Did the Arts and Crafts Movement really influence GCA?

[TEPaul]

Rand Jerris agrees that the arts and crafts movement should now be considered the primary influence on the architecture of the heathlands as well as the "Golden Age" of golf architecture? That's interesting. Since we do speak with Rand Jerris about other things I think I'll ask him exactly how he feels about that theory or hypothesis.

I guess if one endorsed Tom MacWood's "umbrella" theory that the "arts and crafts" movement and its philosophies was so prevalent and pervasive during that time that it basically primarily influenced most every aesthetic (or even philosophy) of that particular time then one probably could support Tom's theory or hypothesis about the importance of the A/C movement on golf architecture of that time. But to me, again, that is massively generalizing to encorporate a point about an art form (golf course architecture) that may've had other  influences unconnected to the A/C movement that were primary to its development.

I, for one, am not willing to make that leap of logic by using Tom MacWood's "umbrella" theory about the A/C movement. Not yet anyway.

[T_MacWood]

TE
"Hutchinson definitely had a powerful voice in golf architecture from his pulpit as the golf writer of Country Life magazine but the question here is---did he actually both inspire and instruct the likes of Park, Fowler, Colt and Abercromby to do what they did with their break-through designs in the heathlands which golf architecure's literatary histories tell us was the beginning of re-creation of the linksland architectural model outside the linksland?"

Yes. He definitely inspired those men...they put into action the ideas that he was suggesting in Country Life. He was the first and most powerful voice on golf archirtecture. Its is no wonder they also contributed articles on the subject in both CL and his book on GCA.

[T_MacWood]

If you mean by 'Umbrella' that the A&C movement was made up a number of subgroups that are now considered part of the larger A&C Movement (like the Prairie School or Pre-Raphealite) or overlapped the A&C Movement (like Aesthetic movement or Art Nouveau) than yes he will explain that aspect to you. I have discussed this aspect of the movement with him...in fact he is particularly interested in how the arts influenced the early links creators.

[Kyle Harris]

Tom MacWood,

Having read your essay through twice now. When do you feel the A&C movement ended? Does it link with the end of the so-called Golden Age of Golf Architecture?

Your essay, while thoroughly researched and thought-out seems to make the connections arbitrarily and in different places at different times. At first, A&C directly influenced the likes of Colt and Park but then as time evolves A&C becomes more the "spirit of the design" instead of a specific way of thinking. Logically, this is selective.

As per your essay, it would appear that the A&C movement was nothing more than "not Victorian." Where are the defined axioms of the era?

This is comparable to saying the social changes during the '60s was nothing more than "not the '50s."

Also, from an academic standpoint, do you have a list of cited and uncited sources?

[T_MacWood]

TE
"I think the writers of the evolutions and primary influences in golf architecture have given those early architects of the heathland, particularly Park, credit as primary influences for doing it first because they are the ones who actually designed and built those courses."

Speaking of the writers of the evolution....have you read Hutchinson's take on this important period.

[T_MacWood]

Kyle
Because it was an all encompassing movement and migrated to many corners of the world it is difficult to pin point a specific end. In the UK it was losing steam around 1910 or WWI, but there were individuals that continued on designing in that vain for many years. The USA was about a decade behind in picking up the movement, and it started to lose steam in the 20's, although you could find traces of it the later work of FLW, Julia Morgan, the Greene brothers and others.

In your opinion what is the major disctinction between "spirit of the design" and a way of thinking?

"As per your essay, it would appear that the A&C movement was nothing more than "not Victorian." "

Is that is all you get out of the A&C movement and my essay? Obviously I didn't do a very good job. You ought to pick a book on the subject (there have been countless written in the last decade)...there was a little more to it than not Victorian.

"Where are the defined axioms of the era? "

Did you read the essay? Have you been following this thread?

When I re-write the essay I'll include all the sources, there were a lot of them. It was a massive amount of research...over a period of about ten years.

[Kyle Harris]

Tom,

I figured there was a massive amount of research, which I give you full credit and respect for.

Being "not Victorian" is certainly not everything I've gotten out of your essay. However, I felt that was one of the broad categorizations you were attempting to make. Any good essay will have these categorizations and then elaborate, and you did. In my experience with historic research, social changes and artistic movements tend to be born out of a desire to be different (subtly or radically) from a previous era. By the timeline we are speaking of here, the A&C movement seemed to be born out of the idea that Victorian principles were too rigid and boring to some.

