Did the Arts and Crafts Movement really influence GCA?

[ForkaB]

Rich
"WRONG.  YOU JUST HAVE NOT BEEN READING WHAT I SAID CAREFULLY ENOUGH."

Don’t worry I’ve been reading what you’ve been writing—when it comes to golf architecture, and in particular golden age golf architecture, I would characterize your attitude as flat worldish.

"THIS IS AN IRELEVANT COMMENT"

The Richmond question is relevant because you have in the past speculated (alternatively argued) that Willie Park II was not designing Victorian era stuff in the 1890’s, and now that Willie Park II was offering as an alternative, examples of existing gca (I presume the old natural links) at Sunningdale and Huntercombe.

Are you now acknowledging that Sunningdale and Huntercombe were in fact landmark designs (recognized as such in England by H.Hutchinson and in Scotland by Garden Smith, to name two prominent examples) and that the inland golf courses of the 1890’s left a lot to be desired (including WP II’s)?

"I NEVER SAID ANYTHING ABOUT OTM'S INLAND COURSES AND HOLES.  I DON'T KNOW THEM WELL ENOUGH TO KNOW WHAT HE DID AND DIDN'T DO AT THEM."

On a thread dealing with A&C golf architecture, Victorian era golf architecture (and OTM’s inclusion in this category) and the influences on the reform of inland golf design at the turn of the century, you said “And, Old Tom Morris built some GREAT golf courses and holes in the late 1800's.”

I was interested in what were some of his better inland designs.

"HOWEVER, IF HE WHAT HE DID DO AT ALTYH, ROYAL BURGRESS, STIRLING, ETC. IS STILL THERE, IT IS PRETTY GOOD STUFF.  NOT AT ALL "UNNATURAL" OR "GEOMETRIC" OR EVEN "VICTORIAN" (EVEN THOUGH THEY WERE BUILT DURING VR'S REIGN)....."

Are there any Victorian courses that survived to this day in that form? I don’t think so. Which brings up interesting question, what are some of Old Tom’s best preserved designs?

"VERY HARD TO SEE FROM THAT PICTURE, BUT I'LL TAKE YOUR WORD FOR IT.  BUT, EVEN IF SO WHAT?"

Again it goes back to your theory that WP II was not designing Victorian type courses in 1890’s.

Tom

You really need to get a remedial reading course under your belt.  I'll just deal with the last sentence of the above rant....

I never said WP Jr. "was not designing Victorian type courses in 1890’s."  All I said was that he was designing some interesting "non-Victorian" courses at that time (which I know for a fact, because I have played them). This is a very different statement, and it is why I questioned the relevance of your "Richmond" reference.  Capice?

Feel free to continue with your theories about A&C and GCA.  They are interesting, if ultimately unconvincing, at least to me.  You might be proved right in the end, but I don't think so.  Just an honest opinion.

Cheers

Rich

[T_MacWood]

This is one your comments regarding that subject from the WP II thread a month or two ago, maybe I misunderstood what you were saying....weren't you requesting proof that Park's 1890's designs were of the Victorian style? On that same thread I believe you argued that the only reason Ladybank was considered a landmark design a la Sunningdale was because of its location in Scotland:

"Your statement that Willie Park Jr.'s '....earlier designs were no different then the rest of the Victorian stuff' is just not true."
~~Rich Goodale

Perhaps some day you'll come around...I'm not going to hold my breath. But on the other hand you've already come along way...you now acknowledge there was a golden age of design...at least I think you do. Its kind of ironic, someone who argued against the exsistance of the golden age is now arguing about what were its influences.  

[ForkaB]

Tom

I'll stand by the statement of mine in quotation marks above.  It is a truth.  Do you have a problem with the truth?

Rich

PS--all I believe is that there have been many "golden ages" of design, including what you call the "Victorian Age" as well as today, as a matter of fact.  In fact, I believe that history will show that the designs of today will trump your and Ran's "golden age."  But, like Mucci, I may be wrong....

[Patrick_Mucci]

DMoriarty,

The flaw in your argument is that you refer to GCA in the context of other disciplines, rather then refering to and placing GCA in the context of GCA, not other disciplines.

It's not how GCA evolved or differed from other disciplines, it's how it evovled or differed from it's historic perspective, it's roots and evolved form prior to the A&C period that Tom MacWood indicates it experienced.

[TEPaul]

From Tom MacWood's post #

(TE
"Those who took part in that era of architecture wrote about what the influences on them were voluminously and specifically. The entire literature of that time and afterwards in golf’s evolution is replete with what those primary influences were on that era of golf architecture. There are numerous really fine books on what those influences were---really hallmark books such as Hunter’s “The Links”, Thomas’s “Golf Architecture in America” and Mackenzie’s “The Spirit of St. Andrews”, not to mention the excellent “Scotland’s Gift Golf” and the fascinating articles of Behr on the influences on golf architecture of that time.")

You responded:

"Those involved in the different art forms of the A&C Movement wrote volumes about their influences as well. It was the vernacular tradition that evolved naturally in each given local....another common link."

Tom:

I realize that. You wrote plenty about what the influences were that originated and evolved the A/C movement's rejection of certain things in the first three or so parts of your A/C Movement article---eg a rejection of the classical Greek and Roman building architectural style, a rejection of the dehumanizing effects of the Industrial revolution, a rejection of some of the stultifying effects of the Victorian Age, perhaps such as a minimalization of various individual expressions, perhaps even the rural individual's expression of the glories of Nature etc.

But what does any of that have to do with your suggested influences of the A/C Movement on golf course architecture of the so-called Golden Age? People wrote volumes about the influences of all kinds of things on all kinds of other things----the influences on the A/C movement from various things and the influences of the A/C Movement on various things such a building architecture, art and craft, painting art etc. The A/C advocates and practioners did write about those influences both on and from the A/C Movement.

