Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture Discussion Group => Topic started by: TEPaul on October 29, 2008, 07:03:24 AM
-
Probably because of the recent Tillinghast thread (with some really interesting new research production from Philadelphia's Joe Bausch) that eventually got into a discussion (argument?) on the identity of the early American Golfer magazine pen name "Far and Sure", some of us got interested in the entire subject of the use of pen names that seemed so prevalent back then.
What was that about really and what were some of the reasons they did it? Should it be done again like that? Should it even be done on this particular website like they did it back then? ;)
And how did it work? It seems to me those who did it, particularly if Tillinghast really did use both pen names of Hazard and Far and Sure (even if one or some may've used it too for convenience or deflection or whatever), it surely was a pretty cool and interesting literary tool or trick to use, particularly if and when he referred to himself in the third person.
It kind of reminds me of the final scene in the movie "The Sting". The denoument was even after they conned the hell out of the big Irish gangster from New York, the deal was not just to walk away but to do what Henry Gondorf (Newman) said was, "To Hold the Con."
The deal was that noone (other than the con artists) was to ever know that the Big Mick from New York got conned.
Did Travis and Tillie or whomever it was who used that or those "pen names" actually hold the con? It seems like they may have, at least with most of them who never knew them well personally, because as hard as some of us research it and try we may never really know who it was who used some of those pen names.
If the likes of Travis and Tillie can hear us somehow I know it would have to make them chuckle.
I think it's cool. What do you think?
-
According to Travis biographer, Bob Labbance (Travis was the Editor of American Golfer Magazine) here were some of the pen names used in that magazine through the years:
1. "Lochinvar"---Western region
2. "Bunker Hill"---New England
3. "Buckeye"---Ohio
4. "The Judge" and "The Colonel"---the South
5. "Hazard"---around Philadelphia
6. "Far and Sure"---Eastern Pennsylvania
7. "William Pitt"----Western Pennsylvania
8. "Argonaut"---Pacific region
9. "A Sufferer", "The Duffer", "The Philosopher", "Westward Ho!"----general
Who can identify who any of those pen names really were? And secondly, who thinks those pen names were not or could not be used by more than one person and why?
Is it possible that Wayne Morrison, Tom MacWood and TEPaul are pen names? If so what're their real identities? Well, what the heck, with me it's been going on too long anyway, so I don't mind finally revealing the con. TEPaul is not my real identity. My real name is actually Glenn "Fireball" Roberts.
-
I once wrote under the pen name of "Dat Effen, Golf Course Architect."
There is a family with several members who are gca's. I have suggested to them that they write under the pen name of Fuggin. That way, the whole Fuggin family can contribute to writings, just as they do to their designs......
-
I once wrote under the pen name of "Dat Effen, Golf Course Architect."
There is a family with several members who are gca's. I have suggested to them that they write under the pen name of Fuggin. That way, the whole Fuggin family can contribute to writings, just as they do to their designs......
Of course, then their competitors would have to adopt pseudonyms of their own -- if for no other reason than to just, you know, keep up with the Fuggins.
(P.S. Any eligible women in that family, Jeff? If you'd marry her, you could go by "Dat Effen-Fuggin, Golf Course Architect.")
-
Would he be any relation to Dat Fuggin Arsehole Jr.? Of the Bumfug, Pennsylvania. Arseholes?
Tom Paul,
Pen names, pseudonyms and pseudepigraphy in golf and architecture writing have been around since the the beginning of time. It allowed the writer anonymity when it wasn't of a critical nature--but sometimes it did go beyond that. For example Boyles McCracken was actually Scotty Chilsolm, a well-known at the time writer/golfer-at-large, who took many of the pictures from California's architecture we so much admire today.
Tillinghast, it would seem loved to utilize a lot of nicknames and create unusual characters like Whiffenpoof, etc..
-
I have to seriously wonder if we didn't get much better (at least more honest) critical review and analysis here on GCA back when various contributers participated anonymously using psuedonyms? For instance, I miss "Sandy Parlour" and "Dr. Katz", and "Bendelow2". ;)
Of course, there's a downside to that if the attacks and criticisms are personal and not professional, which sometimes was the case.
More to the point, I see no reason why the same person or persons couldn't/wouldn't use multiple synonyms, especially for a fledging magazine with very few "experts" in the country at the time, who both knew the game well and had writing abilities.
To conclude that Tillinghast couldn't have been both "Far and Sure" and "Hazard", or any other name in the same magazine seems a bit unrealisitic. Especially when we know both psuedonyms covered essentially the same territory under different bylines.
It would also suggest to the reader that the magazine had a breadth of coverage that might have been somewhat lesser in actuality through giving multiple names to single contributing writers.
-
I see no reason why the same person or persons couldn't/wouldn't use multiple synonyms, especially for a fledging magazine with very few "experts" in the country at the time, who both knew the game well and had writing abilities.
To conclude that Tillinghast couldn't have been both "Far and Sure" and "Hazard", or any other name in the same magazine seems a bit unrealisitic. Especially when we know both psuedonyms covered essentially the same territory under different bylines.
As a guy who anonymously edits a newspaper feature, every day of every year, written by pseudonymous contributors, I can assure you that, even today, in the 21st century, it *is* possible for one human being to have multiple pseudonyms.
Why do a handful of my contributors have multiple handles? Because they're really prolific, and they're really good at it, and they know that other, less-really-good-at-it contributors would bitch and moan about them if they didn't disguise themselves even more than a single pseudonym would disguise them.
That could explain multiple Tilly-nyms, too.
-
Would architecture commentary in mass circulation golf magazines be better and more honest with pseudonymous authors?
I think it unquestionably would - though we are working from pretty a low bar. Almost anything would be an improvement on what we get now.