My spirit of the design was meant to put some disparity between a defined A&C movement and Golf architecture. Going back to my '60s example: Popular music changed and evolved rapidly during this era, as did social norms, etc. However, linking the two as causes of one another is shaky ground at best. Did the social causes latch on to the music to further their cause? Yes. Did music become a voice of the social cause? Yes. However, the music was changing before the vast social causes began to take foot (see: The Beatles). Just so happened that the radical shift in popular music was allegorical to the radical social changes of the time. They were converging movements and both got caught up in the spirit of the other.

I feel it is more reasonable to say that Golf Architecture and the A&C movement converged and that Golf architects of the time used the spirit and feeling of the era to influence their designs instead of some axiomic principles.

[TEPaul]

"Speaking of the writers of the evolution....have you read Hutchinson's take on this important period."

Tom:

Probably only some. Does he say anywhere in what he wrote that he inspired or instructed those heathland architects, most importantly including Park what to do in the heathlands or how to do it? Did Hutchinson, the messenger of the A/C movement's influence in golf course architecture actually ever mention the influence of the "arts and crafts" movement specifically or as a specific golf architecture philosophy or even aesthetic? By that time, and according to you, the A/C movement had certainly been identified by name. If Hutchinson never did mention the A/C movement in any of his golf and golf architectural writing did he at least mention this "Umbrella effect" theory of it that you are describing to account for its prevalent influence in so many art forms in this time?  

[wsmorrison]

Who was more influential in those early days than Hutchinson?

Certainly the fellows that were practicing the architecture at the time and not the guy that wrote about it.  Are you saying that because Hutchinson wrote about the poor quality of the inland architecture and the A/C Movement that the architects changed their practices?  I would be surprised if that is supportable to any degree.  I defer to Park, Colt, Abercrombie, Fowler and those guys.

In your opinion was there a Philadelphia School of golf architecture?

Yes, as a collaborative learning and design effort among friends.  Why?  Was it really a Philadelphia version of the Arts and Crafts Movement?  I cannot recall Willliam Flynn or Hugh Wilson ever crediting their work to Hutchinson and the A/C Movement.

[T_MacWood]

TE
"Probably only some."

What have you read?

"Does he say anywhere in what he wrote that he inspired or instructed those heathland architects, most importantly including Park what to do in the heathlands or how to do it?"

Park is mentioned...I would suggest you pick it up.

"Did Hutchinson, the messenger of the A/C movement's influence in golf course architecture actually ever mention the influence of the "arts and crafts" movement specifically or as a specific golf architecture philosophy or even aesthetic?"

I'm not sure if he did mention it or not in his essay on Morris. I don't believe he did...it wasn't a commonly used term. After reading that quote is there any doubt what he was talking about?

"If Hutchinson never did mention the A/C movement in any of his golf and golf architectural writing did he at least mention this "Umbrella effect" theory of it that you are describing to account for its prevalent influence in so many art forms in this time? "

What is your understanding of the "Umbrella effect"? Or has this discussion degenerated into an excercise in making fun of the essay and myself?

[T_MacWood]

Wayne
"Yes, as a collaborative learning and design effort among friends.  Why?"

Did the members of the Philadelphia School ever mention the Philadelphia school by name or that they were involved in Philadelphia movement in golf design?  

"Certainly the fellows that were practicing the architecture at the time and not the guy that wrote about it.  Are you saying that because Hutchinson wrote about the poor quality of the inland architecture and the A/C Movement that the architects changed their practices?"

Hutchinson did a little more than that. And yes because he was the first who wrote about this subject and began critically analyzing GCA, these men were influenced and as a result the architecture changed. Have you read the book he published on golf architecture or anything he has written on the subject.

One of the frustrating aspects of this discusion with TE and yourself is the fact that neither one of you has bothered to read any material from the early years of British golf design...the topic we are discussing.

[Paul_Turner]

Any interesting comparison would be between Darwin's:

"Golf Courses of the British Isles" approx 1910 and "Golf Courses of Great Britain" 1925.  One written at the cusp and including "Victorian" courses,  the other written well into the "Golden Age".

[T_MacWood]

Kyle
"I feel it is more reasonable to say that Golf Architecture and the A&C movement converged and that Golf architects of the time used the spirit and feeling of the era to influence their designs instead of some axiomic principles."

That is the essence of the essay.

[Kyle Harris]

Tom MacWood,

Alright, then I think me, Wayne and Tom Paul are probably reading into everything a bit too much, and as a result you are with your counter examples.

Oh well, such is the life of a buckeye and Nittany Lion.  

[Mike_Cirba]

Oh my God, you guys....

SHUT UP!!!

I'm trying to get some sleep...    

