.....what disturbs me is his total lack of respect for history.

I am bothered that he has no problem putting his smudged finger prints over every important golf course he can get his hands on--ANGC, Inverness, Riviera, PVGC, Oak Hill, Winged Foot, Merion, Oakmont, etc.

I'm not saying that I disagree with you, but where's the culpability on the part of those clubs and their membership's that retain him for the sole purpose of altering their golf course ?

He just doesn't walk in off of the street.
He's invited in.
And, he's invited in with but one thought in mind.
To alter the golf course.
And, that determination has been made by the membership prior to extending the invitation to him.

So, while I agree that he's been an instrument of disfiguration, the opportunity and incentive to do so was presented to him by a membership that had already decided to disfigure their classic/historic golf course.

All too often the architect is the lightning rod of discontent on this site, when in fact, more responsibility for disfiguring classic/historic golf courses should be placed at the feet of those who wanted it, solicited it and paid for it.
The individual clubs and their membership [/color]

Why would a guy who has so little interest and respect for the past be involved in so many important/historic courses?

Because, that's what those memberships want.[/color]

I don't expect you to answer my question because you are more focused upon defending Fazio than you are in preserving and celebrating historic work.

Tom, do we blame the scalpel when the surgeon disfigures a patient ?  Fazio is but an instrument, executing the will of the membership.[/color]

As someone who believes important works of all eras should be preserved and studied, I hope there isn't a future TF who ruins his most important works.

You're blaming the messenger, the servant.
Blame the ones who want, send and pay for the messenger, the clubs themselves.[/color]