There's not much question but that pseudonymous pieces during the GA promoted the flow of honest opinions. That's part of the reason why architecture magazine commentary was so good in the GA.
I also agree with Dan and Mike above. I suspect these pen names fronted a stable of rotating writers from time to time. Which I assume is important if you are publishing weekly or monthly and you have a group of underpaid, hard to reach, cranky, spoiled, easily distracted contributors.
Bob
-
Bob:
It's hard to say if the plethora of pen names back in that day (American Golfer etc) had something to do with the concern of most of those writers, so many of which were good amateur golfers, with jeopardizing their amateur status. Technically, the USGA Amateur status philosophy of that day was that a good amateur player was not allowed to trade on his name to make money out of golf and that did include writing about golf. I do not recall that any well known amateur golfer of that era lost their amateur status merely for writing about it for pay but it had to concern the likes of Travis and Tillinghast anyway and may've been the best explanation for not just the use of a pen name but maybe a few of them.
A lot of that changed around 1920 when the USGA amateur status rules began to make exceptions for such things as professional architects and writers. That probably helped to slowly usher out such common use of that literary tool.
-
On the other hand, I could be wrong but it seems like the amateur status philosophy got quite a lot stricter in the teens than it had been in the decade before that. The reasons for that might be historically interesting too in American golf.
-
TE -
I've been thinking about this for a couple of days, what with the other thread. It's hard for me to get any kind of clear picture or opinion.
If I knew nothing about the United States in 1910-1920 except what I read in American Golfer, I'd think that there were only about 400 people living in the entire country back then, all of whom knew eachother and all of whom either/and played the great courses competitively, belonged to those courses as members, designed those golf courses, or wrote about those courses, those designers, those members, and those competitions.
Which is to say, I can't imagine how the pen names helped the writers stay anonymous and hold the con, and for so many years -- but since they did manage to hold the con (in some cases for decades now), it means that I must be missing something, big time.
Peter
-
Hiya, Fireball! My name's sunburst and I don't see roman candle anywhere, so he must have the night off or something.
I'd like to throw out the idea that somewhere...someplace same in his business records...Travis must have kept a log or journal of who posted under what fake names. It only makes good business sense to do that. Maybe pay stubs where he had to write out checks and what they were for. Maybe a ledger. But it seems likely something like that existed...hopefully...
-
Speaking of names, I guess you can put lipstick on pseudepigraphy, but it's still pseudepigraphy.
I'm Mike Cirba, and I approved this message. ;D
-
"Which is to say, I can't imagine how the pen names helped the writers stay anonymous and hold the con, and for so many years -- but since they did manage to hold the con (in some cases for decades now), it means that I must be missing something, big time."
Peter:
I'm sure you're right about that and I don't think you're missing something, matter of fact you probably just pointed out a fairly obvious fact----eg the world of golf was pretty small in those days and certainly in those regions and obviously all the people who actually knew that actual pen name writer knew he was writing under those pen names, particularly when they read his copy that was frequently about them and even about him (the pen name writer) in the third person.
This probably isn't a matter of them trying to con anyone about their identity, it's probably just so long ago now there isn't any direct connection, and it's just hard to track now even if it may not have been that hard to back then.
Actually, I think Tillie used both those pen names and it's seems pretty transparent to me reading some of that copy that it's him.
-
Peter -
Great point about the same 400 people that show up in golf magazines in the 20's. It was a rotating cross section of the same industrialists, society nobs, golfers and USGA/R&A big wigs.
Most of them probably had a pretty good idea of who was behind the pen names. But even, so the pen names gave the authors plausible deniability (as they say at the CIA).
Some of my British friends can set me straight, but I seem to recall that articles in The Times had no by-lines until 20 or so years ago. Darwin's articles were by-lined as "Our Golf Correspondent". Unlike the US, there is a long tradition of anonymous or pseudonymous journalism in the UK going back to Addison & Steele and The Tattler. No?
Bob
-
Bob, TE -
I agree that the pen names provided plausible deniability, and I'd imagine that many back then also found the writing styles 'transparent'. Maybe it is simply that too many years have passed - but still, it sure seems like one of the best-kept-secrets-that-wasn't-a-secret ever... as if the 400 people made a pact to keep it that way. Which suggests to me that eveyone had an interest in staying on Far and Sure's good side and in Hazard's good books etc...which further suggests that the men behind he pens were heavyweights in that world.
But that's as far as I can get in my thinking.
Peter
-
Hiya, Fireball! My name's sunburst and I don't see roman candle anywhere, so he must have the night off or something.
Would someone please tell me what the Hell this is supposed to mean?
I'd like to throw out the idea that somewhere...someplace same in his business records...Travis must have kept a log or journal of who posted under what fake names. It only makes good business sense to do that. Maybe pay stubs where he had to write out checks and what they were for. Maybe a ledger. But it seems likely something like that existed...hopefully...
Jay, Are you really being serious? Please tell me your joking.
-
Bob Crosby,
For what its worth, pseudonyms were a huge thing for a lot of guys in the old days, from all of the great magazines and periodicals. Scotty Chilsolm used to do a column called The Blitherings of Boyles McCracken, as Boyles was secondary persona--but he really didn't need it. Scotty's Scot roots always were evident! Tillinghast, and Phil will back this up--was sort of a master of pseudonyms, like Whiffenpoof, the dragon/dinosaur-like character seen from The Course Beautiful collection by Bob Trebus and Rick Wolf
Then there is that Sandy Barrens Jr. character...Whoever that guy was, he was GOOD! ;)
-
Bob:
It's hard to say if the plethora of pen names back in that day (American Golfer etc) had something to do with the concern of most of those writers, so many of which were good amateur golfers, with jeopardizing their amateur status. Technically, the USGA Amateur status philosophy of that day was that a good amateur player was not allowed to trade on his name to make money out of golf and that did include writing about golf. I do not recall that any well known amateur golfer of that era lost their amateur status merely for writing about it for pay but it had to concern the likes of Travis and Tillinghast anyway and may've been the best explanation for not just the use of a pen name but maybe a few of them.
