News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Ben Sims

  • Karma: +1/-0
Is it important...
« on: March 28, 2012, 02:05:29 PM »
...that the architect should endeavor to go further and combine art with the utilitarian side of his work?  

(not my words, but a great question)

What about vice versa?  That the utilitarian part is important even in the most pleasing of setting?
« Last Edit: March 28, 2012, 03:39:58 PM by Ben Sims »

Grant Saunders

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Art vs. ball/ground interaction
« Reply #1 on: March 28, 2012, 02:28:05 PM »
Ben

The following is a reply that I posted a few years ago on somethig similar:

I totally agree that golf course architecture is in itself an outlet for artistic expression. I do however feel that artistic component is beginning to be weighted disproportionately in relation to the actual function of the course by some people on here.

Ultimately, a golf course is a physical creation on which we interact with via the game of golf. The characteristics of the course which directly impact on the way in which we play the game, in my opinion, should carry the most weight when judging a course. The indirect aspects help contribute to the overall experience and most certainly should not be discounted but I personally will opt for substance over style.

I am not implying that the details do not matter and I appreciate that when they are given consideration in conjunction with great architecture that the result is something special.

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,40737.msg859531.html#msg859531

« Last Edit: March 28, 2012, 02:30:45 PM by Grant Saunders »

Jon Wiggett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is it important...
« Reply #2 on: March 28, 2012, 03:49:37 PM »
I would agree with Grant. The stratergy of the course is more important than the look.

Peter Pallotta

Re: Is it important...
« Reply #3 on: March 28, 2012, 03:57:01 PM »
Ben - I'd suggest that not only is it important, it's inevitable.  Whatever an architect's skills/talents in terms of routing and creating playable, interesting and strategic holes, he is still forced in some way to shape/utilize the existing site and nature itself in order to make the land suitable for the purpose; and it is in this shaping -- this transmutation of a medium into a form -- that his artistic sensibilities will emerge and be made manifest, one way or another.  (The analogy I use is 'faith' -- we all have it, we all live by it, but there are many different versions of faith, i.e. some have faith that banks won't fail; some that their health is fine; some that the new car or wife will make them happy etc).  I have a feeling that the architects who are most fully conscious of this fact are the ones -- for this very reason -- who do it best, i.e. who combine the art and craft most seamlessly and successfully.

Peter 

Ben Sims

  • Karma: +1/-0
Re: Is it important...
« Reply #4 on: March 28, 2012, 04:10:00 PM »
I wonder if the author of this question in his time and age was trying to call on successful architects to not only concern themselves with the function of the golf course, but in how those playing qualities manifest themselves to the eye.  Maybe he was sending a shot towards the Macdonald/Raynor camp?  Maybe he was saying that blending those terrific ground features in with nature at large is as important as the features themselves?