There's a TV programme in the UK called Grand Designs where each programme is about a a different person or a couple who are building there own home, usually adopting innovative design techniques. The ones I really love or the ones where an old building is being converted or refurbished. Rather than taking a building and renewing it and hiding all the old bits, or at the opposite end, trying to have new elements appear old, the thing to do seems to be to show what has been done. In this way where new stone has been put in a wall, it stands out beside the old, where the building was say an old industrial building, retain something in the structure to show its previous use. That way the building almost tells its own story. It certainly makes a more interesting building IMHO.
This approach to treating old buildings came to mind when I was playing Elgin GC a little while ago. Elgin dates back to the 1920's and has had a couple of redesigns as well as the usual tinkering. As you walk along you see old bunkers, tee pads here and there and in places that doesn't make sense on todays course. Often the bunkers are different shapes and styles, and even some of the bunkers still in use are of different styles. Its almost as if you could see how the course evolved. The Old Course at Moray was similar. Disused bunkers half way down the fairway on a par 3 ? Why, I don't know, but fascinating to think about the history of the course.
In the act of returning old courses back to their "original" appearance/design, are we not losing something ? Are we not in danger of wiping out a whole load of history which made the course more interesting ? Would it not be more honest to retain what was there rather than wiping out previous redesigns to deny their existence ?
Niall