A lot of that changed around 1920 when the USGA amateur status rules began to make exceptions for such things as professional architects and writers. That probably helped to slowly usher out such common use of that literary tool.
TomP
Are you suggesting that amateurs were evading the rules of amateurism by using pen names? That seems incredible to me especially since many people would have known who the author was. Of course, there is plausible denial, but it doesn't seem like these guys would break the rules intentionally as there was a question of honour at stake- no?
Ciao
-
"I agree that the pen names provided plausible deniability, and I'd imagine that many back then also found the writing styles 'transparent'. Maybe it is simply that too many years have passed - but still, it sure seems like one of the best-kept-secrets-that-wasn't-a-secret ever... as if the 400 people made a pact to keep it that way. Which suggests to me that eveyone had an interest in staying on Far and Sure's good side and in Hazard's good books etc...which further suggests that the men behind he pens were heavyweights in that world.
But that's as far as I can get in my thinking."
Peter:
Your post there sort of outlines my own interest in this subject of pen names in that age of golf magazine and newspaper reporting. I'd just like to determine how close the people writing under those pen names really were to the people and courses they were reporting about. I think the reason for that should be pretty obvious.
As this particular medium was by far the best and most comprehensive way to get the word out about significant events in golf and architecture it seems like all those people relied on each other and the fact that they were all probably very close friends may be one of the reasons for the need to use pen names and hide the writer's identity from the general readership.
-
TommyN:
Regarding post #16, I think we've already had enough of the residuals of some personal battles between posters on this website recently. Whatever you and Jay have going with each other elsewhere and on other kinds of subjects it may be best not to get them on this particular thread. It looks like Jay's post was just a question and/or opinion on pen names and maybe your post #16 was too but I hope you two don't take it into something on this thread that doesn't really relate to the subject of this particular thread.
Thanks
Regarding your post #17----eg it looks like Tillinghast may've written under a few different pen names but noone who's even remotely familiar with his life and times in writing would likely deny that he also had a helluva imagination for songs and ditties and drawings (even if a lot of that was likely his father B.G.) and sort of cartoon characterizations of which things like "whiffensnoof" or "whiffensnapper" or whatever their actual names were. But I'd like to keep the distinctions between those semi-cartoon characterization names and the actual pen names these people in that time wrote under. The pen names use seems to be complicated enough as it was or is.
-
I once wrote under the pen name of "Dat Effen, Golf Course Architect."
There is a family with several members who are gca's. I have suggested to them that they write under the pen name of Fuggin. That way, the whole Fuggin family can contribute to writings, just as they do to their designs......
Of course, then their competitors would have to adopt pseudonyms of their own -- if for no other reason than to just, you know, keep up with the Fuggins.
(P.S. Any eligible women in that family, Jeff? If you'd marry her, you could go by "Dat Effen-Fuggin, Golf Course Architect.")
Yeah, there is one hot chick in the family. I have often said I would like to work under her.......or over her!
I once heard that the late Ed Seay was going to partner with the tour pro Grant Waite and form the firm of Waite and Seay.........
If Brett Farve got into the business (and who isn't getting into the "easy money" of gca these days and he matched up with the Fuggins they could have designs with great Farve and Fuggins, not unlike VW cars.
Be sure and tip your waitresses!
Seriously,
Jay,
I think those reciepts might be out there. Not sure why Tom N thinks you would/should be joking. I doubt these guys wrote for free. And if someone can find obscure shipping manifest records, there might be an attic containing the old business records of those old magazines. Its amazing what kind of stuff is still around, although, never when you need it!
I think the whole pen name thing had to do with amateur status and a greater sense of propriety back in those days. As always, I could be wrong.
-
"TomP
Are you suggesting that amateurs were evading the rules of amateurism by using pen names? That seems incredible to me especially since many people would have known who the author was. Of course, there is plausible denial, but it doesn't seem like these guys would break the rules intentionally as there was a question of honour at stake- no?"
Sean:
What I meant to say is it seems like the philosophy (I used the word "philosophy" on purpose) on what well known amateur players over here could do as far as any kind of financial remuneration from golf (via their reputations as good players) was beginning to seriously tighten up, get stricter and get questioned far more in the teens and particularly the mid-teens than it had been earlier and in the decade before the teens. It seemed to get very strict under USGA president Watson in the mid-teens.
I'm not saying those guys like Tillinghast were technically violating "amateur status" rules because mostly those rules hadn't been that specifically written but it seems like the USGA was evolving in their philosophy to a stricter interpretation (I can see this in most of Macdonald's writing about goings-on with the USGA committees and Board from his book).
This would significantly change and relax in the early 1920s with the USGA on Amateur Statue Rules but in the teens some significant amateur golfers came under some real scrutiny, including Travis. Quimet and Tillinghast who actually lost his amateur status and never even bothered to try to get it back.
-
This may seem like a digression from the subject of pen names, writers who were well known amateur players etc but I don't think so.
It seems like some of the distinctions between those considered to be professionals and those considered to be "amateur/sportsmen" was becoming more distinct and defined into the teens and I think this included the difference between the developing professional architects and those who chose to remain "amateur" architects (and to some extent writers on golf and architecture).
And I also think this kind of ethos or philosophy was not exactly matched abroad by what was going on in America at that time in this context.
It seems like there were a lot of interesting and counterposing philosophies (and perhaps even rules) going on at this time---eg particularly the teens between America and abroad. We probably need to understand them better to understand not just what was happening with writing but also with architecture too in this way over here in America.
