Golf's best writers.......

[TEPaul]

architectural writers and otherwise........what was their message? Did they have one? Particularly those who wrote 50-100 years ago....did they have an understandable message, goal, ideal and a clear vision or were they mostly just trying figure the game out themselves or to prevent the game, at any time, from taking wrong turns and going down wrong roads?

[Joe Hancock]

Tom,

I'm pretty sure those old dead guys were writing in hopes of making a few extra bucks on the side.

Joe

[mike_malone]

 How about golf's slowest writer

[Michael Moore]

Pretty much the only golf books on my shelf are the collected works of Harvey Penick.

They feature feel-based instruction, pithy anecdotes, and good old folk wisdom. The charisma that drew people from around the world to Austin leaps off the pages.

To answer Tommy Paul directly, I would point out that Penick's life pretty much ran from the beginning of the twentieth century to the end, and I believe that people like that are highly qualified to comment on change.

In Game for a Lifetime, Penick has a long excerpt from Henry Cotton (1948) regarding the steel shaft, in which Cotton observes 300 yard drives and the death of shotmaking, and concludes that you can't stop progress. Penick add that without the steel shaft "golf would still be a game played only by the wealthy and the obsessive."

Similarly, he has an essay on the modern giant-headed driver and how it is easier to find the sweet spot on a persimmon clubhead.

He claims that drawing a line on your ball for putting alignment is vaguely against the rules, but is more concerned with its capability for distraction.

Over and over again he addresses modern equipment, agronomy, swings, behavior, etc. and he never seems threatened or disturbed by any of it. Reading Penick it seems there is no possibility of golf ever going down the "wrong road".

[TEPaul]

Michael:

Excellent example and a very interesting compilation of opinions.

[Jason Topp]

Architectural writing from the golden age largely mirrors the views expressed here.  Most interestingly to me, the concerns about club and ball technology ruining the game were identical then to now, just the yardages were different.

Penick's take on steel shafts is interesting.  He portrays them (probably accurately) as making the game more accessible for more people.  By contrast today, new technological innovations are created to sell products at a premium price, thereby reducing affordability in the game.  

[Brian_Gracely]

Unfortunately, too many of today's writers seem to believe that their writing outlet is a bully-pulpit to state nothing more than their opinion and damn anyone or any group that espouses to have a differing opinion.  More often than not, these opinions quickly become formulaic and repetitive, and quite frankly boring.  

What seems to be missing, these days, are writers that are willing to go find the interesting personal aspects of stories and the people that make the game interesting.  Far too often, they go after the stories that are "the long drives" and rarely go after "the 3ft putt" angles.  

Finally, folks like MSNBC, Fox, CNN, etc. have the market cornered on delivering negativity.  So few writers focus on the aspects that bring people back to the course day after day.  I think this is the aspect of Ran's writing that I've come to admire more over time.    

[PThomas]

I think Darwin certainly appreciated good architecture...his Golf COurses of the British Isles was one of the first, if not the first, book devoted to espousing good architecture

HWW's landmark piece on RTJ  back in 1951!!? was also probably a seminal moment in writing on the topic...I believe it was the first time that the subject had been given a wide audience...HWW continued to beat the arch. drum with later essays on places like Dornoch and Ballybunion

Herb even did other essays like profiles of P Dye and on courses like Merion and Seminole in Golf Digest  which I was smart enough, for a change,  to save

speaking of "older"writers, i thought it was interesting to read Dan Jenkins comments on Baltusrol in his PGA article in GD, in whihc he basically said that he now feels that that particular course is not a great one...

[Tony_Muldoon]

Can Michael or someone else put me straight on Harvey Pennick.  His little red book is the only instruction book I'll look at (and yes it's more than just instruction).  It just reeks of a man who lived golf and knew many of the best really well.  However I understood that a journalist (Bud Shrake?) distilled this from his scrapbook.  I also own the little green one and it struck me as scrapings from the barrel (albeit the same barrel).  I've also seen a blue 'best of' but haven't looked at it or noticed any others.  So where is the essential Harvey found and is he really a 'writer' or an anecdotallist/instructor best digested in small lumps?

[Mark_Rowlinson]

Most of the early writers had a proper education which gave them the vocabulary and grammar to express themselves with the utmost precision.  They had a flavour for classical prose and verse and wrote with almost poetic scansion.  They knew the importance of subtleties of pace, phrasing, colour and tone.  They were sharp observers, whether writing about courses and their architecture, golfers or people at large.  Even if someone said, 'There's a pleasant course at X,' they could make such a simple sentence a pleasure to read, whether the reader cared for the subject or not.  That they chose every word for the precision of its meaning giving us a clear and unambiguous understanding of exactly what they intended to convey to the reader, even a hundred years later.  Would that even a small percentage of today's writers had the use of English to emulate them!

