David Moriarty:
The USGA Architecture Archive started with app fifty of the most significant courses and app fifteen of the most significant Architects of American architecture essentially because it has to start somewhere and that's as good a place to start as any. It involves a helluva lot of time and effort. I hope in some years it can cover most of everything about American architecture and those who worked here. Personally someday I would like to see it cover architecture and architects world-wide.
If some of you out there have what you think are some differences of opinion or if you have information on architecture or regions and their architects that you think is important enough to be treated differently then just try to make a cogent case as to why that is and then just make what you know available to us. We've posted a few times who to get in touch with. Don't just complain about what it's doing, get involved and try to help out if you really have the interest in some of what you're saying on here.
"TEPaul, I did not say what you know or don't know. I said most on here no nothing about Norman MacBeth or others like him. I stand by that. As for what you know and don't you, you wax and wane incessantly, and you constantly write about how much you know, but rarely do you ever offer anything new on here, except for Society gossip from the days of yore. Yawn.
Plus, whenever anything new comes up you backtrack immediately, either claiming you knew that all along, or that, despite past claims, it really wasnt your area of focus."
As far as I'm concerned you can take those remarks and others like it and shove them up your ass!
"You really don't think that playing a few West Coast courses gives you an expertise on the history of golf architecture in the West do you?"
Of course I don't think I'm an expert on the history of golf architecture in the West. To be able to do that I figure I'd probably have to live out there. It's only what is generally recognized as the most significant architecture out there that I've seen or tried to study. What I'm really interested in, however, is that contingent made up of the likes of Behr, Mackenzie, Hunter, Thomas and perhaps a few others who were out there and who I think were all in on some really fascinating and futuristic ideas and concepts for architecture. A lot of that revolves around Behr's writing, as far as I'm concerned, and I'm most definitely not unfamiliar with that.
But there sure are plenty of others I want to know more about including the heathland architects, especially Fowler. I know quite a bit about Park and sure want to know more, and certainly Emmet and some of the New England courses and architects I'm not that familiar with such as Stiles. I'm always looking for more on Travis too, and Langford and Moreau, Strong etc. The Fownses will probably be a new project too, what there is from them and about them. The Oakmont history book turned up one fascinating item. I'm sure not done on Leeds either, or even trying to find out more on Yale's Pryde---he may've been an important original architectural educator of a few of America's most imaginative architects.
But Willie Watson, William Bell, Norman MacBeth, Chandler Egan, Robert Hunter, and certainly Marion Hollins I always want to know more about. I might even have a tremendous lead on Hollins I'll be checking out hopefully shortly (maybe I'll even find Raynor's routing
). Her Women's National was pretty amazing. Matter of fact, that entire push for dedicated women's courses back then is a fascinating subject that virtually petered out and not much is known about. Rand Jerris seems fascinated by that unique aspect. Even Crump was going to get into it if he hadn't died. He'd interviewed a couple of the top women amateurs on that. Can you imagine finding those notes or letters?
There's a lot to do and a lot to look into, so again, David Moriarty, try not to tell me what I know and don't know or what I'm interested in and not interested in---basically you have no idea. The only thing I don't ever want to get into is trumping up some revisionism on courses and architects I'm not totally familiar with as it seems both you and MacWood are prone to doing. And if what I write on here bores you then try not to read it. That way you won't feel you need to make insulting remarks like those above.