Arts & Crafts sidetrack

[Sean_A]

Bob

A bit of Christmas cheer eh.  I am not sure I can desribe much of this thread as presented in a learned fashion, but I will give you the benefit of the doubt.  However, all this "learned discussion should lead us further down the path, no?

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

Sean Arble,

I've learned a good deal from Wayne, TE and Tom, why haven't you ?

[Mike_Cirba]

Hell...since I'm on my 4th glass of wine tonight, I think I'll try to help take this to 20 pages.  

I don't have much to add....my lame attempts to sketch the 10th at the original Merion courses went over like a lead balloon, as did my points about it being a possible Alps hole, so I think I'd just at this point simply encourage more acrimony and back-biting and call it a night.  

Carry on gentlemen...  

[Sean_A]

Patrick

I have learned something, I think.  That is why I am calling for a well rounded synopsis to this 19 page quagmire.  One thing is for sure, if people are willing to drop face more can be achieved in less time.  

Ciao

Sean

[T_MacWood]

Thanks Pat and TE.

Its always nice when you end your posts (no mater how screwed up or wrong they might be) with kind holiday wishes. The same to you and your families.

[T_MacWood]

I recently discovered this excellent new book on the A&C movement. Edited by Karen Livingstone and Linda Parry, it is a compilation of thirty international scholars who each tackle a different art form or region. I was surprised to learn the movement made its way to Japan…it goes show how our understanding of the movement is continually evolving. Here is an excerpt from the introduction:

“Arts and Crafts was an international movement that flourished in Britain, Europe and America from the 1880’s until the First World War, and in Japan from the 1920’s until the Second World War. It has been referred to as the first truly modern artistic movement. Developed initially in Britain, it had a widespread influence. It was originally based on an idealistic set of principles for living and working, which were taken up and adapted in many parts of the world to meet specific social and national needs, integrating heritage, local skills and resources.

Many of the characteristics of the movement can still be detected in the decorative arts today: the importance and benefit of practical skills in which individual production and small workshop practice are valued above mass manufacture, for instance. Also inherited directly from the Arts and Crafts Movement was an improvement in domestic design brought about through a new attitude towards living in which items were made to match their purpose and also harmonize together in an interior to provide a total work of art, or Gesamtkunstwerk, a German term now used widely. This balancing of design and technique was quite alien in the mid-nineteenth-century production when the each for new technology ensure that technique, in the form of novelty of effect, speed and cheapness of production, dominated. But it is perhaps in the advocacy of simplicity in design and manufacture, a need to allow quality of material to speak for themselves, that that the Arts and Crafts Movement has had its greatest influence on the arts today. Whereas simplicity is a major characteristic of the movement, its foundation and development—a combination of the ideas and aspirations of many over a period of twenty-five years—were complex. Before tracing this in greater detail it is important to attempt to define the term ‘Arts and Crafts’.

Today, Arts and Crafts describes the process of hand making or decorating objects (frequently referred to as ‘craftworks’) on semi- or completely amateur basis. The Arts and Crafts Movement of the late nineteenth and early twentieth century was different. Far more professionally and commercially based, it took its name from the Arts and Crafts Exhibition Society, which was a founded in London in 1887, and staged its exhibition at the New Gallery, Regent Street, from 1888. Subsequent, the movement encompassed international groups who frequently adopted the British term of Arts and Crafts for their societies, studios, workshops and even a shop. However, the movement also included a number of developments in different parts of the world with names or descriptions more appropriate to their own work, as will be described in the following chapters. What bound them together was a unity of ideas that influenced their work, even though the work is often visually quite different. All sought a great improvement in the arts through the adoption of a new democratic ethic towards living and working. In some areas this was brought on by a need for social, political and cultural change, whereas elsewhere it simply provided a means of reforming industry and improving everyday design. This was unlike any other artistic movement that had gone before.”

This has been today’s A&C moment.

[TEPaul]

Tom MacWood said:

"I was surprised to learn the movement made its way to Japan…it goes show how our understanding of the movement is continually evolving."

