[Tommy_Naccarato]

This is what I know, or at least think I knew before, and now afterward of trying to read maybe one page total of this thread:

Hugh Wilson, the much beloved and devoted SPORTSMAN--whose ghostly spirit I once saw gleaming down upon me from the upstairs railing of the vacated, closed-on-Monday, Merion locker room (while trying to collect my senses, recovering from heat-prostration after experiencing a 102 degree/98% humidity, charming Philadelphia day.) stopped into Southampton for a visit with C.B. MacDonald, and conversed with him on what to look for/how to study golf architecture on his way to see the Great Links of Great Britain.

Wilson came back and took those principles--which he learned from that meeting and what he saw abroad, found them in the ground on a somewhat convoluted parcel and built one of the great courses in the young American SPORT. They had trouble getting playable turf grass to grow, and after some consultation from C.B. MacDonald, H. Whigham and many other well-respected experts, who played a Sport that required the ball to utilize slopes, contours and other natural aspects of land to get the ball into the hole, finally did get it figured out.

The course that Wilson laid out, along with his brother Alan, William Flynn, Joe Valentine and many other passionate people, many of them Italian laborers--or in this case artisans--evolved over a period of time and is still a defining attribute to the sport today and has contributed to some of American Golf's Greatest Moments in History. The course has perfected itself over time. (Well sort of)

It's that simple.

There are no missing puzzle pieces. Just the hope of finding pieces of paper or photographs that say who did what and what they were thinking--IF that evidence even ever existed.

Enjoy Merion. I don't think a golf course has ever been more passionately discussed on this website. THAT has to mean something. I know this from experience.

[JESII]

Shivas,

I have been knee deep in this since about page 8 so I can tell you this thread is, and always has been a misunderstanding of arguments. Pretty common on here I guess, but this one struck a cord with both sides, hence 27 pages.

Moriarty has never specifically stated what his goal (or even instinct) is as far as finding CBM's actual involvement was. Tom and Wayne mistakenly thought he was arguing for design credit of Merion to go to CBM. There is no evidence of specific involvement and they stated that, and that without that no specific credit could be given. Moriarty takes that out of context to imply they (Wayne and Tom) are trying to eliminate CBM from the Merion history.

MacWood chimes in with various speculation that, as yet, seems unprovable. His end thesis is that if you believe one thing and he can offer reasons why that belief might not be true, yet offer no proof of it being untrue you are wrong. Interesting bit of convoluted logic.

The nuts are...these guys are all arguing different things and are befuddled that they can't see eye-to-eye.

>CBM played an advisory role in the creation of the original version of Merion East.
     -the extent of which will never be known because how would we know how much influence Pete Dye had over Tom Doak's first course? Could we identify the exact features? Could we assign a percentage to it? No.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Sully,
Thanks for explaining to me what I asked for about 6 or 7 pages ago--or something like that. But I should have known this.

In other words, they're all right, and they'll go to any length to prove it, including bringing mental health and paternity issues into it.

[JESII]

Tommy,

To be clear, I am the only one that's all right...but you are alright by me.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Sully,
Good. For a second there I thought I needed a valium...I've been trying to reread the thread to no avail. It's just so hard to focus.

[T_MacWood]

William Evans was singing a different tune in 1916: Wilson, Francis, Lloyd, Griscom, Toulmin, Macdonald & Whigham not to mention young lad named Flinn.

Its interesting M&W were engaged for their turf expertise...that would seem to point to other visits by the two men. Their first visit was late 1910 to give their view on the site and then again in the spring of 1911 when the plan was being finalized.Construction began right after that. Very interesting.

[Mike_Cirba]

My Lord, this has gotten completely silly again over the past couple of days.  Thanks to Tommy Nac for coming in here with a breath of fresh air and clarity!  

Let's assume for a moment that Hugh Wilson was NOT the architect of Merion East in 1911.  

Then, why did the Merion committee send him to GB for seven months to study the great courses?

