Would an indication of one's interest and dedication be revealed by the quality and quantity of GCA publications, authored by the great architects and other interested GCA parties, that one has read ?

Ross,
Tillinghast
MacDonald
Behr
McKenzie
Hunter
Thomas
et. al.,

Can one have a comprehensive understanding of architecture without reading and/or studying their works ?

Pat,

Please give me one example of where reading one of these books is going enhance my appreciation of architecture after 39 years of playing the game?  Why should I sacrifice the joy of discovery for the immediacy of learning.

Pat, I would say that it is an important part of understanding architecture. Experiencing the courses of those arch's is certainly more important, provided that that particular course is true to the original concept. Too many times this is simply not possible. I find it curious that courses by arch's that have written book(s), essays and articles so often have designed courses that are so revered, yet some don't even take the time to read and come to know how that come about, to know the thoughts and ideas of that architect. Some may never get that chance to experience some of these courses, so how else are the enthusiasts so supposed to understand what the design elements the arch was trying to implement? Efforts are made, for example, to read rankings from various publications or write up's done by present writers, but who best can describe what the intent was on certain holes than by the man who took the effort to A) design it, B) put his thoughts to paper? How can anyone not want to learn everything they can about something that they care about? Does learning ever really stop? Does one ever become so experienced that they can't possibly learn more?

Would an indication of one's interest and dedication be revealed by the quality and quantity of GCA publications, authored by the great architects and other interested GCA parties, that one has read ?

Ross,
Tillinghast
MacDonald
Behr
McKenzie
Hunter
Thomas
et. al.,

Can one have a comprehensive understanding of architecture without reading and/or studying their works ?

No.  In fact there may be an inverse correlation.

Yes.  Once you get past the trivialities, self-aggrandizement and poor writing, the greats don't really have much to say, particularly for and in this day and age.  Reading this website (and learning how to separate the wheat from the chaff) is far more benficial.

I've read a fair old few and I must say that I think if one were to read The Links, The Spirit of St Andrews, Anatomy of a Golf Course and Geoff Shack's Masters of the Links there's not that much more out there that will enhance your understanding of GCA, plenty for bragging rights at dinner parties, maybe, but not much. I read for pleasure and I enjoy finding voices I enjoy, so I continue... but GCA is not rocket science and once you have a grasp of it (we don't all grasp it the same way) you are unlikely to change your ideals because Tilly tells you to.

Eg - I had never read Behr - still haven't much and so the term 'Line of Charm' was something that I was unaware of before seeing it here, and on Geoff's book. However, once I understood it's meaning, it didn't impart any great new understanding - it's just a cool way of saying what makes sense in strategic design, and play.

Which is not to say that we can't learn new things, find new insights, new angles.. I'll second Rich. Once you've read a few - you are more likely to find new those angles, ideas etc here.

Thanks, Lloyd

I agree that much of what is said on this site is said in code (e.g. "lines of charm," "golden age," "minimalism," "penal architecture," "ideal maintenance meld," "tying in," etc., etc.) which both places an undue aura on the phrase and stifles productive communication.  In many cases, the latter seems to be deliberate, as if the phrases were some sort of divine shibboleth, rather than just ways of describing things which most of us know intuitively.

Rich

PS--I should have added to my previous post that playing and watching other people play the game, as often as you can, will teach you more than any book, if you know what to look for, which if you have been paying attention to what is said on this site, you should and probably do know.

R

I'm with Rich.....stimulating discourse is good...and to be a successful designer you come to a certain point where you have to think for yourself.....books can become crutches and a substitute for creativity.

I think such would definitely be an indication of one's interest and search for knowledge on the subject.  Of course one must read the publication before determining if there was any quality to it also.  As far as determining dedication, I don't think so. Quantity, yep..because it would be part of weeding out the quality.

For me, as with Jacqueline Susanne, "One Color is more than enough."

Are we going to be tested on this?

I've read several /many books by the authors listed.
(I guess I read them for the pictures, which would make me illiterate, except that I read Playboy for the "articles" ).


I like playing good (by my definition of course) golf courses.
I also like seeing what's out there (via some of the  great pictures on this site and elsewhere)
Along the way, anecdotally, I may have learned a bit about many different courses their GCA, and their architects.

I'm sure I wouldn't read any of the books by the authors listed and play many of their courses if that was a requirement to be serious about GCA. It's hobby I enjoy to supplement my golf, but if the word serious comes out I think it may go from hobby to chore.

Patrick,

Yes, I like to think I am serious about gca!  And, I have read virtually every book there is to read on the subject, as well as pamplets, off hand quotes, and even a tombstone or two!

Pat,

Please give me one example of where reading one of these books is going enhance my appreciation of architecture after 39 years of playing the game?  Why should I sacrifice the joy of discovery for the immediacy of learning.

John, I know you love to trot this point of view out every 3 or 4 months - or more accurately, as often as it warrants - but where would mankind be if no one researched anything and tried to learn it all for themselves?

The fact that Rich appears to be on your side only strengthens my position....

 

The problem with golf course architects is they tend to write what they think people want to read.

So it is now, and so it has always been

It seems like sometimes we as a group venture off on these tangents and forget the original question.

"Can we have a comprehensive understanding of architecture without reading and/or studying their works?"

I would argue that you can without reading their works, but you have to study their work which is the golf courses they designed.  I can read all about Van Gogh, but can't understand his work until I see his paintings.  I can read about Frank Lloyd Wright buildings but can't understand them until I see the building.  I can read about Ross but can't understand his work until I stand on his tee boxes and greens.

Kind of the old cheesy adage that one shouldn't read about life one should live it.  While I enjoy reading about golf and do it is more fun to play it and experience it.