is always a combination of biz and art to practice your craft.  It's not as hard to do as some on this board have postulated over the years.


 Is there pressure to be different? Yes, but more to be the same.  As on band said, record companies always say they want something different until you come to the studio with something different, when they tell you they want it to sound the same as the last million-selling album, but still be different.


 Do they see flaws in their work? Yes, Yes, Yes, Most of us would take at least a few mulligans per course.


 Do they want to be left alone with their work?  That really isn't practical on most projects, it's more a team effort than the work of a singular "master builder" even though the master builder myth is one of the more enduring myths.


 Are they better appreciated when they die?  I guess I will have to die to find out.  As with other artistic fields, it does seem to be a great career move....but not one I am willing to take.


 Do they want apprentices? I think this varies with personality.  Like any oldster, there will usually come a time when passing on what you know brings joy.  For what I assume is a small percentage, they are loners and don't care.


 Do they have an obligation to help to younger ones that come behind them?  I think so, but see above.


 Do they drink too much? Having been involved with ASGCA, which has let me meet many professionals over time, I think not, and that it was mostly a myth.  That said, I think the profession probably mirrors pro golf in that its practitioners are more straight laced now than before.  Some of the old guys sure did drink.  Sidebar, the oldest architect I ever talked to was William Langford.

 How much do they care about criticism or praise? I think it varies by personality.


What percentage of GCA is art or business? Can the two be separated?  I think it varies by personality and by the project.  If commissioned to design a new course, I rarely focused on the business side, I did what I thought was best for design, subject to the approval and budget of the owner, of course.  If commissioned to do a partial remodel that typically addresses the biggest course problems (which are rarely strategic design, but commonly artistry, but then again, mostly drainage and maintenance, then GCA seems more like a business to me.

[Ira Fishman]

The answer on being appreciated after death is a classic.


Ira

[Tom_Doak]

 Do they want to cut their ear off so they can’t hear the criticism?  Yes, no that one is a myth that creative people are crazy enough to cut off their ear, just because Van Gogh did.  Few people are really okay with criticism no matter what their personality type.

One of the things I loved about Pete Dye was his response to criticism.


I happened to start working for him just before the first tournament at the TPC at Sawgrass, and was around that week as the pros declared open season on critiquing the course.  He listened to a lot, and dismissed most of it as, “If I was playing for money, I wouldn’t like it, either.”  He didn’t care WHO was doing the criticizing but only what they said; afterward, he said the one that made him think the most was Howard Twitty’s belief that the course was too short.


When I sent him a copy of my original Confidential Guide, he wasn’t bothered by it; he did tell me a few places where he thought I was wrong, and questioned me a bit about others.  But mostly he followed the advice he had given me, which was to be confident in your own decisions because they were well thought out, and not to worry if someone with less understanding of the situation disagreed.


It’s good that people have strong reactions to your work.  That doesn’t mean you have to agree with their take.

[Peter Pallotta]

What's interesting is Mr Dye's 'If I was playing for money I wouldn't like it either' -- which tells me he knew something even more important for a creative person than the need for 'thick skin', ie he understood that the reaction to the work said very little about the value and quality of the work itself, and that the views of any given person or group of people about a golf course said more about them than it did the golf course; no piece of creative work can or is meant to or should be expected to satisfy everybody -- it simply doesn't work that way. All of which means (it seems) that Mr Dye listened to criticism only when/in terms of whether he thought that it might make a given golf course better, in fulfilling its particular function. I would've liked to have met him: he seems to have merrily and successfully blurred the lines between artist, craftsman, service provider, and businessman -- and to have done it without much fuss or bother or pretence. It also strikes me that, coming when he did in its history, he might be one of the first or most important proponents of 'the Big World Theory' of gca.

[V_Halyard]

Absolutely. 
Same as any art form.
Stevie Wonder and Weird Al are technically both artists.
The definition is transportable.

[Jeff_Brauer]

 Do they want to cut their ear off so they can’t hear the criticism?  Yes, no that one is a myth that creative people are crazy enough to cut off their ear, just because Van Gogh did.  Few people are really okay with criticism no matter what their personality type.

One of the things I loved about Pete Dye was his response to criticism.


I happened to start working for him just before the first tournament at the TPC at Sawgrass, and was around that week as the pros declared open season on critiquing the course.  He listened to a lot, and dismissed most of it as, “If I was playing for money, I wouldn’t like it, either.”  He didn’t care WHO was doing the criticizing but only what they said; afterward, he said the one that made him think the most was Howard Twitty’s belief that the course was too short.


When I sent him a copy of my original Confidential Guide, he wasn’t bothered by it; he did tell me a few places where he thought I was wrong, and questioned me a bit about others.  But mostly he followed the advice he had given me, which was to be confident in your own decisions because they were well thought out, and not to worry if someone with less understanding of the situation disagreed.


It’s good that people have strong reactions to your work.  That doesn’t mean you have to agree with their take.