Tom MacW;

I'm not sure this book has uncovered that "Arts and Crafts" movement principles made their way to or inspired Japanese artistic principles exactly as it seems the very artistic principles that came to inspire the British "Arts and Crafts" Movement had many centuries before been "principles" in Japanese art (as well as Greece and Italy). So it seems the inspiration initially came from Japan to Britain and not Britain to Japan.

Explanations of this cannot be better found than in Oscar Wilde's lectures in America that numbered nearly 140 and lasted nearly a year (1881-2). Wilde's lectures are some of the most elucidating explanations of the artistic, social and economic cross-currents that led to the British "Arts and Crafts" Movement or what he referred to as "The English Renaissance of Art". Wilde's lecture tour was nominally on the subject of aesthetics and it is as comprehensive an explanaton and chronicle of the "Arts and Crafts" Movement as well as a public relations effort for it, as can be found.

[ForkaB]

Tom and Tom

When I looked up A&C on the internet a couple of years ago to see if I could make any sense of any significant A&C/GCA linkage (I couldn't), the fact that the movement spread from England to Japan in the 1920's was common knowledge.

But wait, wasn't that about the same time that Arison (sic) was doing his thing in Japan?  Hmmmmmm.....

[Sean_A]

Rich

I like your excellent use of Japanese!

Ciao

Sean

[ForkaB]

Sean

I must admit that I stole that from my dog-eared copy of the World Atlas of Golf.  Their essay on Kasumigaseki says that the generic Japanese name for a steep faced bunker is an "arison."

[Tony_Muldoon]

 "All sought a great improvement in the arts through the adoption of a new democratic ethic towards living and working. In some areas this was brought on by a need for social, political and cultural change, whereas elsewhere it simply provided a means of reforming industry and improving everyday design. This was unlike any other artistic movement that had gone before.”

I'd like to repeat a question I posed at the start of this thread (when the study of A&C was still young).

Is there any evidence that the thinkers who predated the application of A&C practices, had any views on leisure time?  

Golf does not (for the most part) consist of either work or interior living.  It was the dehumanisation of these two areas that the industrial revolution brought about, that prompted people to look back to a 'golden age' to find a better way forward.

[Kyle Harris]

Tony,

Leisure time was studied immensely by the Greeks BCE, and in fact, a whole leisure class developed out of their work.

The ancient Greeks felt that the men and women of means were to be burdened with providing the artistic, architectural and entertainment outlets for the society.

They were expected to study and create all the great leisure works of the time.

[T_MacWood]

Oscar Wilde was closely associated with the Aesthetic movement, and Japonisme was a major part of that movement.

No question there was a lot of sharing going on between Japan and Britain and Japan and America....bi-directionally. But I was surprised to learn there was group Japanese artists/craftsmen who had been influenced by Ruskin and Morris....that was news to me. These craftsmen took advantage of the Japonisme phenomenon in England and the demand for Japanese arts and crafts.

You also have Frank Lloyd Wright, his Japanese influences and his influence within Japan...the Imperial Hotel being one of his most famous creations. The same Imperial Hotel where CH Alison created his design for Tokyo GC.

This has been today's Arts and Crafts moment.

[Sean_A]

Tommy Mac

Does China fit in somewhere?  At the same time Japanese art was in vogue, so was Chinese art.  Especially artwork (including tableware, vases, umbrella stands etc) that depicted nature controlled by the hand of man.

Ciao

Sean

[T_MacWood]

 "All sought a great improvement in the arts through the adoption of a new democratic ethic towards living and working. In some areas this was brought on by a need for social, political and cultural change, whereas elsewhere it simply provided a means of reforming industry and improving everyday design. This was unlike any other artistic movement that had gone before.”

I'd like to repeat a question I posed at the start of this thread (when the study of A&C was still young).

Is there any evidence that the thinkers who predated the application of A&C practices, had any views on leisure time?  

Golf does not (for the most part) consist of either work or interior living.  It was the dehumanisation of these two areas that the industrial revolution brought about, that prompted people to look back to a 'golden age' to find a better way forward.

Tony
Do you consider garden's exterior living? Is the art of gardening work or leisure?

