[Greg McMullin]

Thinking about the greats of the Golden Age - MacKenzie, Tillinghast, Ross, Wilson, Thompson ......... Questions? 1:were these men born with the talent necessary to build great courses or did they learn how to create masterpieces. 2: if their ability to create great courses was learned is it possible for the average Joe to create a great course?

[Tom_Doak]

Greg:

I think all of those guys were born with a natural affinity for golf and for design -- like hundreds or thousands of others who didn't find their niche.  But I don't think you could teach it to anyone.  They may not be one in a million, but they're at least one in thousands.

[Jeff_Mingay]

Through my practical experience in the business, I agree with Doak. I don't think you can teach how to build great golf courses. Of course there are aspects of designing and building that are learned through experience, but in the end I really believe it's an inherent talent that separates the best from the rest.

[Peter Pallotta]

Greg -
In the context of any creative work, I tend to think that excellence comes from experience and learning built on a foundation of inate and special talent. But a question: in the context of golf course architecture specifically, an inate and special talent for what?  

What are the gifts that the best golf course architect's have that others don't? What kinds of things are they, by nature,  particularly good at? What do a Ross and Mackenzie (and a Fowler and a Maxwell) have in common, and how do those talents manifest in the courses they build, and in the differences among those courses?

Thanks
Peter

[Jeff_Mingay]

Peter,

As we all know, routing is most important. How do you teach routing? I guess we could all read Forrest Richardson's book as a start. However, I sincerely believe there's a special sensibility certain people have when studying and in turn utilizing landscapes for golf. This kinda sounds "mystical" and perhaps a bit sappy, but I think it's true.

 

[Peter Pallotta]

Jeff - thanks.

No, it doesn't sound mystical or sappy to me, but I'm trying to give it a name -- is it visual acuity? is it a brain wired to grasp spatial relationships? is it a three-dimensional imagination?  Maybe all this is unanswerable, but...

Peter

[Jeff_Mingay]

I guess it's like a feeling... the way I see it, anyway.

[Greg McMullin]

Peter, it's my opinion that all the greats had a unique and rare ability to visualize. They could easily form a picture in their mind of what they could create from the land they were walking and working with. My own personal observation is that the vast majority of people have no ability to visualize without the help of a picture, drawing or some other visual clue. I'd argue that any great artist is able to form a picture of what he/she is going to create long before the actual creation.


[quote author=Peter Pallotta
Greg -
In the context of any creative work, I tend to think that excellence comes from experience and learning built on a foundation of inate and special talent. But a question: in the context of golf course architecture specifically, an inate and special talent for what?  

What are the gifts that the best golf course architect's have that others don't? What kinds of things are they, by nature,  particularly good at? What do a Ross and Mackenzie (and a Fowler and a Maxwell) have in common, and how do those talents manifest in the courses they build, and in the differences among those courses?

Thanks
Peter

[Jeff_Mingay]

Greg makes a good point re the ability to visualize.

This is one of the things I most admire about Stanley Thompson. His ability to visulaize what could be made of extremely rugged, difficult properties at places like Jasper, Banff and Highlands Links for example, is amazing.

Not only is finding natural golf holes - through visualization and also "feeling" - a great talent, the great architects can also see what's possible through construction. This, of course, can be a learned talent through years of experience.

Curiously when Thompson designed Jasper in the early 1920s, he had limited experience as a golf course designer, and no experience with such a difficult site.

[Paul Sinclair]

Greg,

I think you are probably on to something when you say that "all the greats had a unique and rare ability to visualize."

My daughter's boyfriend is a physics major at one of the Big Ten schools. My daughter was getting him to help her with a physics class she was having trouble with. She would describe a problem to him and he would explain it to her without any difficulty. She asked him how he could figure out the problems without puzzling over them at all. He said that he could see the various spatial relationships necessary to solve the problems in his head - planes and stuff.

Or think about the movie "A Beautiful Mind" where they show the big jumble of numbers/letters that the subject of the movie (John Nash) looks at and is able to decipher because of some innate genius he had. Probably the greats of golf course architecture have that same type ability to see through a big jumble of information (a landscape in golf course architecture) and determine its highest, best, and most natural use for a golf course.