[Tom_Doak]

I assume you mean after Darwin.  Everyone else is playing for second place.

I've got to say that I think the standard of golf writing is going downhill.  I believe it's got to do with the internet.  Too many of the articles I've read lately are just a regurgitation of things that have been said before ... writers google their subject and get SO MUCH background that they don't have any room left for their own observations or style.

I recognize that there are some writers above this method, but there aren't enough.

As for Mr. Penick's Little Red Book, all of those words are his, and he might well have sat down and written that book thirty years ago if he had thought for a moment that people would want to see it ... which he wouldn't have!  However, there is no way he sat down in his seventies and punched out the text.  Mr. Shrake did a great job of distilling his thoughts, much as Brad Klein did with Donald Ross's GOLF HAS NEVER FAILED ME.

[Brad Klein]

Tom, that was Ron Whitten who edited and distilled Ross, not me.

[Ed_Baker]

Let's not forget Jethro ( Max Baer) his "lines of charm" premise is evocative to say the least.

Darwin is still my favorite, probably because it makes your head hurt to read him, much like stumbling through Shakespeare in proper Elizabethan form,both will wake up some long dormant alcohol damaged nuerons that would have remained dormant forever if not for the reading.

[George Pazin]

We should all thank Jeff Silverman for resurrecting much of Darwin's work for the rest of us.

And thank Ran, Tom Doak, Brad Klein, Geoff Shackelford, George Bahto, Paul Daley, Rick Wolfe, Phil Young, Wayne Morrison, Chris Clouser and the countless others who've devoted so much time and effort to the most beautiful aspect of the game, the golf course.

[TEPaul]

"Let's not forget Jethro ( Max Baer) his "lines of charm" premise is evocative to say the least."

Eddie, you old fart, the only "lines of charm" that blockhead Jethro (Max Baer) understood were Daisy Mae's "lines of charm", which WERE considerable AND evocative, I might add!

I always did admire a woman who looked as good as Daisy Mae who either had a great sense of humor (as the gorgeous Heidi Klum does) or could run really fast, as Daisy Mae definitely could.

Do you think that "dumb as a stump" Jethro ever actually caught Dasiy Mae and nailed her?

[TEPaul]

Mark Rowlinson said:

"Most of the early writers had a proper education which gave them the vocabulary and grammar to express themselves with the utmost precision.  They had a flavour for classical prose and verse and wrote with almost poetic scansion.  They knew the importance of subtleties of pace, phrasing, colour and tone.  They were sharp observers, whether writing about courses and their architecture, golfers or people at large.  Even if someone said, 'There's a pleasant course at X,' they could make such a simple sentence a pleasure to read, whether the reader cared for the subject or not.  That they chose every word for the precision of its meaning has given us a clear and unambiguous understanding of exactly what they intended to convey to the reader, even a hundred years later.  Would that even a small percentage of today's writers had the use of English to emulate them!"

Mark:

Wow, that's good! That's pretty much identical to what you just said the best of the writers of yesteryear were so good at! It must be an English thing!

[TEPaul]

"....much as Brad Klein did with Donald Ross's GOLF HAS NEVER FAILED ME."

Brad:

If I were you and Tom Doak gave me credit for "Golf Has Never Failed Me" rather than give the credit to Ron Whitten who wrote it, I'd just take that credit anyway.  

Nevertheless, "Golf Has Never Failed Me" has always sort of bothered me simply because it's nearly impossible to tell if some of the "thoughts" in the book are Donald Ross's or Ron Whitten's.

[Brad Klein]

TEP, you mean like Sebonack, where you can't tell where the Doak ends and the Nicklaus begins.

[cary lichtenstein]

I don't see Matt Ward's name mentioned in this thread of golf's best writers

[Jonathan Cummings]

I am a casual freelancer writing mostly local golf course reviews.  I judge my writing ability as passable - it's not my training and I bow to those who do it so well.

Doak, Klein and others are fine authors but the two golf writers that I love reading are Rick Reilly and Gib Papizian - both write with a passion that is barely harnessed and their articles glow because of it.

JC

[Wayne_Kozun]

I would add Lorne Rubenstein to the list as well.

[TEPaul]

".....but the two golf writers that I love reading are Rick Reilly and Gib Papizian - both write with a passion that is barely harnessed and their articles glow because of it."

Jonathan:

That right there is very well written!  

[JAHogan]

Two who capture the spirit of the game for me:

PG Wodehouse -- funny every time I read him

Michael Bamberger -- "To the Linksland" is my favorite golf book

[Jonathan Cummings]

Let me add Michael Konik and Joel Zuckerman to the list of enjoyable golf writers.

Wodehouse - of course!

JC

[Agman]

And thank you, Mr. Pazin, for the words of thanks. If Mr. Darwin were still around, I'm sure he'd be thanking you, too...

js