Books vs Being There - The Changing face of Learning

[Peter Pallotta]

The old architects (Ross, Macdonald, Mackenzie etc) sought out and/or studied the great GB&I courses in the pursuit of learning their craft, and they took great pride in telling anyone who'd listen of their on-the-ground approach to understanding gca.  Decades later, most/many of today's architects have also done such study tours -- but have also had access to the large collection of books on design written since the golden age, many of them by the great old architects themselves and those that followed. Nowadays that repository of knowledge just keeps growing and groiwng, probably at an exponential rate -- libraries/bookstores and cyberspace are chock-full of the very best photos and advice and study materials and examples and analysis of great golf course architecture in all its forms. So: given that each potential site is different, and given that no professional wants to exactly replicate a golf hole seen elsewhere, and given that just about everything that could be tried has been tried (and in locations/terrains that the golden agers -- pre carts and wall to wall irrigation -- could never have dreamed possible, incluidng deserts and mountains), have we come to the point when aspiring architects are actually better off learning from books than they are from being there? In other words, do you think that the approach to learning and the nature of learning and the value of learning has changed, and if so will this impact future design?

Peter

[JC Jones]

This reminds me of an exchange between Sean (the psychologist) and Will (the kid) in Good Will Hunting.  Sean says to Will:

So if I asked you about art, you'd probably give me the skinny on every art book ever written. Michelangelo, you know a lot about him. Life's work, political aspirations, him and the pope, sexual orientations, the whole works, right? But I'll bet you can't tell me what it smells like in the Sistine Chapel. You've never actually stood there and looked up at that beautiful ceiling; seen that. If I ask you about women, you'd probably give me a syllabus about your personal favorites. You may have even been laid a few times. But you can't tell me what it feels like to wake up next to a woman and feel truly happy. You're a tough kid. And I'd ask you about war, you'd probably throw Shakespeare at me, right, "once more unto the breach dear friends." But you've never been near one. You've never held your best friend's head in your lap, watch him gasp his last breath looking to you for help. I'd ask you about love, you'd probably quote me a sonnet. But you've never looked at a woman and been totally vulnerable....

You're an orphan right?

[Will nods]

Sean: You think I know the first thing about how hard your life has been, how you feel, who you are, because I read Oliver Twist? Does that encapsulate you?

[Tom_Doak]

Peter:

I think you get something from both mediums.  

There are certainly many aspects of shaping that you'll never get from even the best picture books ... for example, the scale of undulations can only be appreciated first hand.

By the same token, I find myself going back more and more to Tom Simpson's book.  [Others would use George Thomas' book in the same way.]  There are a bunch of brilliant holes illustrated in those books, that I've never seen anything like on the ground.  I'm determined to build a course that feels like that someday, and probably sooner than later.

Nonetheless, the key is to be able to internalize all these ideas and concepts, and then be able to pull the right one out of your memory banks when you come upon the right place to use it.  And I don't mean copying it exactly ... I mean getting the inspiration for how to solve the problem at hand.

[Peter Pallotta]

JC, Tom - thanks, I understand what you're both saying, and I agree with you, but here's some background to my thinking/post:
 
I played golf last week and was paired up with a fellow who I'd call an education methodology consultant. He's at the local university and, in short, helps teachers learn how to teach -- advising the professors on how to plan/design/organize their courses so that their students get the most of of them.
 
Well, we were chatting about this and that and we got to the subject of technology, i.e. the internet etc. His view was that there are too many naysayers complaining that no one really learns anything anymore because everything they can possibly want to know is available almost instantly on the web, just by googling it, and so people don't want or feel they need to take the time to study any subject too deeply when they know they can search for it only if/when they need it. He believed that the naysayers are wrong, and that in fact the new technology/internet is a wonderfful tool precisely because it "frees up time and resources" -- i.e. it gives people the ability to spend their time and brain power not in studying for years and years but instead in "being creative" and "thinking outside the box", secure in the fact that if/when they need to know something they can find it quickly. Now, needless to say, I'm one of those naysayers -- to me, this technology/the internet encourages and supports an already unhelpful tendency in human beings to confuse "facts" with "knowledge" and to mistake "insights" for "understanding" and to falsely conclude that to "explain" something is akin to "experiencing" it and to be so puffed up by "words" so as to never realize the lack of "wisdom". Maybe I'm wrong, but in any event I do get the feeling that I am or soon will be in the minority, and that the opinions of folks like this education guru will gain more and more traction -- such that the facts and insights and explanations and words gleaned from books (i.e. online books) will carry more and more weight in the world, and in professions like gca. Perversely, I was trying to provide a rationale for the very thing I don't want to happen but think may indeed happen....and was just wondering what that might mean/look like on the ground, in the future.

Peter

[Wayne_Kozun]

Maybe we need MOOCs for GCA students 

[Tom_Doak]

He believed that the naysayers are wrong, and that in fact the new technology/internet is a wonderfful tool precisely because it "frees up time and resources" -- i.e. it gives people the ability to spend their time and brain power not in studying for years and years but instead in "being creative" and "thinking outside the box", secure in the fact that if/when they need to know something they can find it quickly. Now, needless to say, I'm one of those naysayers -- to me, this technology/the internet encourages and supports an already unhelpful tendency in human beings to confuse "facts" with "knowledge" and to mistake "insights" for "understanding" and to falsely conclude that to "explain" something is akin to "experiencing" it and to be so puffed up by "words" so as to never realize the lack of "wisdom".

Peter:

I guess my problem with that line of thinking is that getting a great golf course in the ground is more than just a thought exercise ... you really have to be able to think and work in three dimensions, and there is little to no instructional material to teach anyone how to do that.  So, perhaps all the freedom of the internet will allow more people to think they understand design, but I'm skeptical that it will enable people to actually DO it, to the point of being able to get their ideas in the ground.