But they never wrote about the A/C movement's influences on golf architecture and golf architecture's practioners never wrote about the A/C Movement's influence on golf course archtiecture.

If you are only drawing the conclusuions you have because the A/C Movement was some movement of a reversion to Nature and golf architecture of that time was as well, that is simply not the type of nexus or interesting connection that indicates a major influence of one on the other, in my opinion.

To attempt to assign a major influence on and between various things because of something that general simply doesn't work. After a while you could be saying a major influence on golf architecture is the sun because at one time or another it happens to shine all over the world. You seem to be so fixated on the Art and Crafts movement you seem ready to assign its influence on far too much, in my opinion---and all of that without any real proof of influences from one on the other.

The connections you made between the A/C Movement and the Golden Age of golf architecture and the influences on it are tenuous at best.

Good examples are both your attempt to label the Golden Age era of golf architecture "arts and crafts architecture" and your attempt to label Horace Huthinson the "Father" of golf architecture. For Christ sakes, the man was scarely even a golf course architect!    

And just because various things are written about in a magazine such as Country Life certainly does not necessarily mean they have important influences on one another. The New Yorker wrote and sometimes writes about golf and architecture but that certainly doesn't mean other movements they may write about have primary influences on golf or golf architecture.

Do you also believe that Oswald and Ruby were part of a massive Kennedy assasination conspiracy because their paths crossed a time or two in Dallas? Do you believe that others who at one time or another crossed paths with them were involved too? Because the way you've attempted to make this connection between the A/C Movement and golf architecture of the Golden Age is about equally as tenuous.

[T_MacWood]

"You wrote plenty about what the influences were that originated and evolved the A/C movement's rejection of certain things in the first three or so parts of your A/C Movement article---eg a rejection of the classical Greek and Roman building architectural style, a rejection of the dehumanizing effects of the Industrial revolution, a rejection of some of the stultifying effects of the Victorian Age, perhaps such as a minimalization of various individual expressions, perhaps even the rural individual's expression of the glories of Nature etc."

That is all true. You must have missed the part about drawing inspiration from the past...embracing the local venacular tradition, their feeling was whatever that evolved style may have been, it evolved naturally for good reason....not unlike how the links golf courses evolved naturally.

What did Pugin say about classical:

"What does an Italian house do in England? Is there a similarity between our climate and that of Italy?"

Read up on the A&C Movement, the artisans and artists explain their inspirations and influences just like the golf architects you mentioned...and they were very much influenced by local traditions and the evolved style of the region. That common attitude is one of the strongest arguments for A&C's influence upon golf design.

[TEPaul]

"Read up on the A&C Movement, the artisans and artists explain their inspirations and influences just like the golf architects you mentioned...and they were very much influenced by local traditions and the evolved style of the region. That common attitude is one of the strongest arguments for A&C's influence upon golf design.
You must have missed the part about drawing inspiration from the past...embracing the local venacular tradition, their feeling was whatever that evolved style may have been, it evolved naturally for good reason....not unlike how the links golf courses evolved naturally."

Tom MacW:

No, I didn't miss any part. And as much as you may think so you certainly are not the first one to inform me or probably some on this site of the A/C movement. In 1913 my grandfather built one of the best American examples of the A/C movement houses in Isleboro Maine. It's described as an "English vernacular cottage style" (but it ain't no cottage, that's for sure). It was designed by the Philadelphia architectural firm of Bissel, Sinkler and Tilden and constructed by a well known Rockland contracting craftsman firm of W.H. Glover. I used to spend parts of the summer up there a long time before you were born. Some of the other "cottages" up there were also of the influence of the Arts and Crafts Movement.

Drawing inspiration from the past? Embracing local vernacular tradition? Their feeling was whatever that evolved style may have been, it evolved naturally for good reason....not unlike how the links courses evolved naturally? And then you say read up on the artisans and artists as they explain their inspriations and influences just like the golf architects I mentioned did??

Tom, you keep saying things like that on here as if it's your evidence that the A/C movement was the primary influence on golf architecture of that time. It just wasn't no matter how hard you keep trying to fit that square peg into a round hole. The primary influence on the Golden Age of golf architecture was no mystery at all as much as you seem to want to think you've just uncovered what was behind that mystery. The great linksland courses were not something of the past either (as you refer to those Golden Age architects looking back into the past as the A/C movement looked back to Midieval times)---they were all right there back then as they are today, as the prototypes for the inspiration and inflluence for more natural architecture after golf left the linksland and began migrating around the world.

The A/C movement may've been a reaction to, or a rejection of the dehumanizing effects of the Industrial revolution, some of the stultifying effects of Victorianism, the rejection of the balance of Greek and Roman classical building architecture in England in favor of a more natural local vernacular in building architecture, furniture and art and craft and painting art that eventually carried on throughout Europe and America. However, the influence of the linksland courses was the primary influence on golf architecture of that time after its rudimentary start in varous areas around the world.

As Adam Foster Collins implied this was not a similar reaction in golf architecture to the reactions and rejections of massive social and cultural changes going on around the world to the age of the Industrial Revolution and the cultural changes due to it. As Adam implied this was basically no more than golf architecture coming of age after its rudimentary beginning following its intial departure from where it all began centuries before and where it only resided for centuries---eg the linksland.

Again, the literature of the history and evolution of golf and golf architecture explains this all well and quite clearly and has for decades now. All golf architecture did is turn and look back at it's original model and prototype in the linksland and to those like Park who first understood it best. Park, as an excellent example of a linksland golf architecture practitioner was not some dedicated advocate or practitioner of the A/C movement, he was just a linksman who first applied the essence of linksland architecture to golf architecture outside the linksland.

It's about time you stop telling all of us to read more about the A/C movement, as if none of us have ever heard about it before or read about it before. It's time for you to stop thinking you are discovering or redefining the evolution of and influences on golf architecture because you read old magazines and newspapers all the time. It's time for you to begin to wake up and admit that as much as you might like to think you have, you have not recently uncovered the primary influences on the Golden Age of golf course archtiecture. Many men and writers before you have told the true and accurate story of the most important influences on early golf course architecture and many of them have told it very well and very clearly for many decades.