[TEPaul]

From Tom MacWood's post #129;

"The purpose of the essay was to expose the conditions and atmosphere at the time (including the overall society) and the influences that sparked the revolution in golf architecture--"

Tom:

Please don't get me wrong here---I really do think that is an interesting thing to attempt to do---in any era.

Today, and for the last 10-15 years we seem to be undergoing not exactly a revolution in golf architecture but certainly a real renaissance in golf architecture that is a reversion to a far more natural and certainly hand-crafted look, particularly in the extraordinary natural looking bunkers of the like of Hanse, De Vries, Doak and Coore and Crenshaw (check out the "Where's this?" thread).

Do you think there is something in the conditions and atmosphere of this time of ours (including the overall society) that is a primary influence on this renaissance style of hand-crafted natural architecture, particularly this bunkering style? And if so, what do you think that primary condition, atmosphere of our time (including the overall society) is that is causing this to happen in golf architecture? I certainly can see from your posts on this thread that you believe that the A/C Movement was a very wide-spread and pervasive influence on many things in the society of the era of 1850 to about 1930, including many art forms, and that seems to be the reason you think it also was such a primary influence on the era of the "Golden Age" of golf architecture.  Do you think the influence of Country Life magazine, Horace Hutchinson and the "arts and crafts" movement is making a comeback and is the primary influence on this renaissance architecture we see today?  

[Mike_Cirba]

Could it be that the baby boom generation, after experimenting with drugs, free sex, liberalism, etc., is now in a reactionary mode overall, and now focused on trying to get back to our roots?

Is our current obsession with golf courses of the 1920s something akin to our present politics which seem to be in the Coolidge/Hoover tradition?

Nah...probably not, but if someone told me in 1970 that the generation that invented Woodstock and protested Viet Nam would elect George Bush and take a preemptive, policing view to world conflicts I wouldn't have believed it.

[T_MacWood]

TE
Doak said he preferred the term Arts and Crafts to describe his architecture to minimalism. When GS and I were discussing a book on Arts and Crafts golf, the idea was a look back and a look forward, I would write about early arts and crafts golf architecture, and Geoff would discuss the modern movement including his and Gil's work at Rustic Canyon. The idea of Country Life, a magazine covering so many diverse and interesting topics, really appealed to Ran. IMO although GCA is not exactly comparable, it has had an affect.

I think there is something in the atmosphere, evidence of an Arts and Crafts aesthetic revival--from Pottery Barn to Bandon.

[Mike_Cirba]

Aren't we all the products of our times as much as the products and art we create reflects those times.  How could one fail to influence the other while ironically becoming self-defining at the same time?  

Kyle used the term axiomatic, and I think it's our unavoidable destiny, just as it was for those early pioneers in the game.

[TEPaul]

MikeC:

Excellent questions. Perhaps you don't believe in the social and cultural cycles particularly this country goes through and particularly the cycles America went through in the 20th century---some may just call those cycles--fads. There is little I believe in more than that!

That moving forward rapidly into new and unexplored areas in all kinds of things (change) is frankly the American way---the American ethos. In no country in history is "change" as respected and glorified as in America--it's the Amercian ethos. We are the "can do" people of our world's history. Our underlying self-image and "ethos" I call "American Manifest Destiny" (with us and our country----anything's possible!).

However, for a society that is that change-oriented, I firmly believe that after a time of rapid forward moevement into new and unexplored areas (The over-all Golden Age of the 1920s, WW2 and our post WW2 expansion, the Vietnam War/1960s cultural revolution etc) what we always seem to do (perhaps almost have to do) at the end of a rapid forward moving part of the cycle is STOP, CATCH OUR BREATH and LOOK BACK to some former time that probably tends to make us feel more comfortable and perhaps more grounded again, perhaps more innocent again.

Ralph Lauren built a retail empire on identifying and nailing that "looking back" part of the cycling of America. It's obviously going on in the golf architecture, and the apparent popularity of  Hanse, Doak and C&C (even if somewhat or a niche market today) is perfect evidence of it.

There is no question this young "renaissance" movement we see in the architecture of those few today is a reverting or looking back to a former time that used "naturalism" as its theme.

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom,

I agree with you.

The risk with any regressive movement is that it becomes stale, boring, reiterative, and repetitive, and ultimately some pioneer decides it's time to move forward again in some new direction.

On a recent thread I mentioned that I thought the biggest drawback and risk to the longterm artistic form and longevity of C&C's style was that they would begin imposing it in a uniform manner, and fail to stretch and expand their art just at the time they are at the top of their game and in a position to do so.  Hearing that they have recently brought their wild and wooly bunker style to Prairie Dunes is evidence of them possibly falling into this trap, although I must admit that I haven't seen them yet and the "look" might fit in well there.  However, that look can become stereotypical and rote and ultimately incongruous at other geographic locations.