It is not lost on me that MCC (Merion Cricket Club, that most of us just refer to as Merion) was one of the most intensely dedicated clubs in America at that time to the entire idea of the "amateur/sportsman." I know this via at least one very significant speech given at that club by those who ran it then.
This could have a whole lot to do with the reason MCC chose to go with a group of "amateur/sportsmen" members to design their new courses in Ardmore and it could have a whole lot to do with why they turned for advice to Macdonald/Whigam both of whom were clearly at the pinnacle of what was then considered to be the golf "amateur/sportsman" ethos.
Macdonald did not hesitate to state that under no circumstances would he ever consider taking pay for anything he ever did or would do with golf or architecture. He didn't believe in that. It guess he felt he came from that old-fashioned world of the gentleman amateur sportsman who did what he did in golf and architecture, and frankly sport generally, for the love of it and definitely not for financial remuneration.
We need to understand how important that was to some of those people back then. Were there some perceived class perceptions or distinctions rolled up in some of these philosphies at that time? There is no question about it and it is pretty easy to track and document.
How did that dynamic begin to diminish and get resolved going into the 1920s and on? That's another story but certainly no less an important one!
-
I'd like to know if Tom Doak ever had regrets about his Confidential Guide getting out under his name. After all, it was intended to be, ... ahem, confidential.
Bob
-
Jeff and TEP:
it's such a fine line between what could have survived and what could have been thrown out with the trash 80 years ago, but it stands to reason that, somewhere, Travis would have kept a note or a ledger with those identities written down.
Tom, I remember you saying that some people kept their records in their head, and some people do that. What kind of man was Travis in that regard? Was he a pack-rat who kept everything in neat piles? Or was he a "right-brainer" who could just handle all his business dealings in his head? Who else would know that, maybe Mucci?
-
Its amazing what kind of stuff is still around, although, never when you need it!
In that regard, I'll ask my wife if she has come across anything! She is the biggest garage saler, and keeper of "stuff' (useless stuff I might add) of anyone I know. Hell the damn receipts may be in some box in my very basement as we speak! ::) ::) >:(
-
Hey Brother William! I bet they're in the finis africae! ;)
So that's what Jorge and William were after! Somebody go kick Malachai's heiney and get the abbot to open it up. ;D
-
Could someone explain why they used pen names?
Many years ago I wrote a few articles for a golf management magazine under the pen name Carl Spagler, called: The News From Featherbed Bent Country Club. I basically would try to put myself in the mindset of the Bill Murray character in Caddyshack. It was always a lot fun to go to meetings and hear people talk about the idiotic stuff I had written, not knowing that it was me. Actually I wasn't that far out of character. :P
-
"Who else would know that, maybe Mucci?"
Jay:
I would think the best person to ask would be KevinM, Bob Labbance's partner. After-all they wrote the only biography on Travis I'm aware of. I just saw him last Monday but I don't believe I'd thought of this to ask him at the time. That kind of thing was not in their book though.
-
TEP-> That's a thought. Also, they must have gotten their info from some living relatives of Travis.
Where are artifacts from the American Golfer kept? Does the USGA have some?
-
Bradley:
There were a lot of different reasons writers used pen names and pseudonyms. If you Google "pen names" and "pseudonyms" it explains most of the reasons.
-
"Where are artifacts from the American Golfer kept? Does the USGA have some?"
Jay:
I am no expert on Travis. If there was one it was definitely Bob Labbance. Some have thought that "Far and Sure" was Travis or mostly Travis but I just can't see how Travis could've written the really detailed copy that Far and Sure did of the Eastern Pennsylvania region as consistently as that pen name did so often in 1911 and 1912. Travis was in New York. Tillinghast was in Philadelphia. If Tillinghast never did write any of the "Eastern Pennsylvania Notes" in American Golfer in 1911 and 1912 it must have been someone other than Travis and none of us here can see who else it could remotely be at that time other than Tillinghast.
-
Phil:
In this thread you stated that there were a couple of instances in which Tillie admitted he was the writer behind the pen name "Hazard", and that the April 1918 American Golfer column in which he reports that "Duffer" was B.C. Tillinghast, the gentleman who had contributed to the column, was his (A.W. Tillinghast's) father, is one of those instances.
I'm wondering what other "Hazard" articles you think that pen name writer admitted he was A.W. Tillinghast because I do not think Tillie did admit in that April 1918 "Hazard" article that he was A.W. Tillinghast, at least certainly not to readers who had no idea who B.C. Tillinghast was or that his son was a golf course architect. In a number of articles Tillie, as the pen name writer "Hazard" or perhaps even "Far and Sure", did occasionally refer to A.W. Tillinghast, perhaps as a golfer or even a golf architect but he always did so in the third person (apparently consciously disassociating Tillinghast from the pen name writer). That is essentially the most common trick of a pen name writer if he ever writes about or refers to himself. If he did not want readers who did not know him to suspect who he really was that is what he would continue to do. If he wanted readers who did not know him to understand who he really was he would've simply referred to himself in his article in the first person but he did not do that in that April 1918 “Hazard” article.
Again, to understand this type of literary trick from the point of view of the pen name writer we need to look at the issue of the reader who did not suspect who he was and not from our perspective who’re trying to investigate who he may’ve been.
Obviously, there is loads of transparency in this kind of literary trick or game because we must understand that anyone Tillie knew or knew him or who he ever actually interviewed or questioned for information under his own name or in person (this is why "first hand" (being present at an event) is so important for us to now know if we are investigating whether he could've written under the pen name "Far and Sure" too) were of course going to know his identity, and particularly when they saw the subject he was interviewing and writing about in print.
To me this is just an example of some of the nuances of some of us today appreciating the way things actually worked at the time and in a contemporaneous way when we view them now historically.
