[Ted Kramer]

I'm admittedly obsessed with Ayn Rand. And I have just about finished my 3rd reading of The Fountainhead. I am not nearly talented enough to give a reasonable summary of the entire work to those of you who might not be familiar with the book; However, there is one theme, woven into the novel that interests me a great deal. While this might not be the major theme or idea presented by Ms. Rand it is certainly expressed throughout the novel. The idea that I would like to discuss is:

Collaboration in a creative effort/endeavor is folly.

I would appreciate reading your opinions relating to that idea. . .
I couldn't help but think about Mr. Doak, Mr. Nicklaus, and Sebonack when I was reading The Fountainhead this time around.

Thanks,
Ted

[Ted Kramer]

Mr. Moran,

I would be very interested to read your thoughts on the subject . . .

-Ted

[Jerry Kluger]

Ted: the collaboration at Sebonack has been very fruitful as they have created a wonderful golf course.  I think it has worked because the principals respect each other and compliment each other.  My understanding is that Jack was very concerned about the course as a championship venue while Tom was concerned more about the course as a golfing experience.  When I toured part of the course with Tom he took great pride in the green complexes including the green contours and what types of recovery shots would be needed to be played around the greens.  These are factors which will make the course more interesting and enjoyable as the course is played over and over.  Tom was very complimentary of Jack and he has said that he would not rule out collaborating with him again on the right project.

[Ted Kramer]

Ted: the collaboration at Sebonack has been very fruitful as they have created a wonderful golf course.  I think it has worked because the principals respect each other and compliment each other.  My understanding is that Jack was very concerned about the course as a championship venue while Tom was concerned more about the course as a golfing experience.  When I toured part of the course with Tom he took great pride in the green complexes including the green contours and what types of recovery shots would be needed to be played around the greens.  These are factors which will make the course more interesting and enjoyable as the course is played over and over.  Tom was very complimentary of Jack and he has said that he would not rule out collaborating with him again on the right project.

Interesting.
Thanks,
Ted

[Jeff_Brauer]

Ted,

From time to time, you have a few here calling out for "more collaboration" like they presume happened in the old days, specifically in the Philly school.  To the degree that happened, I think it worked because all were trying to learn something in a fledgling field.

When it works - at any point in history - it has to be because the two designers subvert their egos and still think they have something to learn.  I believe I should be learning until I hit my deathbed, BTW......Sometimes that subversion of egos comes when people see a bigger need (like in developing the A bomb or a cure for cancer among scientists) and that is harder to achieve on a "non essential item" like a golf course.

However, it does happen. I have collaborated with both John Fought and Jay Morrish, and both were great experiences, mostly because I thought I could learn a lot from them.  In both cases, the contracts were set up with me as the prime designer responsible for the plans, etc, and the other in a lesser production role, which may have lessened any conflicts.  However, we did have great fun comparing, contrasting and combining ideas in the design phase, and in the case of the Morrish collaboration which got built, during Jay's field visits.

[Kelly Blake Moran]

Ted,

My design work is informed by others, and even during the creative process the comments of others, be it members, consultants, my wife, whomever, do resonate with me and I think go into the brain to rattle around a bit and can in some way affect my output, that to me is collaboration in the broadest sense, but a literal collaboration where there are two equals out there would be nearly impossible for me because I believe deeply in what I am doing at the time, and to have that focus and belief be required to be adjusted or modified in someway to accomodate somone would be very hard for me.  I think collaboration is a dangerous thing, and is usually done more for marketing purposes rather than to make the very best project.

[Kirk Gill]

Collaboration in a creative effort/endeavor is folly.

Even on the most basic level, creative endeavor is inherently collaborative. There is, at root, a creator and an audience for the creation. An artist doesn't dictate to the audience, or direct the response to a work of art.

Even in fairly solitary creative pursuits like writing or painting, there is inevitably a moment when the work of art leaves the hands of its creator and is appreciated by an audience.

Ok, but how about the process of creating a work of art? Isn't that what Rand is talking about? Ok, then, if you're talking about those relatively solitary pursuits mentioned above, then sure, the process of creation may best be pursued alone, without "interference" from collaborators. But if you're talking about making a movie, or building a golf course, there are just too many people that are, by necessity, involved in the project that the notion of solitary creation becomes folly.