If you don't have the genius to unlock that big jumble of a landscape, you can certainly still make a good golf course out of it. But you probably won't be able to unlock its full potential unless you have the genius to see in your mind how the terrain is best suited for golf.

The greats of the golden era most likely were able to solidify their reputations because in the day and age when earth moving was minimal, they were able to see the best possible use of land forms for golf and apply that vision to creating a great golf course. And they could do it time after time on differing land forms.

In the recent era of brute forcing land forms, the genius of the odg's may not have been as critically necessary -- if you don't like the land form, just change the land form! The brute force approach is giving way to the minimalist approach of the golden era and that seems to be widely accepted (at least hear on the gca forum) as a good sign.

[Greg McMullin]

Jeff, I believe Thompson used plasticine models for some of his designs and I wonder if this was in part an attempt to better communicate to the construction crews what he "saw" and
and what he wanted the outcome to be. Maybe he realized that the crews needed some visual clues in order to accomplish the work as Thompson visualized it.

[Tom_Doak]

Greg:

I do not believe the ability to visualize a finished product in detail -- if you mean drawing a picture of it in your head -- is the key to golf course architecture, because I don't have a particularly high aptitude for that myself.  I make up for it by having a very good ability to understand how the course is going to play and how it's going to work ... how the slopes of the ground will affect the golf and what will need to be done.

I think different architects have had different skill sets.  Simpson and Strantz and MacKenzie were very visual in their work.  Colt and Alison and Ross were planners.  Either way can work as long as you are good enough and dedicated enough, AND you wind up in the right place at the right time.

[Chris Parker]

It seems to me, IMHO, that all great golf course architects are great artists.  Maybe not in the traditional way that we tend to view art, but they are all certainly artists in their own right.  

Don't get me wrong, I know that there is a great deal of science and engineering involved in designing a golf course -- those skills can be taught -- but I think that it is the innate artistic sensibilities that separate the "great" architects (especially those in the "golden age") from the mundane ones.

Of course, it doesn't hurt that the golden age architects had access to great sites with virtually no environmental limitations imposed on them!  

[Jeff_Mingay]

Chris,

It's like sending two people to art school. One becomes Van Gogh, the other you've never heard of; or sending two people to architecture school. One becomes Lloyd Wright, the other you've never heard of.

Did Van Gogh and Lloyd Wright "learn" to be Van Gogh and Lloyd Wright? Or is their respective brilliance more attributable to inherent talent and sensibilities each was born with?

[Greg McMullin]

Chris, I agree that the "Great One's" were artists and I'm now wondering if any of the greats ever expressed their artistry in any other form? I know Tillinghast wrote a number of books on golf but wonder if any painted? Designed buildings? Wrote fiction? Sculpted?

hhuummmmmmmmmmm.................?

[Greg McMullin]

Jeff, interesting that you reference Frank Lloyd Wright. Based on what I know about his work he was another great one who took his cues from the land and as a resulted created the Prairie Style which marked his place in history. Maybe the lesson here is "use the land or be relegated to the dust bins of history"?

[Jeff_Mingay]

Greg,

Indeed many of the Golden Age greats were eccentric, artistic types.

Tillinghast wrote some fiction and made cartoon sketches since published. He was also an antique collector, and dealer later in life. Geo. Thomas was an innovative rose breeder and fisherman who wrote on these subjects, as well as golf. And, Alister Mackenzie was reportedly a fine dancer!

I'm sure there are other examples which escape me currently.

Like Tillinghast, Thomas and Mackenzie, several other Golden Age era architects were from well-to-do clans, too, who promoted education and travel, which certainly cultivated an intellectual capacity in general.  

Re Lloyd Wright. Yes, I also understand he "took his cues from the land", much like Stanley Thompson who also had no formal education in architecture, but following an apprentice with an established firm became "the legend".

Amazing stuff.

[Ian Andrew]

Curiously when Thompson designed Jasper in the early 1920s, he had limited experience as a golf course designer, and no experience with such a difficult site.

Jeff,

1920

Muskoka Lakes GC (Port Carling, Ont.)
Summit G & CC w/ George Cumming (Richmond Hill, Ont.)

1921

Bigwin Island GC (Huntsville, Ont.) NLE
The Briars Golf & Country Club, Nine holes (Jackson’s Point, Ont.)
Highland G & CC w/George Cumming (London, Ont.)
North Bay (9 holes) (North Bay, Ont.)

