What's with the "Natural"?

[DMoriarty]

First TomP, my summary of your current position and your summary of your original position are very different.  

Second TomP, neither I nor TomM ever disagreed with anything in my summary of your position.   T

Third, when I said you were flat out wrong you were and still are.   For  example, AC movement is not about attempting to contrast with nature.  Further, AC movement and golden age GCA did share many of the same goals and purposes regarding nature and man's role in nature.  You have yet to identify any of the "fundamental artistic and aesthetic distinctions and differences" between the two mediums which you claim exist.  

But back to my two line summary what you say is all you were trying to say in your last hundreds of lines . . .

So What?   What does that tell us that we didnt already know?    

_______________________________

TomP With regard your dismay that I would stoop to quoting designers:   I am tired of digging through your posts but if you go back to one of your first ones you stated something like that the words of the designers were the best source of information when trying to get at their motivations and purposes.  Not sure why this would apply to your beloved Behr and not to the AC movement . . . .

[T_MacWood]

TE
Rand's backgound is art and he is very interested in the influence of artistic movements like the A&C Movment and the Picturesque on golf design. The Picturesque was 18th C. And 19 C. mostly British artistic movement...which influenced garden designers, architects, writers and artists of that period. It might be worthwhile to go through an excercise that seperates a garden from a book.

American Sublime?

He and I pretty much agree on Tilly's portfolio, seperating it into three to four distinct periods and on Tilly's unfortunate later years.

[TEPaul]

"First TomP, my summary of your current position and your summary of your original position are very different.  

Second TomP, neither I nor TomM ever disagreed with anything in my summary of your position."  

David:

That is probably the two funniest remarks I've ever seen from you! You are a piece of work. My advice to you then would be to stick to summarizing your own position and noone else's! Neither you nor Tom MacWood ever disagreed with anything in YOUR summary of MY position?

Gee David, I just don't know what to say about that except perhaps it's a total waste of time to try to discuss an issue like this with either one of you!! Say hi to Pugin and Rushkin and all those others whose names you two are so fond of throwing around on here. Did a single one of them ever play golf?  

[T_MacWood]

"Neither you nor Tom MacWood ever disagreed with anything in YOUR summary of MY position?"

TE
I'm still waiting for you to present your position....hopefully in a concise and coherent manner...with supporting documentation.

[DMoriarty]

"First TomP, my summary of your current position and your summary of your original position are very different.  

Second TomP, neither I nor TomM ever disagreed with anything in my summary of your position."  

David:

That is probably the two funniest remarks I've ever seen from you! You are a piece of work. My advice to you then would be to stick to summarizing your own position and noone else's! Neither you nor Tom MacWood ever disagreed with anything in YOUR summary of MY position?

Gee David, I just don't know what to say about that except perhaps it's a total waste of time to try to discuss an issue like this with either one of you!! Say hi to Pugin and Rushkin and all those others whose names you to are so fond of throwing around on here. Did a single one of them ever play golf?  

Uhhh TomP, I think you may be having trouble keeping track of your own posts again.  YOU ASKED ME TO PROVIDE YOU WITH THE SUMMARY OF YOUR POSITION, SO I DID.  Then whein I did you indicated that my summary was what you had been trying to say for the last three pages.
 

. . . I don’t know why it had to take about 3 pages on here for you to agree that’s pretty obvious as I said a couple of days ago to which you said I’m ‘just flat-out wrong! “So What?” SO, it looks like we agree on the point I made that building architecture will always contrast with Nature’s “lines” while the same is not necessarily so with “naturalist” golf architecture . . .

But TomP, please actually answer my questions:   So what?  What does it teach us that we do not already know?

. . .  if you handnt ignored my "Third . . . ." you'd see some of the places you were flat-out wrong.  

[T_MacWood]

"Say hi to Pugin and Rushkin and all those others whose names you to are so fond of throwing around on here. Did a single one of them ever play golf?"

TE
You are right...Pugin didn't play golf. He was too busy producing children and working himself to death. Ruskin and Morris on the other hand belonged to the same artisan club and had a weekly game at a craggy course near Cottswold. In fact they loved the game so much they used to take golf vacations down south...to meet up with their golfing Boer friends.  

[TEPaul]

Tom MacWood:

Thanks for the little primer there on various movements. Why don't you teach art in grade school? I know Rand Jerris has a background in art---he went to Princeton for that.

Yes, American Sublime!

[TEPaul]

"In fact they loved the game so much they used to take golf vacations down south...to meet up with their golfing Boer friends."

Well, there you go---there's obviously no question at all that it was the AC movement that taught the Boers the art of military camouflage who taught Alister Mackenzie the art of military camouflage who then applied it to golf architecture to perfect the style of natural golf arch.......  

[T_MacWood]

TE
Ruskin and Morris never mixed doctrine with pleasure. They simply went down there to get a little sun and to play golf with the Boers.  

[TEPaul]

TM:

Are you certain the Bores could find a course to play in South Africa in those days? If one from back then is still around perhaps it's about time to restore it! Or maybe the Boers have already done that but noone could tell.