This is not to say that some of us are not particularly aware of the A/C movement and what it was, as you seem to keep telling me. This is not to say that golf architecture was developing outside the linksland in a vacuum as you keep telling me I seem to be saying. Not at all, golf architecture was developing and evolving from it's original model and prototype---the linksland courses, after a relatively brief hiatus of rudimentariness after initially migrating outside Scotland. And anyway, that relatively brief hiatus in quality architecture after golf initially migrated outside the linksland isn't even remotely close to the effects of the Industrial revolution and the social changes due it, or to the near century long effects of Victorianism (Edwardianism) or even the rejection in some areas of Greek and Roman buiding architecture in England.

Because some of these things may've happened concurrently with the early development of golf course architecture does not necessarily mean they were primary influences on golf course architecure as you suggest. The primary influence on golf course architecture---the linklands, is clear, and has been clear and well written for years. The primary influence on golf course architecture of this era just was not the "arts and crafts" movement.

It's certainly OK with me if you want to keep thinking that or if you want to think you finally uncovered this primary influence. But the fact is, it's just not historically accurate no matter how much you seem to want to think it is.
 

 

[DMoriarty]

Patrick,

My focus on other disciplines is in large part a refutation of your generalizations about other disciplines.  You are one of the strongest proponents on this website for basing opinions on known facts (ex. seeing a course, reading a book, etc.), yet your critique of TomM's theory is purely based on generalizations.  What is with the Anti-Tom MacWood Bias?  Or is it Anti-A&C Bias?  

DMoriarty,
The flaw in your argument is that you refer to GCA in the context of other disciplines, rather then refering to and placing GCA in the context of GCA, not other disciplines.

Not exactly.  I refer to GCA in the context of the evolution of GCA, then compare it to other disciplines and their respective development.

But let's skip the second part for now . . . . .

A good portion of this dispute seems to come down to a single question . . .

Immediately prior to the supposed "Golden Age," was golf course design and contruction heavily influenced by Victorian Industrialization?
   
According to some sources-- I cite two above, and TomM has more I am sure-- the answer is Yes.  
. . . . Courses designed on similar stereotyped lines
. . . . Plain, straight and unnatural looking cop bunkers extending from the rough on the one side, to the rough on the other, a bunker for the drive and one for the approach
. . . .  Holes built with  with mathematical precision.  
. . . .  A complete absence of strategy, interest and excitement.  
. . . .  Amazingly bad.  
. . . .  Natural features were incorporated into the courses only when an "irremovable object intervened to prevent the designer carrying out his nefarious plans."
As Leach's article in American Golfer said, "This was Victorian golf architecture."

Now if we accept that such a dark period existed, then everything else pretty much falls into place . . .
 
Both sides agree that the supposed "Golden Age" Designers followed a more natural aesthetic, and that they looked to the pre-industrial links courses as their guide.

Now to turn to other disciplines.   The defining characteristics of those now considered as part of the late 1800's and early 1900's Arts and Crafts Movement are as follows:  

1.  They rejected Victorian Industrialization.
2.  They attempted to return to a more natural aesthetic.
3.  They looked to pre-Industrial forms as their primary guide.

Now GCA seems to fit pretty well here to me.   But I can be pursuaded otherwise, but thus far there have been very few facts which would indicate to the contrary.  

[DMoriarty]

It just wasn't no matter how hard you keep trying to fit that square peg into a round hole. The primary influence on the Golden Age of golf architecture was no mystery at all as much as you seem to want to think you've just uncovered what was behind that mystery. The great linksland courses were not something of the past either (as you refer to those Golden Age architects looking back into the past as the A/C movement looked back to Midieval times)---they were all right there back then as they are today, as the prototypes for the inspiration and inflluence for more natural architecture after golf left the linksland and began migrating around the world.

This seems to be a major sticking point in this discussion.  

Both sides agree that the great linksland courses were the inspiration for the designers of the Golden Age courses.  

Both sides also will likely agree that, looking back on it now, this was the obvious place to get inspiration.  But the fact is that designers of inland courses turned their backs on the great linksland courses and went in another direction--  At least this is fact according to A. MacKenzie and Leach's American Golfer article and Hutchinson and other sources.  

"[a]fter its rudimentary beginning following its intial departure from where it all began centuries before and where it only resided for centuries---eg the linksland. . . [a]ll golf architecture did is turn and look back at it's original model and prototype in the linksland and to those like Park who first understood it best." [/b]

TomP, this by itself goes a long ways toward placing the Golden Age courses firmly in the Arts and Crafts Movement.  

Many men and writers before you have told the true and accurate story of the most important influences on early golf course architecture and many of them have told it very well and very clearly for many decades.[/b]

TomP, most of the historical accounts I have read, are pretty consistent with TomM's version of the history.   Take the American Golfer article I mentioned above, or MacKenzie's Spirit of St. Andrews . . . What are they talking about if not a rejection of an Industrial, Victorian style of design and a harkening back to a pre-industrial design inspired by the links and nature?  

With all due respect TomP, your assumptions about the Arts and Crafts Movement are innacurate.
-- You note that Park was not a dedicated advocate or practitioner of the A/C movement.  Very few of those considered to be part of the AC Movement were "AC practioners or advocates" in the sense that you mean.  They were artists, designers, builders, etc. who had rejected many of the practices and the aesthetics of the Industrial age, and were pursuing a more natural aesthetic based on pre-industrial works.  
-- While it may be true that "the primary influence on golf course architecture of this era just was not the 'arts and crafts' movement,"  it is also true that the arts and crafts movement was not the primary aesthetic influence on any discipline considered part of the movement.  Rather, the practioners were  primarily influenced by nature and pre-industrial works for which the natural was the primary aesthetic.