1922
Niakwa G&CC (Winnipeg, Man)
Halifax (Old Asburn) (Halifax, NS)
Lingan  (9 holes) (Sydney, NS)
Burlington G&CC (Burlington, Ont)
Cedar Brook G&CC (Scarborough, Ont.)
Cedarhurst GC  (9 holes) (Beaverton, Ont.)
Lake Shore GC (Toronto, Ont) NLE
Shore Acres GC (Scarborough, Ont.) NLE
St. Thomas G &CC (Union, Ont.)
Thornhill G&CC (Richmond Hill, Ont.)
Uplands GC (Richmond Hill, Ont.) 9 holes NLE

1923
Couchiching GC (9 holes) (Orillia, Ont.)
Fort William CC (Thunder Bay, Ont)
Islington G&CC (Toronto, Ont.)
Kenora G &CC (Kenora, Ont.)
Queen Victoria Park (Niagara Falls, Ont.) (NLE)
Marlborough GC (Montreal, Que.) (NLE)
Sleepy Hollow GC (Cleveland, Ohio) (U.S.)

1924

Big Pay Point GC (Barrie, Ont.)
Erie Downs (Bridgewater GC) (Fort Erie, Ont.)
Ladies Golf Club of Toronto (Richmond Hill, Ont.)
Minaki Inn (9 holes) (Minaki, Ont.) (NLE)
Three Rivers (Ki-8-Eb) (Trois Rivieres, Que.)
Neilhurst GC (Jacksonville, Florida) (NLE)
Squaw Creek G&CC (Yongestown,  Ohio)


That's more than limited exoperience!

[Ian Andrew]

Chris,

Did Van Gogh and Lloyd Wright "learn" to be Van Gogh and Lloyd Wright? Or is their respective brilliance more attributable to inherent talent and sensibilities each was born with?

Jeff,

Lloyd Wright apprenticed under Louis Sullivan who was an enormously important figure in architecture too - I think this thread is underestimating collective experience.

Thompson's work was not outstanding right away - it got better and better as he did more projects. When you look at all the courses he did before jasper - you realize he was able to try a lot of ideas out before he got his first great project.

[Ian Andrew]

Whether we like to admit it or not - luck and opportunity are as important in identifying genius as talent.

[Jeff_Mingay]

Ian,

I'm not under-estimating collective experience.

In fact, in my initial post, I point out that aspects of design and construction are learned through experience... such as Stanley Thompson working with his brother, Nicol, and Geo. Cumming before venturing out on his own. And Lloyd Wright apprenticing under Sullivan in Chicago. I mention that as well, above.  

Frankly, there's no way Stanley Thompson was personally involved with over 30 golf course designs between 1920-24. Much of that work was carried out by the aforementioned firm - Thompson, Cumming and Thompson - in which Stanley was a "junior partner" amongst more well-known elders.  To present your list as a Stanley Thompson portfolio - 1920 thru 24 - is inaccurate.

Re Lloyd Wright. I did mention he apprenticed with an established firm, in Chicago. But, again, he was not formally educated in architecture (aside from his apprenticeship).

Didn't Ben Hogan say something about luck being the product of hard work?

[Phil_the_Author]

Greg,

You asked, "I know Tillinghast wrote a number of books on golf but wonder if any painted? Designed buildings? Wrote fiction? Sculpted?"

Tilly wrote only 2 books in his life and both were expanded collections of of stories about his fictional "Cobble Valley Country Club" and the lives of the members. The vast majority of everything he wrote wwere articles, poems and essays found in newspapers and golf journals.

He never wrote childen's books but did make up imaginative stories for his grandchildren including drawings of some of these imaginary characters that he invented.

He was an award-winning photographer. One, a photograph of his new wife Lillian (can be found in my Tilly bio) won a $25 first place prize in a contest held by the Phialadelphia Inquirer ca. 1895.

Many of the photographs that accompanied his articles were taken by him. Copies of his most famous one, the fabulous portrait of Old Tom Morris standing in the doorway of his ship taken during his 1898 trip to St. Andrews, was still being sold as individual prints in the late 1930's.

He painted; quite well in fact, and one of his grand-children, Marny Lu who passed away several years ago, was a brilliant artist in her own right. His talent though was displayed in his course and hole sketches, many of which are now highly prized as much for their artistic qualities as for the fact that he drew them.