[T_MacWood]

Tommy Mac

Does China fit in somewhere?  At the same time Japanese art was in vogue, so was Chinese art.  Especially artwork (including tableware, vases, umbrella stands etc) that depicted nature controlled by the hand of man.

Ciao

Sean

There was general Orientalism, but emphasis was on Japan.

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

Thanks Pat and TE.

Its always nice when you end your posts (no mater how screwed up or wrong they might be) with kind holiday wishes. The same to you and your families.

Could you cite the specific errors in my posts ?[/color]

[TEPaul]

"Tony
Do you consider garden's exterior living? Is the art of gardening work or leisure?"

Tom MacW:

To my knowledge very little landscape architecture was directly effected by the Arts and Crafts Movement which was a number of art forms, primarily decorative arts, building architecture, etc. You did mention Gertrude Jekyll in your article and that she was effected by A/C building architecture in her own life (her own house to a degree) and in some ways Edwin Lutyens' (whom she worked with and introduced to her rich friends) building architecture was influenced by A/C building architecture but I've seen a few of Gertrude Stein's "country gardens" and I can pretty much guarantee that the man or lady of the house did little if any "leisure gardening" in Jekyll's landscape gardens.  

[paul cowley]

Hey, at least we are back on task....but I do cringe a little when the AC movement is considered 'new', as opposed to its evolution as a revival of prior periods that focused on a more natural ethos...in response and in contrast to what had been lost during the Industrial Revolution.

and a belated Merry Xmas to all while anticipating a very Happy New Year!

[paul cowley]

...and TomP , I agree the only 'leisure' in most of the English country and cottage gardens of Stein's and Jeykll's day was when the numerous 'gardeners' under their employ had their half day off a week, which came after Sunday church.

I think the intent on this side of the pond was a little closer to the mark.

[T_MacWood]

Garden design was an important part of the A&C movement. Jeykll was the most famous garden designer of the period, in fact she was one of the most well-known A&C figures period, better known than most. Her mentor the Irishman William Robinson was an important garden designer. Reginald Blomfield was another. Blomfield claimed he designed Rye.

Many of the architects designed both house and garden--Ballie Scot and Wright are examples. Then you have the city planners (on both sides of the Atlantic) involved in the Garden City movement...guy like Parker & Unwin. Some consider Olmsted's work, if not within the A&C movement, definitely influenced by it.

The book I posted about above has a chapter 7 -- Architecture and Gardens. They appreciated the relationship between the two.

"The choice of site and the positioning of the house were acts of reverence, and the scope of the garden was as important as the distant view."

[Mike Hendren]

From this thread I have learned what a blessing it is to have limited intellectual capacity.  

You guys are fascinating, seriously.

Mike

[TEPaul]

"This thread is now # 2  statistically in number of posts yet has only half the views of the number ten thread.
What does this say..."

redanman:

That obviously says this thread is not one that everyone is interested in or is one that perhaps half as many people are interested in as the thread that has the tenth most posts. So what? There're contributors to this site who are very interested in this thread's subject, nevertheless. Are you suggesting that for a thread to get as long as this one has that there should be some sort of quota of posts to the population of this website?

[TEPaul]

Matter of fact, I think there's a whole lot of unfinished business and unfinished discussion to do with landscape architecture's relationship to golf course architecture, particularly historically.

This particular thread that is now almost 20 pages long seems to have been started by Tom MacWood as some sort of "testimonial" of support for his thesis and conclusion on his essay entitled "Arts and Crafts Golf". Not just that but the "testimonials" are posted by Tom MacWood. Just look that the first page and the first few posts by Tom MacWood. This thread also seems to have been started by Tom MacWood so as not to sidetrack his other thread on landscape architecture's influence on golf course architecture. As soon as this one was started the other one seems to have ended.

It seems every time I bring up and question Tom MacWood's "Arts and Crafts Golf" essay and the relationship of the Arts and Crafts Movement to golf course architecture (or the lack of it) that he tried to establish in it, this kind of thing happens. But why?