Why did industrialist tycoon Clarence Geist hire him two years later to design his palatial course at Seaview?

Why did contemporaneous newspapers accounts in the Philly and Atlantic City area refer to Wilson as the guy who laid out "both courses" at Merion?

Why did Max Behr in 1914 say that Wilson was the guy at Merion so dictatorial in his approach as to compare to Macdonald at NGLA and Leeds at Myopia?

Why did the city of Philadelphia ask Wilson to lay out its first public course in 1915?

Why did Wilson (with Flynn's assistance) continue to modify Merion for the next 10-12 years?

Why did Pine Valley ask Hugh Wilson to finish Crump's last four holes?

Why did AW Tillinghast feel compelled to point out clearly and gush fervently that Wilson was the designer and genius behind the creation of Merion when the US Open was being played there in 1934?

This is not some "myth" as some would have you believe.

There was less evidence to implicate O.J. Simpson as there is that Wilson was the architect of Merion almost 100 years later, despite what seems like some missing club records.

And, Tommy...you're right.   Macdonald and Whigham advised as necessary, and in limited fashion.   There is not a single shred of evidence that it was any more than that.

[JESII]

That is very interesting.

Let's take that at face value along with M&W being consistently termed advisors. Unless, that is, you are suggesting they were more than that??

It makes perfect sense to me to confirm a site selection, a layout plan, and a near finished product with these advisors. It actually seems like it could define the term to me.

What would be incredibly interesting is a reason to believe they were anything more than advisors.

[T_MacWood]

DS
You're now looking for magazine quotes?  

[T_MacWood]

That will shock TE more than Paul and I.

[T_MacWood]

We knew he was in the States in 1914, but we didn't know he was in Chicago in July. Thats an excellent discovery.

[JESII]

There has been some excellent research done on this topic todate, but IMO a lot more information needs to be uncovered before any definitive conclusions can be drawn regarding who did what.

Some of the things we don't know:

* When exactly did Wilson go to Southampton to visit Macdonald

* What were the months Wilson was overseas (was it seven or eight or some other number of months)

* Where did he go and who did he visit with...did he travel alone

* What was the state of the project when he returned

* Was Wilson around in late 1910 when M&W were checking out the site

* Why was Pickering - who live in Massachusetts - hired. Who recommended him

* When did Pickering begin working at Merion

* How much time did any of the committee men spend on site during the construction phase

These are important questions we can't answer at this point and until we can answer some of them we are left with a hell of a lot of speculation and conjecture.

I guess the question has to be asked...are you looking to establish responsibility for each specific feature on the golf course?

[DMoriarty]

The 1915 Wilson quote that TEPaul includes above is not the only reference Wilson makes to MacDonald's influence.  In Bahto's book there is a similar quote, which Bahto dates at December 1916 which is very similar.  One of the differences is that the Bahto quote also includes the sentence:

Through sketches and explanations of the right principles of the holes that formed courses abroad and had stood the test of time, we learned what was right and what we could use."

Doesn't this raise the the possibility that these were actually MacDonald's the missing sketches from MacDonald's trip?  Is it possible that these are the missing sketches that Wilson brought back from his trip?   If so, then that would explain what happened to MacDonald's sketches, at least.  

[JESII]

Are you suggesting Wilson borrowed CBM's drawings and never returned them? Even though CBM was ever-present on the grounds of Merion East during its construction phase? I guess that could be because Wilson was probably chasing girls at the Jersey shore during that summer of 1911 while CBM was building Merion for him.

[JESII]

TEP,

The only problem is that the entire club thought it was 1914 because they were commemorating a 50th anniversary of the opening. Not proof, but certainly more evidence that he was there in '14.

[TEPaul]

JESII;

I hope Colt was in America in 1914 and that that fact can be completely proven. That would be most interesting indeed, and particularly to confirm where he went in 1914. If somehow it could be proven that he actually returned to PVGC that would be really interesting indeed and may require a certain amount of reinanalysis of the PV timeline. I can pretty much guarantee if that were the case PV has not been aware of it in literally many many decades.