What's great about acts of creation is that there are so many ways to skin the cat. To say that artistic collaboration is folly is to deny the value of a lot of work that was produced by collaborative effort. Would Coore be better off without Crenshaw?

[Craig Disher]

Collaboration in a creative effort/endeavor is folly.

The Beatles?

I think most creative people prefer working alone, especially after they've collaborated with someone. But Rand's statement seems overbroad and a little simplistic. Most creative works come from some sort of collaboration.  Maybe the comment was stuck in by a collaborating editor.

[Tom_Doak]

Collaboration in design is not folly, but it is hard.  Like Kelly said, a designer is very committed to his ideas on site, and when your co-designer doesn't like something, it's hard to give up on that.  You have to set aside your ego and most of us are not used to that.

Then again, all of my associates collaborate with me on stuff, and it works out fine.  

I wouldn't want to be a partner with anyone full-time, but to do it now and again is an interesting experience and we learned a lot in trying it.  I think the experience will have a profound influence on my work from here on out, though perhaps not in ways most people would have anticipated.

[Ted Kramer]

Thanks for all of the responses.
And just for the record, I'm not claiming that Ayn Rand ever said that collaboration for creative purposes is folly. The protagonist in The Fountainhead said that and it seems to be an underlying theme in the book, but those words were mine.

-Ted

[cary lichtenstein]

Tom:

Could you please expand on your last post, sounds most interesting

Cary

[Philip Gawith]

Craig - I think the musical analogy you make is quite an interesting one, and maybe has some relevance to the situation with golf. When people have chosen to become partners and have worked out how to work together - such as the Beatles, or Coore/Crenshaw - then it can work.

But it is a different matter when two people who have independently made their names are put together to sing a song. In my experience (and I am thinking mostly of music here) such collaborations - inevitably dreamt up by some marketing man - result not in a multiplication of their talents (usally the premise for the collaboration) but a division. The list of execrable songs produced by famous artists collaborating is endless.

Personal experience also bears out this point. Two people cannot seriously write an article together - one person has to write it, and then the other person can crit it, but you cannot craft it, word by word, together.

[Craig Disher]

Philip,
When I mentioned the Beatles I was thinking how the collaboration produced something very different than what the individual artists would have produced on their own. The tensions that existed between Lennon and McCartney eliminated some of the less desirable features in their own music - or at least that's what I've always thought. The same could be said for Lou Reed and John Cale. They produced one, perhaps 2, transcendent albums then split. Their subsequent output was good but never the same as what they produced together.

In GCA, the same might hold true. Collaborative projects may bring out qualities or ideas that the individuals would never have produced by themselves.

But as you say, it's probably not a good idea to force it.

[Kyle Harris]

I'm admittedly obsessed with Ayn Rand. And I have just about finished my 3rd reading of The Fountainhead. I am not nearly talented enough to give a reasonable summary of the entire work to those of you who might not be familiar with the book; However, there is one theme, woven into the novel that interests me a great deal. While this might not be the major theme or idea presented by Ms. Rand it is certainly expressed throughout the novel. The idea that I would like to discuss is:

Collaboration in a creative effort/endeavor is folly.

I would appreciate reading your opinions relating to that idea. . .
I couldn't help but think about Mr. Doak, Mr. Nicklaus, and Sebonack when I was reading The Fountainhead this time around.

Thanks,
Ted

Ted,

Having read through Fountainhead a few times myself, the theme is more about groups of men and the folly in thinking a colloborative effort of people is better than the thinking of one man, or one vision. That an ideal man with ideal vision should not and cannot yeild to compromise.

I've often thought of the parallels between golf architecture and the Fountainhead, and would enjoy having a drink with you and George Pazin about the subject.  

[Ted Kramer]

I'm admittedly obsessed with Ayn Rand. And I have just about finished my 3rd reading of The Fountainhead. I am not nearly talented enough to give a reasonable summary of the entire work to those of you who might not be familiar with the book; However, there is one theme, woven into the novel that interests me a great deal. While this might not be the major theme or idea presented by Ms. Rand it is certainly expressed throughout the novel. The idea that I would like to discuss is:

Collaboration in a creative effort/endeavor is folly.