Tilly was a talented poet and many of his golf poems (though his poetry was not all golf related) were published as part of his columns. In fact, his columns written under the name of Hazard included many poems written by his father.

Tilly was more than a piano player, though not quite a pianist. He was self-taught and performed quite willingly at parties.

Most on-site are aware that Tilly was a fine amateur golfer, but few know that he was a very talented cricket player (which may be the reason his family ended up joining the Philadelphia Cricket Club) who played on teams representing the U.S. in international matches.

Tilly not only enjoyed antiques, he was considered an expert in the field, specializing in Civil War memorabilia and political autographs. There are a number of mentions of Tilly sales in the New York Times in the 20's. He owned antique shops on two occasions, one in New Jersey and the other in Beverly Hills.

He and Lillian also played Bridge far beyond social levels.

About a year & a half ago, I was approached for confirmation by someone who lived in a house in Harrington Park directly across the street from where Tilly lived from 1927-36. He had found paperwork that stated that he lived in Tilly's original house (he didn't) and that Tilly had not only designed his, but a number of other homes on the street (He didn't do this either).

He did work with his son-in-law, Harold Worden, a civil engineer and employed by Tilly at the time as his on-site management engineer, on the design of the house next door to his that he built and gave to the Worden's as a gift in 1930 after he bought his own house.

AS far as I know, he never sculpted anything...  

[Ian Andrew]

Ian,


Frankly, there's no way Stanley Thompson was personally involved with over 30 golf course designs between 1920-24. Much of that work was carried out by the aforementioned firm - Thompson, Cumming and Thompson - in which Stanley was a "junior partner" amongst more well-known elders.  To present your list as a Stanley Thompson portfolio - 1920 thru 24 - is inaccurate.

Jeff,

Thompson formed his own company Stanley Thompson & Associates in 1921. This list was the courses that have verification of his involvement - obviously not day to day - but involvement none the less.

[Chris Parker]

Ian,


Frankly, there's no way Stanley Thompson was personally involved with over 30 golf course designs between 1920-24. Much of that work was carried out by the aforementioned firm - Thompson, Cumming and Thompson - in which Stanley was a "junior partner" amongst more well-known elders.  To present your list as a Stanley Thompson portfolio - 1920 thru 24 - is inaccurate.

Jeff,

Thompson formed his own company Stanley Thompson & Associates in 1921.

Don't know if this helps guys, but here's part of a post that I made on the Re:Stanley Thompson’s Definative List of Designs thread:

Barclay indicates that the firm of Thompson, Cumming and Thompson was formed in 1920, as announced in the February 1920 issue of CG:

"A Canadian golfing firm of outstanding ability has recently been formed, composed of Nicol Thompson, the popular Hamilton pro and golf architect, George Cumming, the celebrated Toronto pro and architect, and Mr. Stanley Thompson, the young amateur who last year returned from overseas."

It is apparent that Nicol and Cumming were the "big names" of the firm.  

Barclay writes,

"The new company was flooded with work, including contracts for courses that Nicol Thompson and George Cumming had already been commissioned to do.
After one year, the demand for their services as golf course architects was too much for golf professionals Nicol and George, whose first responsibility was to the members of their clubs."

In April 1921 CG reported:

"The firm of Thompson, Cumming and Thompson...owing to the great stress of other business, has sold out its interests to Lewis and Thompson Company, with offices in New York, Philadelphia and Toronto..."

Barclay goes on to indicate that "the above-mentioned Lewis, an American, was primarily an earth-mover -- or golf course contractor -- and Lewis and Thompson advertised the company as "Golf Course Engineers."  Less than a year later, Stanley Thompson formed his own company."

[Jeff_Mingay]

Ian,

Had their circumstances been different, allowing them to continue designing golf courses, do you think either Nicol Thompson or George Cumming could have created courses comparable to Stanley Thompson's best work over the same sites?

This gets us back on topic... what made the greats great. In this case, Stanley Thompson?

(P.S. Apologies for my ramblings above, in which I apparently fail to accurately acknowledge Thompson's experience prior to 1924! And mistakenly credit Tillinghast with writing a children's book! I was thinking of those cartoon-y sketches, Phil!)

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()