Tillie mentioned in one article (or one of the pen names did) that there were probably about 5,000 golfers in Philadelphia at a particular time. By that he seemed to suggest that may be the expected readership of these kinds of articles or at least those that had some interest in the subject. How many of them knew Tillie personally, were interviewed by him under his own name at any point, and therefore had to know the identity behind the pen name? It's impossible to put a number on that question but I would have to say it may've been less than 10% of them and it seems to me that was the trick of pen name writing and perhaps its very point.
Peter Pallota raised an interesting question and point earlier in this thread that the world of golf back then was pretty small compared to today so who really did these pen name writers think they were tricking "identity-wise" with this literary pseudonym game, and secondly, why did they and their magazines even bother?
I submit to write in the first person would only help to make both the writer and those he ever interviewed and who knew him look slightly self-serving if the general readership totally understood how they well they knew each other or even that they knew each other at all.
Perhaps I should’ve put this post on the pen name thread because even if I may be wrong about this it seems to me this type of literary pseudonym game basically helps to make the interest in this kind of subject look bigger, at least perceptively than it really was or may’ve been and clearly that is going to play right into the hands of what a magazine such as American Golfer is basically trying to accomplish!
-
Does anyone know who the "Colonel" and the "Judge" might have been who covered the South?
A couple of intriguing facts are that Bobby Jones' father was call "Colonel" and the name of Jones' beloved dog was "Judge".
Logically O.B. Keeler would be the best guess. But an interesting coincidence with the pen names.
Bob
-
Bob:
If those two pen names used in American Golfer in the "Southern Section" were NOT taken from Jones' father's nickname and Jones' beloved dog's name that really would be SOME coincidence!! Of course who wrote under those pen names is another question.
The thing I'm getting more and more interested in is if pen name writers used more than one pen name from time to time and particularly WHY and if writers were sometimes interchangeable for convenience.
In that vein I really am wondering after Phil Young said recently that B.C. Tillinghast was "Duffer" and that he also could've been "Far and Sure", then why is it that Phil is so resistant to the fact that Tillie (A.W. Tillinghast) could have used two pen names (Hazard and Far and Sure)?
If it is only for the reason that Phil THINKS Tillie was too busy with other things in 1911 and 1912 to have written under Far and Sure (when Hazard was not being used), then I think Phil should at least consider rethinking his intrepretation that Tillie was too busy during those two years to have also used Far and Sure. Did Tillie ever actually say or indicate, at any time, that he was too busy during those two years to do that? Not that I'm aware of. As far as I can tell, at this point, that is merely Phil's interpretation.
-
Yesterday, we may've found another person who might fit the bill as the identity behind "Far and Sure" but as of now, at least in my opinion, for a few reasons he just does not exactly fit the bill as well as Tillie does.
-
A few quick thoughts as I am really under teh weather and even typing is a bit much...
The Whiffensnoozer & Whiffenpoof & even a few others were cartoon charcters that Tilly made up stories about for entertaining his grandchildren.
Though it hasn't been mentioned, Tilly took on three nicknames for himself that he preferred his friends call him by. In his late teens to early twenties it was Bertie, shortened from his first name Albert. After this, and no one knows why, he took on the first of two similar nicknames. The first is Tillie, ending in "ie." This didn't seem to last all that long and he would almost exclusively use the the nickname Tilly, ending in "y" for the rest of his life. That is why you will never see me referring to him as Tillie but as TILLY. It is the smallest of points but one that I have been questioned about.
Yes, Tom, There were at least two occasions that I can think of off-hand, though I'll have to look up the exact references for you, where he gave up writing for a magazine or newspaper for the single reason that he was too busy with his design work. One of these was the Philadelphia Record and the other was the American Golfer.
Also, I never made the claim that B.C. Tillinghast was F&S; in fact in my first posts, as well as subsequent ones, clearly stated that I didn't think he was. The reason for mentioning him as a possibility is because part of the argument by some on here that F&S must have been Tilly was that they couldn't think of anyone else with his writing experience, playing experience ,social connections, had access to Tilly's photos, may have been present during some of the matches he played in and had the influence in the game locally and nationally from the Philly area as he did. Clearly B.C. did and, in fact, he wrote for the AG. That he isn't doesn't prove anything about the claim of Tilly being F&S, but rather clearly shows that there were others who fit this bill.
Here's another name for you as a possibility... Cameron Buxton. He also most likely is not the one. The point is that there are a number from that time who do qualify and do meet the clues given... it's just that he hasn't been identified as of yet.
Back to coughing my lungs out...
Finally, as I am running on empty here,
-
Phil,
Hope you're feeling better soon.
Mike
-
Mike,
Thanks for the nice thought... Yet hacking away can do some good at times, for a person came to mind that needs considering in this discussion for the very reason that he DIDN'T use a psudonym, wrote a regular column for the American Golfer from Jan. 199 through 1912 in which he actually gave swing advice and then wrote for GOLF magazine beginning in 1913 for a number of years.
The entire time he remained a highly respected amateur, and was in fact, THE amareur player in the U.S. after he became the first person to win both the U.S. Open and U.S. Amateur championships in the same year.
Charles "Chick" Evans.
WHY didn't Chick lose his amateur standing while some such as Tilly & Travis did? Because he evidently didn't accept remuneration for these articles, for if he had, he would have been declared a professional. In fact, he actually made a habit of contacting the USGA by letter and asking how they would rule if he performed certain functions, such as golf course design, and whether the ACT of doing so would cost him his standing. He was always told that there wasn't a problem so long as he didn't get paid for doing it.
Was the purpose of the using a pseudonym for golf writing simply a means of keeping an amateur standing that should have been forfeited under the rules?