This stuff can be fun and exciting to do and can be really interesting in the end. As you can see the base-line to all this stuff is attempting to do what Wayne and I call "timelining". Once you get a really decent timeline structure on some projects all kinds of things fall into place pretty easily.  

[Mike_Cirba]

Let's assume for a moment that Hugh Wilson was NOT the architect of Merion East in 1911.  

Then, why did the Merion committee send him to GB for seven months to study the great courses?

Why did industrialist tycoon Clarence Geist hire him two years later to design his palatial course at Seaview?

Why did contemporaneous newspapers accounts in the Philly and Atlantic City area refer to Wilson as the guy who laid out "both courses" at Merion?

Why did Max Behr in 1914 say that Wilson was the guy at Merion so dictatorial in his approach as to compare to Macdonald at NGLA and Leeds at Myopia?

Why did the city of Philadelphia ask Wilson to lay out its first public course in 1915?

Why did Wilson (with Flynn's assistance) continue to modify Merion for the next 10-12 years?

Why did George Thomas praise Wilson as one of the architects who taught him much of what he knew?

Why did Pine Valley ask Hugh Wilson to finish Crump's last four holes?

Why did AW Tillinghast feel compelled to point out clearly and gush fervently that Wilson was the designer and genius behind the creation of Merion when the US Open was being played there in 1934?

This is not some "myth" as some would have you believe.

There was less evidence to implicate O.J. Simpson as there is that Wilson was the architect of Merion almost 100 years later, despite what seems like some missing club records.

I would note that neither Tom MacWood nor David Moriarty has attempted to answer any of the very obvious questions above, as they clearly are all common-sense and simply fly in the face of the supposed significant role of Macdonald and Whigham in the design and construction of Merion.

[DMoriarty]

Are you suggesting Wilson borrowed CBM's drawings and never returned them? Even though CBM was ever-present on the grounds of Merion East during its construction phase? I guess that could be because Wilson was probably chasing girls at the Jersey shore during that summer of 1911 while CBM was building Merion for him.

No I was suggesting that Wilson pinched the sketches.  Snuck them out of Southampton in his knickers.  The first in many attempts by Philadelphians to take credit from MacDonald and keep it for themselves.  Those attempts still continue today.  

[Mike_Cirba]

I would also note that Max Behr's 1914 article also cites Wilson as one of the three men who have studied course "Construction" as never before, and therefore ideally suited for their dictatorial roles given their immense knowledge and expertise.

I argued earlier with MacWood that the term "constructed" at that time also included what we know today as "architected" by definition, and he disagreed with me because it would obviously add more definitive proof to the overwhelming evidence that Wilson designed Merion East.

However, I find it humorously ironic that even Hugh Wilson agrees with me about the use of the term.   As Tom Paul quotes Wilson's letter;

We spent two days with Mr Macdonald at his bungalow near the National course and in one night absorbed more ideas on golf course construction than we had learned in all the years we had played. Through sketches and explanations of the right principles of the holes that formed the famous courses abroad and had stood the test of time,...

It is clear here that Wilson is talking about golf course DESIGN, architecture as we know it today, when he uses the term "golf course construction".   As I pointed out earlier, the term "constructed" was completely synonymous to "architected", or "laid out", or "designed" to these men, and MacWood knows it.  

His denial of Max Behr's own very clear description of Wilson as the "constructor" of Merion is really not a very intellectually truthful one, given his vast knowledge of the time.  Unfortunately, it doesn't fall into his hypothesizing, so he tries to split hairs in what he KNOWS Behr meant.

[DMoriarty]

Mike,  

I am not exactly sure why you would expect me to answer your questions when you do not answer those asked to you.  

Nonetheless, I'd still be glad to address your posts and everyone else's (maybe even some that have been deleted) when I get the chance.   I just don't have time to respond to everyone now, and I am leaving aside the most obvious responses until later.    