I would appreciate reading your opinions relating to that idea. . .
I couldn't help but think about Mr. Doak, Mr. Nicklaus, and Sebonack when I was reading The Fountainhead this time around.

Thanks,
Ted

Ted,

Having read through Fountainhead a few times myself, the theme is more about groups of men and the folly in thinking a colloborative effort of people is better than the thinking of one man, or one vision. That an ideal man with ideal vision should not and cannot yeild to compromise.

I've often thought of the parallels between golf architecture and the Fountainhead, and would enjoy having a drink with you and George Pazin about the subject.  

Kyle,
How about a round of golf followed by a few drinks?
Sounds like a great time to me.
Would you like to pick the course?
There are so many around the area that I haven't yet seen. . .
Or would you maybe be interested in a round at Pine Hill.
The course is in outstanding shape . . .
George?
Any interest?

-Ted

[TEPaul]

Seems to me that the most notable collaborative efforts in golf architecture, probably with Pine Valley at the top were projects that even though the collaborative input may've been enormous and diverse it was nevertheless done with one man always making the final decision of what was going to get done from all that collaboration. At Pine Valley that man was Crump. Although he apparently allowed or even encouraged all kinds of input from all kinds of people he decided what got done and what didn't, and it appears even if he didn't do something he was very nice about it. A good example of that would be Travis's rather elaborate effort to do a reverse routing at PVGC that he trumpeted a time or two in his magazine as something Crump asked him to do. Only thing was Crump never did it.  

There was also the time early on when 18 members for the contribution of $1,000 per hole could design their own hole. That never happened either even though they may have produced some ideas in a collaborative mode.  

[Jeff_Brauer]

TEPaul,

A few things occur to me....

First, wasnt't Crump a hotel guy?  Thus, is it possible he was the Donald Trump of his day?  And the 18 member designs was his version of marketing splash?

If not, Crump getting all that advice and following little of it doesn't sound much like the great collaboration that some on this site give it credit for.  There have been numerous personal designs, and the owner calls a bunch of gca's in for general ideas (for free, of course) before doing whatever he wants.  Granted, PV did come out better than most!

However, I suspect that Travis and Tillie and others were fairly dissapointed to have gone out there to have their free ideas rejected! (No matter how nice Crump was about it) I have always felt it was not quite as described in the old reports, given my belief that human nature hasn't changed. But, since I wasn't there, I guess I don't really know.

[Kyle Harris]

I think a major difference with Crump, et al. at Pine Valley was the way they went about it. Crump seemed to know how to use his talent and the talent of those around him to finish off the product. He did his homework and didn't mess around.

George Crump built Pine Valley like Howard Roark built buildings, he became completely absorbed and wrapped up in them. Each contributor stuck to their expertise, as well.

[Brad Klein]

Ayn Rand''s "The Fountainhead" is the model for an ideology about capitalism and relentless creative spirit, but not about architecture or design. Howard Roark wasn't much for meetings, as I recall, and he worked without any associates, or even friends.

[Kyle Harris]

Brad,

He did work with friends, but each of his friends did their own thing and didn't impede him. It was economic collaboration.

Mike, The Electrician
Dominique Francon/Keating/Wynand
The sculptor whose name eludes me now

You are correct though, The Fountainhead is not about building and designing structures, but rather... how human efforts should be done.

[TEPaul]

JeffB:

To truly understand what Crump did at PVGC in those years of collaboration one has to understand fully the entire evolution of what went on from the beginning of the project to the end of his life. In the beginning Crump could obviously be considered a fairly rank amateur in the art of golf course architecture. However, back in that day it's also fairly obvious if a man with some vision and probably some real latent talent, both of which Crump apparently had, spent the amount of time and effort he did on that golf course with all the people he collaborated with who were seemingly friends that good things were going to come of it.

Was Crump, being a hotelier, a great promoter too in the vein of a Donald Trump? He certainly may've been, in a manner of speaking, although one thing Crump apparently was not, according to the consistent written record of those who knew him, was a big ego. There certainly does not seem to be a single incident in the entire story of Crump and PVGC where Crump stubbornly refused to give someone credit, perhaps even for things that were never actually done.