The Arts and Crafts Movement was not a membership organization.   Many of those we now consider Arts and Crafts practicioners had never even heard that term and never would never have classified themselves that way.  

The phrase "AC Movement" is simply a convenient way of describing when, for a relatively brief period of time, a vast array of practioners in a many different disciplines all rejected Victorian Industrialism and its aesthetics, and attempted to return to a more natural aesthetic which existed in pre-industrial works.  

I just dont see the relevance of whether they professed to be part of a movement, or even if they knew such a movement existed.  

[T_MacWood]

"And just because various things are written about in a magazine such as Country Life certainly does not necessarily mean they have important influences on one another. The New Yorker wrote and sometimes writes about golf and architecture but that certainly doesn't mean other movements they may write about have primary influences on golf or golf architecture."

Comparing Country Life to The New Yorker reveals a basic misunderstanding of that period on your part. That is like comparing apples and oranges--based on typical readership, content, format, visuals, etc. You are lucky to get three or four golf related articles per year in The New Yorker, and how may of those touch architecture. There were 52 in CL, and a good number are related to GA--not to mention the spectacular photogaphy--the magazine was known for its fabulous b&w images.

If you interested in getting a taste, pick up Hutchinson's 'Golf Greens and Greenkeeping' (1906)....you don't even have to read it, just look at the pictures, they come from CL. I'm not sure there has been golf book ever produced with more striking photographs.

CL was the bible of the growing upper middle class, The NEW YORKER, not so much.

[T_MacWood]

"The A/C movement may've been a reaction to, or a rejection of the dehumanizing effects of the Industrial revolution, some of the stultifying effects of Victorianism, the rejection of the balance of Greek and Roman classical building architecture in England in favor of a more natural local vernacular in building architecture, furniture and art and craft and painting art that eventually carried on throughout Europe and America. However, the influence of the linksland courses was the primary influence on golf architecture of that time after its rudimentary start in varous areas around the world."

You are absolutely right, the linksland courses were the primary influence on golf architecture at that time. Just as the adobe structures were the primary influece the architecture Frank Mead and others in the Southwest of US. And the old shingle fishing shacks were the primary influence on Stanford White and others on the American eastern coast. And old low slung thatched roofed farmhouses were the primary influence on de Stihl architects in Holland. You keep making my argument for me....thank you.

It was a facinating period, it produced some of the most fabulous art and architecture, much of which is still popular today. I would highly recommend you (and anyone else for that matter) explore this movement in depth.

[wsmorrison]

"[a]fter its rudimentary beginning following its intial departure from where it all began centuries before and where it only resided for centuries---eg the linksland. . . [a]ll golf architecture did is turn and look back at it's original model and prototype in the linksland and to those like Park who first understood it best."

TomP, this by itself goes a long ways toward placing the Golden Age courses firmly in the Arts and Crafts Movement.


David,

Neither you nor Tom MacWood have demonstrated a cause and effect; that the Arts and Crafts movement caused a change in the direction of golf architecture.  

Granted there were some pretty horrid designs being built back then, both in the UK and America; industrial if you will with geometry and systematic patterns of obviously man-made features.  I don't know how prevalent the practice was nor do I know much about the A&C movement, but I can logically look at your arguments and I don't see a proof that there is a direct connection.  Coincidence and/or independence is as or more likely.

I think it far easier to conclude that the industrial revolution and formal vs. natural influenced these early primitive courses.  But how do you tie together the Arts and Crafts movement to the movement towards back towards a previous style?  Wasn;t the A&C movement about moving in a completely new direction?

I think it far liklier that the influence of links courses was expressed by those that truly understood it and their growing influence in the new regions where golf was growing is the primary source of any influence.

You cite the quote "[a]ll golf architecture did is turn and look back at it's original model and prototype in the linksland"  

How does this prove anything about an A&C influence?  Again, the A&C was about new and different.  I don't think you can truly say that about golf course architecture.

But what do I know?  I don't really care to study the matter at this time and I remain unconvinced that there is a connection.  However, the A&C movement itself is very interesting.  I've always felt an affinity for the building style.  Tom has spoken on several ocassions about his relatives support of the movement in America and he showed me a picture of the cottage once.  It is all very appealing.  At some point I may find the time to explore this in depth.

"You are absolutely right, the linksland courses were the primary influence on golf architecture at that time. Just as the adobe structures were the primary influece the architecture Frank Mead and others in the Southwest of US. And the old shingle fishing shacks were the primary influence on Stanford White and others on the American eastern coast. And old low slung thatched roofed farmhouses were the primary influence on de Stihl architects in Holland. You keep making my argument for me....thank you."

Tom,

You throw a lot of names in there and on the surface it seems like there's got to be something significant in there.  I am missing it though,  please explain to me how this last statement of yours makes an argument.  

[TEPaul]

Tom MacWood said;

"You are absolutely right, the linksland courses were the primary influence on golf architecture at that time. Just as the adobe structures were the primary influece the architecture Frank Mead and others in the Southwest of US. And the old shingle fishing shacks were the primary influence on Stanford White and others on the American eastern coast. And old low slung thatched roofed farmhouses were the primary influence on de Stihl architects in Holland. You keep making my argument for me....thank you."