I don't believe so. As many knew who "Hazard" and others actually were, it his next to impossible to accept that using a pseudonym would enable some to honorably "cheat." This is just out of the realm of possibilities. For one person, maybe, for a number to agree to this, it's ludicrous to believe it so.
In addition, when Tilly began using the pseudonym of "Hazard" (I believe his first artcile in the AG under that name was in 1908) the possibility of losing one's amateur status because of accepting money to write about golf was not yet an issue and the ruling wouldn't happen until 1916 or so (Too tired to look up the year. For those that have my Tilly bio there is a section in the appendix titled "The Amateur Question" that examines this issue strictly from Tilly's perspective).
On top of that, when Tilly had his amateur first threatened for doing this and designing golf courses (for him it was a dual-reasoned removal), he wrote as "Hazard" in July 1914 about his personal situation. He concluded with the statement that "If such be sin, then I will continue in the ways of sin..."
So as to WHY they used psudonym's and then didn't have everyone do so in the American Golfer is another question that needs thinking about...
-
"Yes, Tom, There were at least two occasions that I can think of off-hand, though I'll have to look up the exact references for you, where he gave up writing for a magazine or newspaper for the single reason that he was too busy with his design work. One of these was the Philadelphia Record and the other was the American Golfer."
Phil:
Pardon me for asking but I would like an answer on whether there is anything at all that you're aware of that Tilly really was too busy, particularly in those years 1911 and 1912, to basically give up or seriously slow down in contributing to AG as "Hazard" or whether that's simply your own interpretation.
"Also, I never made the claim that B.C. Tillinghast was F&S; in fact in my first posts, as well as subsequent ones, clearly stated that I didn't think he was. The reason for mentioning him as a possibility is because part of the argument by some on here that F&S must have been Tilly was that they couldn't think of anyone else with his writing experience, playing experience ,social connections, had access to Tilly's photos, may have been present during some of the matches he played in and had the influence in the game locally and nationally from the Philly area as he did. Clearly B.C. did and, in fact, he wrote for the AG. That he isn't doesn't prove anything about the claim of Tilly being F&S, but rather clearly shows that there were others who fit this bill.
Here's another name for you as a possibility... Cameron Buxton. He also most likely is not the one. The point is that there are a number from that time who do qualify and do meet the clues given... it's just that he hasn't been identified as of yet."
Phil:
I don't think this discussion of whether Tilly wrote under the pen name "Far and Sure" needs to be carried on in a manner like a court of law where one side simply guards their interest. We, here in Philadelphia, are only trying to figure out who it was (not necessarily one person in our minds) who wrote under the pan name "Far and Sure" for American Golfer. There are some other likely suspects and we probably know a lot more about and who they may have been and their particulars than you do, but it seems like, at least in our collective opinions, not a single one of them fit the bill for a whole host of reasons as well as Tilly did.
I've asked you before and I'll ask you again---eg why is it that you continue to resist the fact Tilly could've written under the pen name "Far and Sure" as well as under the pen name "Hazard?" I remind you again that I can't see that AG ever carried the "Eastern Pennsylvania Notes" section (the section that Tilly wrote under using the pen name "Hazard" some of the time) in any single month under both pen names. Is it really because you think he was too busy at the time you mentioned (1911 and 1912) or is there some other reason?
I saw Mike Cirba yesterday at the Haverford College Library (a group of us were reading the old American Cricketer magazines) and on the way out as we were talking I mentioned that what is really behind this discussion of "Far and Sure" and Tilly is really all about the things that have been discussed so much on this website about Merion and particularly the two people who have questioned the architectural attribution to Hugh Wilson and supported the fact that Macdonald may've designed the course or been the creative force behind it.
He agreed with that. So I think these threads on Tilly and pen names essentially goes directly to the crediblilty of the writer behind the pen names Hazard and most certainly Far and Sure too. For that reason we want to know who he was and how close to that club and the people from it the writer under the pen name "Far and Sure" was.
-
Yesterday, we may've found another person who might fit the bill as the identity behind "Far and Sure" but as of now, at least in my opinion, for a few reasons he just does not exactly fit the bill as well as Tillie does.
Tom,
We can scratch J. I. Lineaweaver. He was a member of Merion as early as 1909 and still was when the new course opened and he played on their competitive teams with Perrin, Lloyd, Hugh Wilson, Francis, Willoughby, et.al.
I find it extremely unlikely that a member of the club would have written the "Far and Sure" article, especially since he termed the two Merion members (Willoughby and Perrin) who accompanied him on his first go-rounds as his "guides".
-
Mike Cirba:
That Lineaweaver may've been a member of Merion or even if he was, in my mind that does not necessarily discount him as a possiblilty as the writer under the pen name "Far and Sure". Part of the entire gig of pseudonym or pen name writing is to disguise the writer because he may look to the casual observer and reader to be not exactly impartial to the subject at hand, perhaps in this case, Merion.
I do feel one thing, though, and that is whomever wrote as "Far and Sure" he was definitely on that dinner list of that meeting of the Golf Association of Philadelphia that was published under one of "Far and Sure's" column. If he wasn't at that dinner there is no conceivable way he could've written a detailed first hand account as was in that particular column of "Far and Sure's."
-
Phil,
What business would Chick Evans have going on up in the Poconos and Scranton area in 1911? The courses that were there at the time (excluding the fledging Shawnee course) were beyond primitive and I'm surprised anyone even knew they were playing golf in my old neighborhood around Scranton and Wilkes-Barre.
Tom Paul,
I agree with you about the dinner guests at the GAP gala.
However, clever a ruse as it may have been, I can't imagine Lineaweaver as a Merion member stating that he had heard good things from CB Macdonald two years prior and mention that he hadn't had a chance to even see the new course until this time, and then state;
"Fortunately I had as my first guides two of Merion's best golfers; Mr. Howard W. Perrin and Mr. Hugh Willoughby, and my two rounds there that day were delightful."
