First course or last...

[Scott Sander]

(No, not a dinner question.)

In general, which intrigues you more - a visit to the first or final work of a noted architect?

[JESII]

Interesting question Scott, but either one seems like a one-way airplane ticket to me...

Which would you rather see? And why? Maybe you're answers will help me see where you're coming from and then better answer myself.

[Adam Clayman]

Scott, In my experience they are equal. It all depends on what you have seen and the order in which you have seen them.
If I have seen the early work, I'm just as excited to see the newer. And vice versa. There is a change in focus. But I think curiosity lies at the heart of each.

[jonathan_becker]

Scott, In my experience they are equal. It all depends on what you have seen and the order in which you have seen them.
If I have seen the early work, I'm just as excited to see the newer. And vice versa. There is a change in focus. But I think curiosity lies at the heart of each.

To feed off of Adam's point, I don't know how it happened, but I've played most of Pete Dye's greats post 1980.  Now, I really want to see some of his earlier work.  Examples would include The Golf Club and Crooked Stick.

[Scott Sander]

Fair request, Mr. Sullivan!

Don't take it as a one-way ticket.  It's not meant to be either/or.  It's more about which choice gets the juices flowing.

This thought came up as I was mulling over Sahm GC - a hardscrabble muni on the northeast side of Indianapolis.  

It has, to my mind, two fantastic holes... several average ones... and a few scattered features that were clearly placed with more care (and malice) than you'd typically find in a nondescript $15 flatland city course: here a 6' tall hairy mole of rough in the middle of the fairway... there a dogleg with bunkering that deviously coaxes the golfer to take what proves to be the wrong line.  

Pete Dye did Sahm.  It's not his first, but it was early.  There are just enough fingerprints from the future on it that I am getting increasingly anxious to play his first full course, which I understand is now called "Dye's Walk", located elsewhere in Central Indiana.  I like the thought of looking at an early canvas, I guess, to spot signs of what's to come... or perhaps long-abandoned dead-ends.

Dye's latest (I hope not his last) is also in Indiana, though it's a million figurative miles away.  It's the new French Lick course - and while I'm very eager to see it, I'm not madly so.

So, for the moment, I'd rather see Dye's first than his last!  

When I thought of it that way, it seemed odd.   Odd enough to ask the question out loud.

So what do you say.  Pick an architect.  Would you rather, say, see Colt's colts or his thoroughbreds?

-Scott

[Dan_Callahan]

Out of curiosity, do architects tend to get better as they gain experience? I would assume that is the case, but how many "artists" in other forms improve over time?

There are certainly many authors who seemed to have lost their early genius. On the other hand, a guy like Cormac McCarthy wrote arguably his best book near the end of his career.

Same is true in music. How many musicians were great when they were young and then lost their ear for what works?

Is it possible the same trap that ensnares other artists (gaining popularity for a style or voice and then either running from it or overusing it until it becomes almost a caricature of itself) also lies in wait for the GCA?

[Scott Sander]

Messrs Clayman and Becker-

Thanks for the replies!

Adam-
I think you're right about curiosity being the fuel.  If that exists, I suppose any answer is the right one.

jonathan-
Crooked Stick in particular is fascinating - especially if you have the kind of eye that can spot the rings on the tree, so to speak.  He's changed it soooo much over the last 40 years that you need a member to play tour guide.  Once they start pointing things out, you can almost strip away the latter-day features mentally and see Dye's evolution.

[jonathan_becker]

Scott,

As I was typing my previous post, I remembered that Crooked Stick has had many changes over the years.  It doesn't change the fact that I would still love to see it!

[JESII]

Thanks Scott...that does help.

I initially thought your question was philosophical and in the context of never having seen any of the architects work before.

I typically like to see where someone went from here...so I guess that means their last course would attract my curiosity.

I haven't played too many of any particular architect's work and don't have a particular one on the top of a study list...that being said I guess seeing the evolution of a guy like Pete Dye would intrigue me. He's more present. Typically, I prefer the old style courses but seeing first hand the results of his 45 year career would be my choice

[Anthony Gray]

  I would say the last. As the architects carreer progresses I would assume the sites get better and allows more of his talents to be expressed. Also what he has learned from experiences. A side thought.....Are there architects that did their best work early on in their carreers rather than later?

  Anthony

[JESII]

As an added thought...maybe irrelevant and/or off-topic...I would always prefer the course that benefited from the most time on-site by the architect...do they keep records...

[Adam Clayman]

Sully, I don't think records are needed. It usually shows in the finished product.

In the case of Tom Fazio, I suspect from reading and experiencing that his courses could be the most obvious because his attention to detail appears to be better on some than others. .

Like all things related to the subject of GCA, it's all case specific. Archie, site, budget, etc.

Anthony, There was a recent thread on the question you ask.