No, Tom, I think you make my argument for me with that statement of yours. I have no doubt the adobe building was an influence on Frank Mead, the old shingle fishing shacks were the primary influence on particularly the materials used in building architect Stanford White's hallmark Shinnecock clubhouse (the first major clubhouse built for an American golf club), or that the old low slung thatched roof farmhouses were the primary influence on de stihl architects in Holland. And I already gave you an interesting personal example of how the English country cottage was the influence used by my own grandfather to build a substantial and architecturally significant summer home in Islesboro Maine in 1913 known as the "English country cottage" vernacular by the well known Philadelphia architectural firm of Bissell, SInkler and Tilden. That was unquestionably the influence of the arts and crafts movement in building architecture and its not coincidental that the constructors and craftsman were of the Glover and Thatch companies that were indigenous to Maine and were used to build all the "cottages" of Isleboro Maine---a not insignificant amount, BTW, as they numbered about 75 in that era known as the "Golden Age". Most all of them are still there and quite famous now (architecturally). These” cottages” are architecturally significant and many are beautiful and interesting examples of some serious arts and crafts influence. Hollywood has even discovered the island in more recent years. In the place next to my grandfather's now lives actress Kirsty Ally in a house that was built by a cousin of mine by the name of A.J. Antelo Devereux in a house that is of the "colonial revival" architectural style designed by the Philadelphia firm of Mellor, Meigs and Howe (Meigs married into the Philadelphia family of famous ex-patriate artist Mary Cassatt of Philadelphia). Actor John Travolta now lives in the house built by my great uncle George W. C. Drexel that is of a really interesting vernacular style of building architecture and regional materials. "Drexel commissioned the noted Boston firm of Peabody & Stearns to design a shingled summer house of immense scale….the Drexel “cottage” exhibits a dual architectural personality, Tudor Revival on the land side and Shingle Style facing the ocean. The picturesque quality of the land elevation is achieved by a long assymetrical series of medieval features.”

The point you seem to be overlooking and the point that I’ve been reminding you of for about three years on here is although those influences are undeniable they are ALL the art form of BUILDING ARCHITECTURE and not golf course architecture.

In case you miss the point again, I’m definitely NOT saying, and I never have said, that what is known as the Arts and Crafts movement had NO influence on golf course architecture of the era of the Golden Age. My only point here to you is that it did not (in my opinion) have such an important and primary influence on the golf architecture of the Golden Age (and before it) to even come close to warranting the suggestion you made in your article that the Golden Age of golf architecture should be renamed “arts and crafts architecture” to more accurately identify the primary influence on it. And even more illogical and inaccurate (in my opinion) is your suggestion that Horace Hutchinson should be fairly termed the “Father” of golf course architecture. The latter is particularly preposterous, in my opinion, given the other significant and primary influences on golf architecture we've known about for many decades!

Various art forms and various mediums of art are not, in my opinion, as homogenous as you appear to want to make them on here. There are some serious inherent differences and distinctions between building architecture and golf course architecture that you've always been either unable or unwilling to understand or to make. And since that’s so the particular and primary influences on them are not the same, as you appear to want to suggest. Frankly, I think the singular problem you have in the way you form assumptions and then conclusions and sometimes write about them is you simply have far too great a penchant to massively generalize about these things. Generalizing about these things to the extent you appear to creates real inaccuracies in the historical record, in my opinion, particularly when you attempt to assign such primary influence to some specific person or movement you seem to be interested in.

But thank you---with that remark you just made above I think you should finally come around to understanding the signficance of the point I've been trying to make to you on here about your overreaching suggestions that the PRIMARY influence on the golf architecture known as the "Golden Age" was from the A/C movement which, again, was primarily evidenced in BUILDING ARCHITECTURE (and materials), the styles of furniture, and art and craft primarily to do with the culture involved in social living---not to mention its important contributions in painting art and landscape architecture revolving around the critiques and opinions of a man such as Rushkin (undeniably an important advocate, perhaps an initiator of what became known as the arts and crafts movement).

And stop telling me I should understand better the importance and significance of the English magazine Country Life. I know what the magazine was all about----it’s been around me my entire life. Both my maternal and paternal grandmothers were huge anglophiles and every single issue of that magazine has been in the houses I’ve lived in and around for my entire sixty year life. I have about ten issues of it sitting on my coffee table as we speak and probably hundreds of back issues in boxes in the attic. For decades now that magazine has come every week---about a week late!  

You seem to constantly act on here as you continue to rummage through old magazines and newspapers and photographs that you are discovering old facts and truths that were not known or not known by some on here---including me. What you don't know is that many on here have been aware of some of these things far longer than you have been, some of us have actually lived with and through them and it's probably true to say we understand them and there significance and influences on various things a lot better than you do now---and we probably have for a very long time.

[T_MacWood]

Wayne
I’m not sure what cause and effect you are looking for. If you are looking for a golf architect of that period to say he was influenced by the Arts and Crafts movement, I’m afraid you will be disappointed. But you would also be disappointed with most A&C practitioners--now associated with the movement—who never referred to themselves in that way.  

It was not an easily defined or identified style…in fact it was an artistic movement without a style. It promoted diversity and the naturally evolved style of the specific region—it was philosophical movement more than anything.

As result the Dutch style didn’t look anything like the American southwest style…but they shared the same philosophies--harmony between the man-made and environment, revival of traditional craft techniques, the inherent qualities of natural materials, and looking to the past for inspiration. The insistence on using local materials and incorporating evolved local styles gave the movement so much stylistic variation. But it also made the movement difficult to define---the study of the A&C movement is more or less a modern phenomenon…another reason you won’t find it prominently mentioned in the old days.

Cause and effect: Golf’s popularity in England took off around 1890. Before that golf was for the most part confined to Scotland (mostly on the coast) and few pockets on the coast in Britain. The increase popularity of the game coincided with the mass relocation of the middle class and upper middle class in the countryside outside the large industrial cities (there were factors that made this possible covered in my essay).

There was a desire to return to a simpler Arcadian life which included vernacular architecture, simple furniture and furnishes, cottage gardens and outdoor pursuits…golf being one of those outdoor pursuits. It was a romantic vision first promoted by the founders of the A&C Movement.

In response to the growing popularity golf and the growing rural population, inland golf courses were built in these rural locals. Most of these courses were laid out by Scottish professionals, often in a single afternoon. They were stiff geometric designs that followed a formula for placing unnatural hazards—these courses were completely foreign to the links model. They were more a kin to a tennis court or steeplechase course or formal Victorian garden with their rigid geometry.