-
Mike Cirba:
It's little items like that so many miss and are so indicative. Throw out Lineaweaver then if he belonged to Merion. Who would say such a thing who belonged to the club? I think pen names writers take some liberties with the truth such as sometimes referring to themselves in the third person but I don't think they just tell blatant lies about not being there for months or years. ;)
-
Most of my reason for this particular thread was not to discuss who American Golfer's "Far and Sure" really was but to uncover some of the interesting reasons why pen names were used as well as revealing some of the interesting little literary tricks pen name writers such as those who wrote for golf magazines used to keep their real identity under wraps to most readers but certainly not all for obvious reasons.
But one thing I think I'm beginning to see from the "Far and Sure" threads is that a clever pen name writer seems to highlight those things in what he writes that make people look for reasons why it couldn't be him and he somehow minimizes those things in what he writes that make people try to find reasons to think it is him.
To mention himself in the third person in his articles is certainly one clever trick to make some people think it isn't him. Judging from some of those "Far and Sure" threads it seems like juggling different pen names is another trick to make people think it couldn't be him. I guess another clever pen name trick is if more than one writer used the same pen name.
It seems like it was a pretty funny game with the hallmark being to just keep most people guessing as long as possible. If Tillinghast really did use the "Far and Sure" pen name from time to time he sure has been successful at keeping most of the readership guessing. If it turns out some day to be truly obvious that Tilly did use the pen name "Far and Sure" and that he actually fooled one of his own biographers, well, it seems to me that would be downright hilarious, and I bet Tilly would probably enjoy that as much or more than anyone.
I really do have this sort of "time machine" desire to just want to meet some of those people we study on here from the old days and at this point I sure would like to spend a day or so with Tilly to analyze not just his architectural ideas but to also really check out the sense of humor he had. Something tells me it was off-beat and really good! ;)
-
It seems like it was a pretty funny game with the hallmark being to just keep most people guessing as long as possible. If Tillinghast really did use the "Far and Sure" pen name from time to time he sure has been I really do have this sort of "time machine" desire to just want to meet some of those people we study on here from the old days and at this point I sure would like to spend a day or so with Tilly to analyze not just his architectural ideas but to also really check out the sense of humor he had. Something tells me it was off-beat and really good! ;)
Tom,
By today's standards, he was also a flagrant racist and bigot!
That one commentary we read in "American Cricketer" about those with brains was a doozy! :o ::) ;D
-
I think monikers are fine to use for those that really need them. Any architect, any Tour Pro that now designs, and even Mr. Doak who bravely posts under his own name, would be candidates in my opinion. If there are things that would benefit GCA but are not said because of the fear of how it would affect one's career then by all means let them post as "Forced Containment" or "Mr. Artificial Waterfall".
I don't think a guy like me or anyone not making a living from GCA should use one. Everyone knows who some of these guys are and I think it should stop.
Jeff F.
-
MikeC:
Yes, that one in American Cricketer was pretty amazing. I don't have much feel for how well or if a writer could get away with something like that a century ago but if someone wrote that today in a periodical I'm pretty sure that would be the immediate end of their employment at that periodical.
However, personally I have no problem at all rerunning something like that on here or in print today. If that's what was acceptable in print back then there is no reason at all we should not know about it, in my opinion. After-all it IS history.
-
Having been involved, as Travis Society Archivist, in helping with the research for "The Old Man", and involved in discussions with Bob Labbance about the pseudonyms, I can tell you there is no 'smoking gun' out there. On the other hand, it is possible that Kevin Mendik, as TEPaul suggests, might have found something in Bob's papers, etc. Well worth an inquiry.
Ed
-
Mike,
Without defending what Tilly wrote, his is a case where the words are not the sum of the man. He was simply a product of his time and expressed thoughts and used vernacular that was commonly used by all in his day as well as by other writers.
Tilly was not prejudiced; in fact, in another anecdote that you failed to read in my Tilly bio which I may one day be simply be forced to send you a copy of to alleviate your ignorance ;D, Tilly fired a white foreman on one of his work crews and replaced him with a black man. He even went so far as to have this black gentleman named Lon and his wife Mary, move into the apartment he kept in the carriage house on his property so that he could spend the winter teaching him everything he would need to know to manage the project.
That winter the KKK regularly burned crosses on his property in harrington patk in protest. Tilly stood up to them and Lon worked for him until Tilly closed up shop & went on the PGA Tour...
This was related to me by Tilly's granddaughter, Barabara, who lived in the hosue dirctly behind Tilly's and next to the carriage house. She saw and witnessed these burning crosses from the 2nd floor hallway window of her house and the men who set them ablaze. She also spent time with Lon & Mary, whom she remembers with great fondness to this very day...
-
Phil,
That's a wonderful and inspirational story.
In that light, I just went to the following site and have ordered my long-overdue copy of your Tillinghast book. ;D
http://shop.classicsofgolf.com/servlet/-strse-NEW!-Future-Classics/Categories
I'll definitely be looking forward excitedly to its arrival.
I'll also be looking to a future Volume II, where the writings of "Far and Sure" are prominently portrayed. ;)
-
"Without defending what Tilly wrote, his is a case where the words are not the sum of the man. He was simply a product of his time and expressed thoughts and used vernacular that was commonly used by all in his day as well as by other writers."
Phil Young:
Is that right? What do you expect---eg that we should take your word for that because you call yourself one of Tillinghast's biographers??
Maybe you do but you can bet I'm not! I'm sick of your panegryics with Tillinghast, particularly when you try to pass off whatever he said were the common thoughts and were commonly used by ALL in his day.