This story of Crump paying Harry Colt $10,000 dollars for basically a week or two of work at PVGC may be one of those incidents. Of course the Colt supporters on this website will scream bloody murder again that mentioning this is another example of how PVGC, or even me, is trying to minimize Colt's part or Colt's contribution to the way PVGC ultimately turned out. The fact is no one can prove that Crump actually paid Colt that amount of money. That he did pay him that amount is only the recollection almost forty years later of one of Crump's friends. I think those who seem to fail to realize what Crump actually did there over those six years are simply failing to realize the extent of what went on with the golf course between the time Colt left in May/June of 1913 and what the course became by Crump's death in Jan 1918 and at its completion around 1921.

Furthermore, I've seen everything that Colt contributed to the course, some of which I may've even discovered for the first time in recent decades, and I do know exactly how it turned out. The truth is in the similarities but particularly the differences, as it is with what other architects and collaborators contributed.

[Kelly Blake Moran]

Collaboration can be meaningful as has been pointed out here by various examples.  however, I think the difficulty is in finding the right collaborator.  It is very difficult to make real friends, ones that stick with you through anything, and whose personality seems to meld into yours at times, much less combine that requirement with a business relationship.  Many enduring collaborations began in childhood, so later in life if you do not have childhood friendships that transform into adult/business/professional collaborations you must find that person and it gets more and more difficult each year.  A one time collaboration put together for marketing purposes must be very difficult and at times a bit disingenuous, and if it does not go further somewhat disappointing.  Finding someone that you want to collaborate with, and that makes the adventure of creation  more fun and meaningful for you must be a wonderful thing, but I see it as something where the stars have to align just right.  I think in this business as you move through projects there are occasionally people whom standout in your view, who seem to dig the things you dig, and it makes you wonder a bit if this might be someone you can do more with, and grow your ideas into something special.  It is an interesting opportunity, but elusive for so many reasons.

[Ted Kramer]

Brad,

He did work with friends, but each of his friends did their own thing and didn't impede him. It was economic collaboration.

Mike, The Electrician
Dominique Francon/Keating/Wynand
The sculptor whose name eludes me now - Steven Mallory

You are correct though, The Fountainhead is not about building and designing structures, but rather... how human efforts should be done.

[Tony_Muldoon]

Reading this thread reminds me of the many books on the Auteur theory in Cinema.  This was conceived by a bunch of film fans in France in the late 50's who argued that all the best films were the vision of one man.  Their hero was Hitchcock who had done every job in film as he learned his trade in England In Hollywood he supervised the script writing and pioneered the drawing of storyboards before filming commenced.   Iike the adherents of this site they liked to imagine they too could be auteurs – but  unlike most of us who has heard of Truffaut, Goddard and Chabrol.

However Hitchcock was the exception and today most film studies accept that film is a collaborative effort between many talented people, from the hated producer to the cameraman and the costume designer etc etc etc.

The more I learn on this site the clearer it seems to be that Golf courses are a collaboration of many people.  Architects on here talk about listening to the future superintendents; bunker shapers are becoming names in their own right and many developers have quite a lot to say about how their courses will turn out.  Which great course sprung complete from the GCA’s mind?  Many of the golden age guys weren’t even present during construction.   So if on some jobs two guys have the title of GCA it’s just more collaboration, sometimes the results are good and oftentimes they’re as worthwhile as the average movie.  And there’s so many reasons why the average movie was never going to work out.

[Lester George]

Justn last Tuesday night I got my final zoning approvals for a destination resort located along the Blue Ridge Parkway near Roanoke Virginia,  The Project has been named FountainHead since I first proposed it almost two years ago.  

I named it that because of the philosophy of the book and the collaboration theory.  Turns out I may have Vinny Giles as a colaborater on this one as he did on Kinloch.  I agree with Tom and Kelly, colaboration in the truest sense is difficult because you always test youe mettle when ideas that go against your basic philosophy have to be debated.  In my case at Kinloch, Vinnie was really helpful from the aspect of how he thought shots should be rewarded or penalized (especiallyaround the greens) and I actually learned some interesting insights into what really strikes fear in the better players mind.  

Anyway, it was fun.  Do I want to do it everytime out? No.  I've always had enough self-confidence to put my ideas out and let them be judged.  You learn early that the world is full of "second-handers" and if you try to placate them they will only criticize your better ideas worse.  

Even if I don't keep FountainHead as a name for this unique project, the philosopht of the design will stay the same.  

Lester

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()