This is an important subject, and it should be discussed. Obviously Tom MacWood is maintaining there's a strong connection between the A/C movement and golf course architecture through what he refers to as "Garden art" (architecture) or "Cottage Garden Art" (architecture), (A/C landscape architecture?). Doesn't Tom MacWood feel they are landscape architecture? He also contends the influence of the A/C Movement is strong on GCA of the Golden Age due to a return to Nature and a general abhorrence with Victorianism, Victorian aesthetics and the Industrial Revolution.

If the A/C Movement's influence on golf course architecture through landscape architecture is that strong then we need to investigate the A/C Movement’s influence on LA architecture and its evolution, first. But we know that the landscape architecture of Lancelot "Capability" Brown and Humphrey Repton to whom a number of Golden Age architectures referred to as at least influencing their golf architecture regarding a few of LA's "principles" PRECEDED the A/C Movement by many decades. Lancelot “Capability” Brown, one of originators of a more “natural” English landscape architecture had been dead for almost a century before the Arts and Crafts Movement even began and Humphrey Repton had been dead for about a half century!

If that is so then one should certainly legitimately ask how it could be that Tom MacWood is assigning so much influence on golf architecture through landscape architecture to a movement that came many decades later than Brown and Repton (the LA architect mentioned by a number of Golden Age golf architects)?

Not just that but it would seem that logically the thing that would have the most influence on English "garden" or "cottage garden" architecture would be the art form from whence it evolved----eg English landscape architecture of Brown and Repton and not necessarily some movement that had far more to do with BUILDING architecture and the "DECORATIVE" arts, primarily interior art.

When questioned about these things it seems Tom MacWood's usual response is to contend that the reason the A/C movement's influence on golf course architecture was so great is because the influence of the A/C movement was so universal in its extent on all art forms that its influence on golf course architecture as an art form should be obvious for that reason alone.

I'm afraid this is a form of "a priori" reasoning (from cause to effect) that is so tenuous and perhaps messy that its validity should definitely be challenged. It appears to me, and apparently to others, that there're probably a number of "premises" of Tom MacWood's within that five part essay that allow him to make these connections from "cause" (the A/C Movement) to "effect" (its primary or even significant influence on GCA). It seems to me that too many have accepted those premises of Tom MacWood to be true without really examining them or perhaps even recognizing them.

But are these "premises" true? I, for one, don't think so. Frankly, if even one of them is not true then his conclusion will very likely be flawed and unsupportable.

So I think this discussion should be continued. If one looks at the last post of that "landscape architecture" thread that's now on page 9 one will see the final post by David Moriarty says that this discussion on landscape architecture's and the A/C Movement's influence on golf course architecture and particularly the Golden Age of golf course architecture should continue.

I think so too and if it doesn't I'm going to write an essay myself rebutting both some of the premises as well as the conclusion of Tom MacWood’s essay entitled "Arts and Crafts Golf".

Tom MacWood said on this thread;

“I suspect every time you bring up my A&C essay, there are as many converts to the idea, as there are converts again'it....thats my impression based on some of the feedback I get.

The way I look at it the more it is discussed, analysed and studied...the better.”

Tom MacW:

I hope you meant that.  

[Neil_Crafter]

Have been an interested observer who has read all the posts on this thread. It has been fascinating to see it eb and flow onto Alps holes, Merion's 10th etc - at least now it seems back on the topic. I'm going to dip my toe into the maelstrom.....

Tom Paul
Your latest post I feel was a good summary or your position. As I see it you do not feel that Tom MacWood has established his thesis sufficiently in his essay and subsequent arguments. However, you do not seem to be able to bring any actual evidence to the table to refute his proposition as to the link between the A&C movement and golf course design. As it seems that the direct evidence of a link is lacking in the first instance - I believe Tom Mac has drawn his conclusion through other means than direct evidence of linkage - then you are trying to disprove his conclusion with contrary evidence to his lack of evidence in the first place! I don't think this contrary evidence exists either. Is a golf course architect from the 20's going to write that he wasn't infuenced by the A&C movement? More likely that he might list some of his influences rather than those that did not influence him. So I feel any search for contrary evidence may well be fruitless.

In any event, I would encourage you to write a counter essay to Tom Macwood's piece as you proposed and put it on the website for all to read and critique. As they say, 'publish or perish'!

cheers Neil