Simultaneous to the growth in rural living and golf, was a life-style magazine that promoted a certain aesthetic/philosophy in everything from Architecture to gardening to furnishings to tapestry to golf architecture—Country Life ('the journal for all interested in country life and country pursuits').

CL (Hutchinson) began criticizing these unnatural inland courses. They promoted golf courses that took advantage of interesting natural features, and whose man-made features were more in accord with nature. As TE has been saying they promoted the vernacular tradition as the model—the naturally evolved links. This message was completely consistent with the message of other experts within the magazine, Gertrude Jekyll was telling the same thing to those interested in gardening,  and Avery Tipping and Lawrence Weaver were telling those interested in architecture and interior design. It was the philosophy promoted by the A&C movement.

[TEPaul]

Wayne:

What both Tom MacWood and David Moriarty are doing, in my opinion, is attempting to assign both primary and important influence on golf course archtiecture of this particular era to the arts and crafts movement by generalizing to such an extent about both the A/C movement and the nexus of various art forms that they seem to think the influence they assign fits or is accurate. To say that all art forms and movements in art forms are so closely connected at the hip that they must have important, specific and primary influences on one another is neither accurate nor particularly interesting or informative, in my opinion. Not for an archtiectural website like this one anyway.

We have the capabilities on this website to be far more specific and defined and accurate in uncovering particular influences, and certainly the primary ones on golf architecture and its interesting evolution than just that.

[T_MacWood]

TE
If you don't like BUILDING ARCHITECTURE how about FURNITURE? Simple Stickley was influenced by Shaker. Mission furniture by Spanish colonial influences. Tapestry: in the American Southwest American Indian influences; in Britain gothic traditions. Gardens: in England the cottage garden; in Pasadena you'll find an Asian influence. Do you see the pattern?

It was a fascinating period, I would suggest you look into it in depth.

[wsmorrison]

Tom,

The Arts and Crafts movement, at least as I see it from my admittedly non-sophisticated perspective, was about moving in new directions and not reverting to some previous style or movement.

The golf architecture that Hutchinson was criticizing (I still don't know how prevalent it was) was more in tune with the Victorian era reflecting balance, formalized structure and overtly man-made features.  The style was thankfully repudiated and cast aside in favor of a previous style.  This is not a new and different direction.  It is a recognition and connection to the past.

I think if one were to do a serious study of influences on golf architecture it should be done in a manner such as done by Dr. John Rooney at Oklahoma State University.  He studies the geography of sport.  I think it reasonable that the finding may be that when existing architects started practicing in inland locations they brought their familiar style with them.  It could be that they were late to the inland game, others (locals maybe) without skill may have gotten inland first.  It may be the reason why the style wasn't there to begin with and happened to occur later is not due to the influence of the Arts and Crafts movement but by the timing of the spread of linksland designers.  I would look at this in a sort of epidemiological manner.

This is why I do not see,at this time, a direct cause and effect between a style movement (even if it was found in many aspects of culture) and golf course architecture.  

Tom MacWood would have me realize that it would not be the case where there would be contemporary recognition by its practitioners nor would it be written about at the time.  That is not important.  

What is important is that the Arts and Crafts movement was an original style and golf architecture returned to its roots.  If anything, a better argument might be stated that the return of golf architecture to its roots influenced the Arts and Crafts movement.  This might be just as reasonable  

[T_MacWood]

Wayne
Tom Dunn, Willie Dunn and Old Tom Morris were all products of the links, yet they brought a very geometric style with them as opposed to a linksland style. The same with Willie Park II, in the 1890's he was guilty of the so-called Victorian model, but something changed in 1899-1900. What caused the change?

"What is important is that the Arts and Crafts movement was an original style and golf architecture returned to its roots. If anything, a better argument might be stated that the return of golf architecture to its roots influenced the Arts and Crafts movement.  This might be just as reasonable "

Arts and Crafts 'style' was not an original style it was a return to an eclectic style.

[TEPaul]

Tom MacWood said to Wayne Morrison;

"I’m not sure what cause and effect you are looking for. If you are looking for a golf architect of that period to say he was influenced by the Arts and Crafts movement, I’m afraid you will be disappointed. But you would also be disappointed with most A&C practitioners--now associated with the movement—who never referred to themselves in that way.  
It was not an easily defined or identified style…in fact it was an artistic movement without a style. It promoted diversity and the naturally evolved style of the specific region—it was philosophical movement more than anything."

Tom:

I just can't imagine how many more times you are going to say that on here and remind us of that. Let me tell you now and tell you again, we hear you---we've read that same response from you at least a dozen times.

When it comes to those ARCHITECTS involved in the creation of the courses of the Golden Age let's just completely forget then about them referring to the "arts and crafts movement" by that name or even about it as an influence on what they were doing---primary or otherwise. Let's look at whether or not any of them ever referred to those you say in your article were the major proponents of what you now seem to refer to as the rather global "philosophy" of the arts and crafts movement or what perhaps even some referred to later as the arts and crafts movement.

Horace Huthinson, the man you suggest should now be viewed as the "Father" of golf course architecture was an excellent observer of the evolution of golf architecture as was Darwin later. Both observed it and wrote about it beautifully. Neither of them were significant golf architects though, if at all. Neither of them actualy informed or inspired a man such as Willie Park Jr to do what he did in the English heathlands with Sunningdale and Huntercombe. Park Jr was a man of the linksland and that was his inspiration and knowledge.

And furthermore, I doubt Park Jr was suddenly imbued with some great architectural talent and ability that came out of latency beginning with those two projects (Sunningdale and Huntercombe) in comparison to anything he may've done previous to them. The fact is Park Jr really took time and huge effort to do those two courses---probably the first two he really did that with or to that extent. Those were not golf courses laid out in a day or two like other things he may've done previously or some of his contemporaries from the linksland did such as Old Tom, the Dunns etc.