As a compromise, and to save bandwidth, please answer a question of mine and you may find that the answer applies to your questions as well.  

When and where have I ever taken the position that Wilson does not deserve design credit for Merion East?

Thanks.  

By the way, If you get a chance . . . why not go back and answer my question about just what the absence of evidence of MacDonald's specific involvement proves?

[DMoriarty]

Moriarty:

What does the absence of evidence of Tillinghast's specific involvement in Merion East prove?

What does the absence of evidence of Willie Watson's specific involvement in Merion East prove?

What does the absence.....

Absolutely nothing at all, one way or another.  The absense of evidence cannot be used to disprove any of their involvement, just as it cannot be used to disprove Wilson's involvement, Flynn's involvement, etc.  

That "fact" that there is no evidence of MacDonald's specific involvement is absolutely irrelevant as says nothing about whether or not he was specifically involved.   It says nothing about whether any of them were involved.  

[Mike_Cirba]

Mike,  

\When and where have I ever taken the position that Wilson does not deserve design credit for Merion East?

Thanks.  

By the way, If you get a chance . . . why not go back and answer my question about just what the absence of evidence of MacDonald's specific involvement proves?

David,

You haven't specifically, but although you deny it's a "zero-sum game", I think that by definition if you imply that Macdonald created holes...say 1 through 15, then that means that Hugh Wilson didn't, and visa versa.

I'm truly not sure what your original point was.   You say you just want Macdonald to get his due, but really have offered no real evidence that would incline anyone to believe his role was greater than reported over the past 90 years.   Instead, somewhat ironically, this thread and some of the uncoverings within only seems to prove instead that Macdonald and Whigham's role was likely quite negligible and "consultative" only in a very broad, limited sense in the design of the original course at Merion East.  

Personally, I think it would be a finding of considerable historical important if we had determined here that CB Macdonald actually had a huge hand in the design of Merion.   That would be exciting stuff that I think this website is so good for.   On a personal level, David, I used to research this stuff way before there was a GCA but the collaboration possible thru this website is wonderfully helpful in doing so.   However, we also need a higher threshold of proof than the sort of specualtion that's been advanced here.   I guess what I'm saying is that I would not have minded one whit if we had proven that Macdonald had a large role...I'm architect neutral in this.  However, what I've found personally in this thread is that Wilson was much more "in charge" and responsible for Merion than I ever would have believed prior.

As far as your second question, I think the lack of evidence of Macdonald's specific involvement indicates to me precisely what it implies.   Macdonald was the GIANT of the American game at that time, at the very height of his powers, and for a landmark course as groundbreaking as Merion to arise quickly and be so renowned in such a short time, if Macdonald had a large role that would certainly have been well documented by everyone who was there at the time and familiar with the design construction history of Merion....Tillinghast, Thomas, Behr, certainly Wilson, and last but not least, Macdonald himself.

It certainly would have been a more newsworthy story at that time to name-drop the famous CB Macdonald than some modest insurance salesman and four other no-name committemen from Ardmore!    

[Matthew Hunt]

I think colt did work on RCD in 1914

[Phil_the_Author]

David,

In an effort to cut through what seems like 17 or more different strands of rhetoric by many, and acknowledging that you have been asked a great many questions that would take days for you to address, I thought that I would ask you one more and whose answer would certainly aid in refocusing this as a discussion.

Since you have said a number of times that you want to see CBM get his proper credit for his participation in the creation of Merion, I ask this.

Could you please elaborate on what YOU (and this is your opinion) believe is the proper credit that CBM should be given and what credit he is not being given?

[JESII]

Good luck Philip, I have asked that a few times in very clear, concise form as you did and he goes in another direction. I think it's unfortunate that so many on here avoid a question that hurts their cause. Muddied waters would be the best way for this thread to end for Mr. Moriarty, and that is a shame.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()