That is remarkable bullshit and you can count on the fact I'm going to take you to task on here if you keep up with it. We can read, Phil Young, (have you seen what we just found that he wrote in American Crickter?), and we sure don't need you to tell us how to translate or understand it. I probably understand that world back then when he wrote in Philadephia better than you do and I probably know more about the realities of the people around here back then better than you do too.
I think a pretty important subject has been generated by that statement of yours---eg essentially the subject of panegyrics. Are you ready for it or are you going to say you're too busy or are you going to say--AGAIN---we should just agree to disagree and you don't want to participate any more??
Think about it---sleep on it---do whatever it takes, Phil Young, because that last post and some of the statements in it sure don't fly with me.
Tomorrow!
-
Phil wrote -
"Tilly fired a white foreman on one of his work crews and replaced him with a black man. He even went so far as to have this black gentleman named Lon and his wife Mary, move into the apartment he kept in the carriage house on his property so that he could spend the winter teaching him everything he would need to know to manage the project.
That winter the KKK regularly burned crosses on his property in harrington patk in protest. Tilly stood up to them and Lon worked for him until Tilly closed up shop & went on the PGA Tour...
This was related to me by Tilly's granddaughter, Barabara, who lived in the hosue dirctly behind Tilly's and next to the carriage house. She saw and witnessed these burning crosses from the 2nd floor hallway window of her house and the men who set them ablaze. She also spent time with Lon & Mary, whom she remembers with great fondness to this very day... "
Phil -
One of the least appreciated things about Bob Jones is the extent of the racism all around him. Most of the presidents of East Lake, the Georgia governor, senators and representative in the 1920's were affiliated with the KKK one way or another. I've got lots of stories. Tom Watson, a senator, wrote truly vile editorials over a long period of time. It was an era when lynchings were so common place that they didn't even make the front page.
There is no evidence that Jones shared such views. But the Golden Age was not so golden in many, many ways.
Bob
-
i can't bare to read all of the stuff being written here, simply because the posts take on a "Energizer Bunny" quality to them, but I do know this: In journalism, whenever there is a column written by more then one or two contributors, in an insider-like format, the use of a clever pseudonym is most always used.
I could give examples, but it would only lead to more speculation, and thats the last thing this website needs is more speculation.
Bob, Yes, I agree that the 1920's did have a certain air to it. For instance, there are covers of Pacific Golf & Motor magazine that are anything but politically correct; most shameful to think that they once existed, but thankfully things have changed.
-
Bob:
Attitudes and opinions towards some certainly could get bad back then---eg what we call "Politically Incorrect" today. Part of the problem obviously was back then there wasn't exactly a counter mentality that we know of today as an aversion against that kind of thing ("Politically CORRECT")! ;) At least there was nowhere near the extent or degree back then that we know of as "Political Incorrectness" today.
The thing I really object to that Philip Young said in a post above is that everybody (he said 'all') subscribed to that kind of mentality and opinion and racial and cultural slurring phraseology back then!!
First of all there's no way at all that he knows that or could know that and the reason obviously is it just isn't true. My thought is that a statement like that is just another example of the psychological ploy of "transference"----eg if one wants to downplay or minimize something that was not admirable about himself or somebody else one way to do it is to claim that everyone did the same thing or thought and said the same thing.
That time sure could be what we today call "Politically Incorrect" but to make a claim that everyone was that way back then it just total bullshit!
That's all I was calling him on.
Furthermore, I doubt Philip Young has ever read what Tillinghast wrote in American Cricketer in that racially or culturally denigrating vein that we ran across the other day. As far as I know nobody has read that stuff in close to a century. I'm the one who read it and I told Joe Bausch to photograph it but I do not believe he put it on this website, or if he did, I missed it.
-
So is it just a question of semantics?
-
TommyN:
What is just a question of semantics?
-
That maybe we are all not understanding, reading everybody's words and opinions correctly, which leads to the discussions gone awry? Just a thought. After all, we all can't be Bob Crobsy! ;)
Meanwhile, I gotta go to work!
-
I thnk that all pseudepigraphy should be cryit doon!
J-P
-
“That maybe we are all not understanding, reading everybody's words and opinions correctly, which leads to the discussions gone awry?”
TommyN:
Here’s what Philip Young said:
“"Without defending what Tilly wrote, his is a case where the words are not the sum of the man. He was simply a product of his time and expressed thoughts and used vernacular that was commonly used by all in his day as well as by other writers."
I believe he said that some of the racially and culturally slurring remarks Tillinghast wrote in American Cricketer and other periodicals expressed thoughts and used vernacular that was commonly used by ALL in his day.
How do you read that differently than I do?
The only thing I can say in Phil’s defense is that he may not have ever read what I’m referring to about what Tillinghast wrote in American Cricketer. However, I’m quite sure Phil has read that article in which Tillinghast went into a description of what he referred to as “Nigger Golf”.
What I’m saying is that if Phil thinks everyone in Tillinghast’s day used that kind of vernacular that conveyed racial prejudice I think he is completely incorrect, and I think that needed to be pointed out.
-
I could give examples, but it would only lead to more speculation, and thats the last thing this website needs is more speculation.
Tommy,
I would argue that "speculation" is the gasoline that fuels the GCA Discussion engine, and I'd argue that it's also the rocket engine that fuels our collective understanding of architectural historical discovery.
From "Who should/will be the architect of the 5th course at Bandon?" to "Was the writer known as "Far and Sure" actually AW Tillinghast?", to "Is this little course on an island in northern Scotland a Mackenzie?", the only way we advance our collective and individual knowledge of all things related to architecture and architectural history is simply asking questions and trying to reasonably speculate as to what the answers might be.
In a way, we also have de-facto, built in, peer review here, so when people speculate and float theories or ideas, or whatever, some rise to a level of acceptance and increase understanding and others get set afire and their ashes scatter to the winds.
Not too bad, not too messy....most of the time. ;)