Maybe Old Tom Morris had that inherent architectural talent too. The fact that he didn't exactly show it according to the observers of that time or today may've had everything to do with the lack of time he spent on those early courses outside the actual linksland. Lest we forget, Old Tom had another day job!!!   That alone was obviously the primary reason he was never anywhere long and was basically a simple "lay out" architect. That's as different from what Park Jr did at landmark Sunningdale and Huntercombe as night is from day.

The likes of Hutchinson and Darwin were great observers of golf architecture and its evolution---they were not the inspiration of that architecture to the architects of that time in what they created though. The may have helped spread the word around in their comprehensive writing but the inspiration and influence for what at first happened outside the linksland that has always been assigned golf architecure of the Golden Age's most important influence? Never! From that the model for the fascinating Heathland was the linksland and many of those involved said so----and in the linksman person of Willie Park Jr in the heathlands first.

The landmark NGLA in America was not the inspiration of Hutchinson or Darwin---it was the inspiration of C.B Macdonald from his time at St Andrews and later other linksland and heathland courses. His inspiration was to actually copy holes and concepts from the linksland and the heathlands. Of course he knew Hutchinson well, trusted him and his feelings on golf architecture, perhaps used him to spread the word of the uniqueness and greatness of NGLA. But was someone like Hutchinson (or Darwin) his inspiration and primary influence for doing what he did? Of course not! The greatest attribution of influence Macdonald gave Hutchinson was for his suggestion to throw pebbles on a flat medium and somehow copy the randomness of their positioning for the contours of his putting greens at NGLA.

Same with Crump, Wilson, Leeds, Fownes, Hunter, Mackenzie, Tillinghast, Behr, Jones et al. Their inspiration and influence was essentially back to the linksland and heathland courses. That's what they wrote was their primary influence, and clearly that's the truth.

The next thing we know you'll probably try to tell us that the arts and crafts movement was somehow the primary influence on what happened in the linksland.

You should just give up this suggestion that the Golden Age of golf architecture should be more descriptively and accurately renamed "arts and crafts architecture" and that Horace Hutchinson should be accurately viewed as the "Father" of golf course architecture.

You've produced an impressive amount of interesting material on the A/C movement and on golf architecture of that time---material that's always been around and out there. It's just that your assumptions and conclusions of what it historically means are just not very accurate.  

[TEPaul]

From Tom MacWood;

"Wayne
Tom Dunn, Willie Dunn and Old Tom Morris were all products of the links, yet they brought a very geometric style with them as opposed to a linksland style. The same with Willie Park II, in the 1890's he was guilty of the so-called Victorian model, but something changed in 1899-1900. What caused the change?"

Tom MacWood:

Here's what changed, what caused the change and what changed the direction of golf course architecture for the first time outside the linksland:

  "Dozens of sorry inland courses built on impervious clay soils convinced most golf purists that only the ancient links could provide excellent golf. But a few golf course prospectors were unconvinced and kept searching for suitable inland terrain compatible to the best linksland. Their search was fruitful, for at the turn of the century they unearthed a mother lode of fine golfing land less than fifty miles south and west of London.
  Here were the "heathlands", with well drained, rock free, sandy soil in gently undulating terrain. This was true golf country, and its discovery was a major step (read influence) in the development of golf course architecture. Many of the world's greatest golf courses have since been created on land similar to that of the heaths, which, except for the presence of trees, is not unlike the links. The long delay in the discovery of the heathlands, despite their proximity to London, is not difficult to understand. The heathlands were covered with an undergrowth of heather, rhododendrons, Scotch fir and pines. Only a fool, it seemed, would spend time building a golf course in such a wasteland when vast meadows were available for the purpose."

Enter that "fool" from the linksland---Willie Park Jr---perhaps the first and primary influence on golf course archtiecture outside the linkland! Enter in America that "fool" C.B Macdonald on a sandy scrubby undergrowth site in Eastern Long Island. Enter that "fool" Geo Crump on that sandy, scrubby, stunted piney wasteland in Clementon New Jersey!

Prospectors and architectural practitioners primarily inspired and influenced by Horace Hutchinson (the "Father" of golf course architecture ) and the "arts and crafts" movement? I think not!

They were all inspired and influenced by the sandy undulating land and golf architecure of the linksland and then the heathlands---just as golf architecture's literature has always said. And not just that---not a one of them ever created a great golf course or great architecture by laying out what they did in a day or two or a week. Had they tried to do so they probably wouldn't have done much different than Old Tom, the Dunns and the other early 'lay-out in a day" specialists from the linkland! The commonality for greatness also included a huge amount of time and effort on their parts on those courses that became what we know of as the great ones.

Was this all primary inspiration and influence of the "arts and Crafts" movement because of what's percieved as its regional or naturalistic "philosophy?

Don't be ridiculous! It was the primary influence of linksland and heathland archtiecture and they all, who were involved, have always said so.

Of course you can continue to ply your theory and suggestion that you have finally uncovered, in the 21st century, the true and primary influence on so called "Golden Age" architecture but you will always get these kinds of "counter-point" arguments simply because many, many will feel you are simply skewing the rather well-known history of the evolution of golf architecture and what its primary influences really were.

And, in my opinion, if you continue to do that with these assumptions and conclusions of yours on here you will simply continue to be wrong. But maybe that doesn't matter to you.  

[DMoriarty]

I think it far easier to conclude that the industrial revolution and formal vs. natural influenced these early primitive courses.  But how do you tie together the Arts and Crafts movement to the movement towards back towards a previous style?  Wasn;t the A&C movement about moving in a completely new direction?

Wayne, this is a good question and hopefully will allow us to clear a few things up.  As I understand A&C, the answer to your question is . . .

No.  The Arts and Crafts Movement most certainly was not about going in completely new direction.  To the contrary, the AC Movement was about returning to a pre-industrialization aesthetic and process.   This was one of its major defining characteristics!