TD, I may have told this story before, but in 1986, the year my first 18 hole design opened, I happened to run into Pete on the floor of the turf show.  I was lamenting some of the critiques from one of the three "soft opening" events, mostly centered on the green contours being too severe.  Pete asks what state the course was in, and when I replied Georgia, he thought for a second and said, "At the opening, just tell them you wanted the best greens in the state, and in this case, that meant having more contours than Augusta National." 


At the final grand opening, someone asked about the contour, and I screwed up my courage to use Pete's line directly, expecting the worst, but heads started nodding up and down.  it was like that scene from animal house where the guy starts screaming (in his head) "She bought it!  She bought it!") 


He also told me to "Never apologize for anything.  If they ask, just tell them that is exactly the way you wanted it, even if you secretly think it's a mistake.



Those lessons from Pete have served me well!

[Ian Andrew]

I can only answer for me, not any other architect.
I know many of them well, but I don’t really know the motivations of any of them.

Are they inspired by their predecessors?

I am, but I like work of current architects too.
I find I’m most inspired by unusual choices that work.

Are they free to let their creative juices unleashed?

Depends on the type of work required.
I find historical work is mostly about details.
Then it depends on the client.
Some want their input; others trust you to do what you do.
It’s unusual for me to have complete freedom.
It also changes committee to committee for me.

Can they develop their own style?

Depends on what you do in the business.
I haven’t done enough to ever answer that question. I never will.

Do they want to cut their ear off so they can’t hear the criticism?

I used to care, getting older has its advantages.
I’m more worried about my health than someone’s GCA post.

What are the pros and cons with commission work?

Pro: When you get to imagine something and take that through to built form, it’s a rush like no other.
Con: When you have no work, no bank balance and a family, it takes a lot of strength to keep going and make it through one of the down cycles.

Is there pressure to be different?

I would counter that with there’s more pressure to conform.

Do they see flaws in their work?

I’m flawed. Most know their flaws or weaknesses.
If you think your perfect every time, you’re either a shitty architect or ridiculously arrogant.

Do they want to be left alone with their work?

I’m sociable, I like to draw others in so they can enjoy what gets created and feel they played a part.

Are they better appreciated when they die?

Nobody will remember me. I appreciate I got to play in the dirt.

Do they want apprentices?

I don’t. I didn’t want the responsibility of paying them when I couldn’t pay myself.
It’s a hard business for most architects, the other ones that don’t make your lists.

Do they have an obligation to help to younger ones that come behind them?

Yes and no. If your successful, you can step aside to help someone else blossom. Some do, some don’t.

Do they drink too much?

Most drink less than you think.
You must be “on” all the time and travel far too much to keep a business going.
You can't juggle addictions and that lifestyle for very long.

How much do they care about criticism or praise?

The larger the ego, the bigger the ears.

What percentage of GCA is art or business? Can the two be separated?

Running a business is an art too.
I’m a third-tier architect. The amount of time I spend outside of the creative process would disappoint you.
It’s travelling, interviews, meetings, permits, course walks, member events, presentations, etc.
It's the price we need to pay to do the things we enjoy the most.

[Ira Fishman]

Mr. Andrew may consider himself a third tier architect. I doubt that is actually true.


However, I know for a fact that he is a top tier thinker, observer, and writer. And that conclusion is not based solely or even primarily on his posts here. Anyone who does not read his essays and blogs is the poorer for it.


Artistry manifests itself in many forms.


Ira

[JMEvensky]

What Ira said. Only problem with Ian is he doesn't enough here.

[Joel_Stewart]

They absolutely are artists.  This year I took a trip to the mid west and it reinforced the point.  Four courses, all fairly close to each other yet completely unique.


Lawsonia Links:  Fantastic man made land formations.  True art.


Mammoth Dunes:  Very creative use of large sand dunes and fairways intertwined.  Big beautiful greens.


The Lido:  A massive undertaking of moving dirt creating 18 pieces of art.


Chicago Golf Club, a flat piece of property that is beautiful to look at and play.


Each of these courses is unique that the architects let their juices go. 


I'll let the architects answer the other questions with the question of being unique an important one but possibly limited by the owner, regulations and pace of play.  There's only a few that have the guts to build a Tobacco Road. 

[Peter Pallotta]

They may very well be artists, but if I called them craftsmen instead would that be to diminish them?

A quote from an old Shaker woodworker, expressing his philosophy:

"Don't make something unless it is both necessary and useful; but if it is both necessary and useful, don't hesitate to make it beautiful".

A very good guide for every feature or golf hole or golf course an architect might build, no?

And likely an excellent way to ensure that form and function, practical utility as a field of play and an understated aesthetic at one with Nature, meld together as one.

[Jeff Schley]

Didn’t read anything in the thread and will say yes they are. Even if dealing with some limitations such as budget, environmental strictions etc. I think it rests in that creative space.


Even an artist if commissioned, has ideas given to him from the client such as: size of canvas, colors, scene, even timeline. 

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()