I also believe that Tom Doak runs the same risk.  The fact that I was able to identify his course in Palm Desert through a single photograph is indicative of that.  

I think the success of the greatest artists is due to the fact that they are continually reinventing themselves, sometimes failing as they move in new directions, but ultimately picking themselves up and continuing on...always challenging the fans of their art to learn and follow along.

As Bob Dylan said, "He who isn't busy being born, is busy dying".    

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike,

Aren't we all the products of our times as much as the products and art we create reflects those times.  How could one fail to influence the other while ironically becoming self-defining at the same time?  

In what context would you explain a restoration of a 1927 golf course in 2005 ? [/color]

Kyle used the term axiomatic, and I think it's our unavoidable destiny, just as it was for those early pioneers in the game.

TEPaul,

Permission granted.

That was funny.

[TEPaul]

MikeC:

Basically your post #220 asks the ultimate architectural question---eg where does the art go once it's achieved some truly enduring quality?

Basically many believe, certainly many on here that the likes of Doak, Hanse, De Vries and Coore and Crenshaw et al are now producting a style and a natural aesthetic in golf architecture that just may be as good or perhaps even better than anything else that was ever done in the great Golden Age of Golf architecture that included the likes of GCGC, Myopia, NGLA, Oakmont, Merion, PVGC, Pinehurst #2, Shinnecock, Pebble, Riviera, Winged Foot, CPC, ANGC etc.

If that is so the question becomes why does the art need to go any further? Why not just hope the world of golf becomes completely populated with courses like some of the ones we see them doing today like that? (personally I don't subscribe to this feeling but only because of my "Big World" theory which basically rests on the need for "difference" in the art form of golf course architecture).

That is an excellent question? Does golf need better than that---does it need to try a wholly new direction to stay fresh as even an art form?

Years ago GeoffShac told me something which has always stayed with me as a mystery and an enigma. He said that the most imaginative and adventurous of those old guys---the MacKenzies, Thomases, Tillinghasts, Behrs etc hoped in the late 1920s that there would come a time when technology (basically perhaps construction machinery) would get to a point when those who followed them could take the art of golf architect to some height when naturalism and architectural sophistication would far surpass anything they ever did or could do back in that day!!

Think about that! Perhaps they did not realize, for some reason, that by the late 1920s they'd already taken the art form to heights that would never or could never be far surpassed that way.

The question becomes where can the art form go now to reach new heights if naturalism is the basic aesthetic that should be followed in golf course architecture?

We should realize that the likes of those architects mentioned today have, for the first and only time in 75 to 80 years finally looked back very carefully at that great time and basically pulled from it in what they do today so many of the things that never were pulled from it in the ensuing years.

If this is as good that way as that time was----where can we go from here?

I most definitely have my own ideas about that. I have a funny hunch that it may take looking all the way back almost to where it all began and see what some of the things may have been that to this day may not have ever come out---of the linkland and particularly a prototype such as TOC that for whatever odd reason never really was used in some ways in all that followed it up until this day.

[T_MacWood]

Wayne
"Yes, as a collaborative learning and design effort among friends.  Why?"

Did the members of the Philadelphia School ever mention the Philadelphia school by name or that they were involved in Philadelphia movement in golf design?  

[TEPaul]

"Did the members of the Philadelphia School ever mention the Philadelphia school by name or that they were involved in Philadelphia movement in golf design?"

Tom:

That's a very good point. I'm quite sure the so-called "Philadelphia School of Architecture" architects never did mention the name "Philadelphia School of Architecture" or were even aware that there was ever considered to be such a thing.

The so-called "Philly School" (or sometimes called "Pennsylvania School if one includes William Fownes) really wasn't a "school" in the sense there was ever any particular type or style of architecture associated with it (as there was more evidently in the "National" School or the "Monterrey" school.

The "Philly School" was essentially just a very close knit group of 5-6 close friends and often playing partners who collaborated with each other frequently----by far the most notable example of their collaboration being at PVGC. Other than that it really wasn't any particular "whole course" type or style of architecture, although at PVGC collaborative ideas from them went into that course as well as came out of it.

I wrote an article about the original "Philadelphia School of Architecture" for the Philadelphia Golfer magazine about three years ago and reworked it some for Merion and the US Amateur there this year. The article will appear in the 2005 US Amateur program which is really nice this year as they went with a single advertizer inside of the usual about 200 pages of advertizing.