Again, the A&C was about new and different.  I don't think you can truly say that about golf course architecture.

Again you cannot truly say that about A&C.  In fact the opposite is true.  When TomM lists the connection between A&C and preindustrial-- shaker to Stickley furniture, adobe to Mead, etc.-- he is doing so to highlight that that A&C was returning to its pre-industrial roots.

Still I think we talk past each other on on crucial notion:  You and TomP seem to want to find some sort of causation or stylistic influence of A&C on GCA.

This misunderstands what A&C means.   The category is descriptive.  It is used to commonly classify a group of diverse of practicioners in a large number disciplines even though these practicioners and disciplines may seem to have little in common stylistically and even though these practicioners may be completely unaware of each other.  

Also, the phrase is largely retrospective, in that it was given meaning by those looking back to figure out what had happened.  Those involved may have had little awareness of what was going on in the other disciplines or that there was an A&C Movement at all.

If near the end of the Victorian Era discipline 1) rejected the aesthetic of industrialization, 2) returned to a more natural aesthetic 3) using pre-industrial examples as its guide, then that discipline is an A&C discipline, whether it likes it or not.  

[T_MacWood]

"Here's what changed, what caused the change and what changed the direction of golf course architecture for the first time outside the linksland: '...Here were the "heathlands", with well drained, rock free, sandy soil in gently undulating terrain. This was true golf country, and its discovery was a major step (read influence) in the development of golf course architecture.' Enter that "fool" from the linksland---Willie Park Jr---perhaps the first and primary influence on golf course archtiecture outside the linkland!....They were all inspired and influenced by the sandy undulating land and golf architecure of the linksland and then the heathlands---just as golf architecture's literature has always said."

TE
Is that right? It sounds like it wasn't so much an architectural attitude change in your view, but a change of site (heathland) that inspired the revolution. Interesting, how come heather courses like Meyrick Park, Woking and Broadstone, that predate Sunningdale and Huntercombe, didn't turn out so hot? And how come Willie Park-Jr design at Richmond is in the Victorian style...did he have a mental block with parkland sites?

"Horace Huthinson, the man you suggest should now be viewed as the 'Father' of golf course architecture was an excellent observer of the evolution of golf architecture as was Darwin later. Both observed it and wrote about it beautifully. Neither of them were significant golf architects though, if at all."

Not a fan of Hutchinson architecture I take it? If i'm not mistaken he was involved at Brancaster, Eastbourne, Le Touquet, Ganton and Ashdown Forest...not bad for an insiginificant architect. Can't you trace the fescued bukners at Merion to the impression Le Touquet had upon Wilson? You've got your own little piece of Horace in Philly!

"Neither of them actualy informed or inspired a man such as Willie Park Jr to do what he did in the English heathlands with Sunningdale and Huntercombe. Park Jr was a man of the linksland and that was his inspiration and knowledge."

Interesting statement...what do you base your opinion upon. Have you read any of Park's books, articles or his biography? Perhaps you believe he was illeterate and unable to read Hutchinson's criticism of his 1890's architecture (Richmond).

IMO you are selling Hutchinson's influence short. Have you read 'Golf Greens and Greenkeeping'?

[Tommy_Naccarato]

David,

Neither you nor Tom MacWood have demonstrated a cause and effect; that the Arts and Crafts movement caused a change in the direction of golf architecture.

Wayne, I couldn't disagree more.

I'm not going to get into the middle of this gun fight, and its a VERY interesting one, but your cutting out a very important historical part of golf architecture in that statement--the move West. Dr. Alister MacKenzie, Robert Hunter, Herbert Fowler, Geo. Thomas, Billy Bell, John Duncan Dunn, Willie Watson, Jack Croake, George O'Neil, A.W. Tillinghast and even Tom Bendelow would most surely disagree with the naysayers.

The winter traveler surely helped build the West as we know it. The wanted warmth and got it here. A & C Architecture both in building of houses, clubhouses, furniture, golf courses, even barns and ranches was embraced as a lifestyle, and it moved further East, exactly the same direction of its original inspiration from Japan.

All of the above not only were engulfed during this exciting time, but also made it their full-time homes. Yes, some would move on to other places in their lives and some of them would eventually die. All of it was affected by the timing of a World Depression and second World War.

The best way to research all of this is simply Google the websites on A & C architecture and see--as Tom & David both have--the influence of the artistic function of building with nature.

I truely do think some of you need to spend sometime in Pasadena to really understand all of this. A trip to Rustic Canyon to coincide, simply because of its A & C influences. It's a trip back into time and what Tom MacWood's theories of A & C influenced golf architecture is all about.

Not speaking for him, but only suggesting--Geoff Shackelford, Gil Hanse & Jim Wagner would probably most agree. California meets Philadelphia AGAIN, producing a work of art and function and of nature.

Cheers

[Adam_F_Collins]

For the sake of clarity - could each of the sides just give a quick, one or two sentence summary of their positions?

Tom Macwood,  DMoriarty and friends______________________

TEPaul, Rich and friends__________________________________

It's easy to get a bit lost here, and before I wade back into the fray, I'd like to be clear on where everyone stands.

[wsmorrison]

Tommy N,

We'll hash this over in a bit more than a week.  I'm not saying the Arts and Crafts movement wasn't a powerful force in the arts.  I just don't see the direct connection to golf course architecture in England and later throughout the world.

If you, Tom and David call the looking back to the linksland for inspiration and the linksland architects finding the right soil types for designing that kind of golf an Arts and Crafts movement, you are free to do so.  I am not convinced.  

I've been wrong before as you know, and I know less about this subject than most.  But the logical progression seems faulty and the process appears to take leaps and bounds over shaky ground to shakier ground.

I'm not that wrapped up in it all, so please don't think I have an emotional investment at all.  In actuality, I think I'll just take my small stake and cash out.  But in the end, I find it most difficult of all to ascribe someone's depictions of an era as a guiding force let alone father of some golden age.