Did golf course architecture influence the movement or did the movement influence the architecture? I'd say neither unless further evidence comes to light. As for what would constitute cause and effect, it is very simple, really. An example of cause and effect would be if any one of a number of classic era architects said "My golf architecture was influenced by the Arts and Crafts movement." Why is the concept of cause and effect so difficult to understand? I know it has yet to be produced. You yourself admit that the question has not been answered.
I agree that the first question is the pertinent one. And surely if they all swore on a stack of bibles that their architecture was influenced by the arts and crafts movement then we'd have the proof you require.
But surely a written statement by the influenced party isn't the only compelling evidence of influence, is it? After all, by your affirmation requirement, you've just erased much of the Arts and Crafts Movement from the history books. For example, by your requirement it is very likely that Morris himself should not be considered part of the movement. It was not a self-identifying or even a self-aware movement, at least not across the board.
And again, these AC practioners did not necessarily look to each other for inspiration, but rather looked back to the roots of their respective fields, to the pre-Victorian state of the Art. An example, from above. Gertrude Jekyll was a AC Practioner, but when she writes of her craft she harkens back to Humphry Repton, a figure that long predates teh AC Movement. This is what made her a AC Practioner, her rejection of the current and return to the pre-Victorian Roots of her field.
At least some of the gca do likewise. Behr and MacDonald reject the current and harken back to Repton, arguing that his principles ought to be a guiding light for gca. Colt cites Repton's school of thought as a source for gcas.
I'm not sure why you require more of the gca's than you do of the AC Practioners.
Merion East evolved over some 25 or so years. The changes from 1912 to 1934 were very dramatic. You say it is due to the influence of the Arts and Crafts movement. What makes you think so? Surely it must be more than if it were so it would serve to prove your hypothesis.
As I said in my last post, I was referring to the previous course at the previous location. But I'd be curious as to what influence you think the links and heathland courses had on Merion from 1912 through the 30's.
If you base your understanding of the Merion course in Haverford due to pictures like the one you posted, I think your characterization might need more support. If it is accurate, it would be by due to accident rather than by research method.
I dont have much of an "understanding" of the Merion course in Haverford. I've never focused my studies on it. That beiung said, I have read descriptions of it and seen a few photos, more than just that one photograph which does depict "dark ages" type features.
But I am here to learn, not to teach. So let's assume it is as you first thought when you assumed that I knew nothing about the origins of Merion whatsoever. I ask you, did the Haverford course at Merion fit the general description of a "dark ages" course? To what degree?
I don't know what you mean by sacred topic. Who considers any of this sacred? Not I.
Terrific. Then you won't mind focusing the conversation for a bit on the influences at Merion.
If you made the comments, surely you must have figured out whether they check out or not. I suppose to you they do.
Why would you assume this? As I said, I am here to learn, not to teach. From the beginning I told you your knowledge of the subject is much greater than mine, which is why I chose it as my example. So I could see if Merion fits in with the theory. If I thought I knew everything about Merion I'd probably write a book or something.
The truth is, every since I got to see Merion East recently I have been stewing over just what the influences were. This seems like as good as place as any to explore this.
Any influence on Merion East was due to Hugh Wilson, William Flynn and to a lesser degree Joe Valentine. Only Wilson went overseas to study courses in the UK. Flynn was never there. None of these men cited the Arts and Crafts movement as inspiring their work or the changes to Merion.
Interesting. I recall reading at some point that MacDonald and at least on other experienced architect advised on the project. Is this incorrect? Did those involved cite anyone outside of golf course architecture as inspiration?
Flynn believed strongly in naturalism (as evidenced by his work on the ground and his writings) and I think the evolution of the course bears this out. What you fail to grasp is that this can be a result independent of some arts movement no matter how pervasive you like to think of it.
I dont fail to grasp that this could result independently from "some arts movement." But I am curious, from where did his strong belief in "naturalism" come. I also think that great men are rarely unaware of what is going on in the world around them, and that it is unlikely that these great men had absolutely no exposure to ideas and philosophies that eventually became known as arts and crafts. Not that this means that AC was their primary influence; but it does make it more difficult to totally seperate what they were doing from what is going on around them.
The attribution that you and Tom alledge requires a far higher degree of proof.
Let's take a step back here for a minute. It is not fair to TomM to lump our views together. In fact, we have very different takes on this whole thing.
And I havent alledged anything. Frankly, I don't think TomM has made his case. Yet. But he has hit on something interesting and worth pursuing. I was encouraged by the other thread when he was setting out in an entirely new direction-- the influence of Landscape Architecture. But unfortunately his antagonists will have nothing of a exploratory discussion.