[Scott Macpherson]

For me, the Cornish and Whitten book (The Architects of Golf) is one of the most important in my library. It gives me pleasure just knowing it is there. And should I want to know something about a course or architect/designer, it is the first place I go.

I met Ron Whitten a few years ago, and he said that he had continued updating the book, but that any reprint now (this was in 2005) would require a double edition. This he thought made the changes of it being updated prohibitive. This was sad news.

As it seems others in this group enjoy C&W, and are aware that it needs updating, is there any will for this group (or at least the well-healed members) to finance/contribute to the costs of the book republication?

scott

[Mark Bourgeois]

Scott

I agree its the bible and that it needs updating badly.
 
He said its all updated but needs a publisher? What about self publishing?

Chris Clouser's interview with Ran has discussion of how he did it for his Maxwell book.

And couldn't he get a little creative, like:
* organizing the volumes in chronological order, so that someone could buy just one if need be?
* publishing an update volume containing only new architect entries and perhaps including dead guys missed? This by the way is how the bible of baseball does it

* publish on low weight paper, like the type used for telephone directories. This is how one of my favorite annual books is published, "Football Outsiders."

Frankly, if he says it's ready to go but too expensive to be published, it sounds like he is locked in to publishing with high-quality materials - or I should say "too-high" quality materials.

But its the word content, the intellectual capital if you will, not the paper or illustrations, that makes C&W awesome. It aint the WAOG.

So why not publish with low grade materials?

After all, that's how The Bible is often published.

Mark

[Ronald Montesano]

What about some sort of web-based publishing?  I realize that this would put it in the hands of lots of people to copy for others or even sell on the black-intermarket, but what is his goal at this point, to make money or to get his holy book in the hands of as many people as possible.  He could be the Radiohead of golf authors, putting it out there for free.

[Tyler Kearns]

Mark,

Good ideas, I too like the on-demand publishing that Chris was able to utilize for the Maxwell book.  For such a niche market, it seems like a no-brainer.  Now please forward these ideas to Ron.

TK

[Ken Moum]

Scott

I agree its the bible and that it needs updating badly.
 
He said its all updated but needs a publisher? What about self publishing?

Ron's a pretty busy guy, so it wouldn't surprise me if he simply thinks he doesn't have time to do that.

If publishers all want someone to guarantee that they won't lose money, a better idea might be to use the trick employed by a hook-and-bullet publisher I know.

He'd advertise a new book for two or three months before its release date with a pre-order discount. If he could sell 500 copies he'd have enough cash to pay for a print run of 1,000 copies and he'd have almost nothing out of pocket.

Given that the original often bring $200+ on eBay, how many GCA buffs would pre-pay $100-$150 for the latest edition?

Ken

[Jeff_Brauer]

I've talked with Ron about this.  He is against self publishing.  The earlier versions of the book have sold over 100K copies.  There is no way some publisher shouldn't take on a new version, rather than Ron and Geoff having to fund this thing themselves, since it has a track record. 

Also, I think the original publisher may still control the rights somehow, but not want to publish a new version, so they are stuck in some ways. But, I may not be correct on all those details.

[Ian Andrew]

There is so much to do.

There is a lot of work to do to update the back part of the book alone. I sent Ron a copy of the research that we did on Thompson. That's only one architect - it took years of research from a number of people. And I feel that it's stil a work in progress.

Look at Neil Crafter's expolration of Mackenzie and how that list has evolved from the years of hard work begun by others before. Look at the controversy between research on Old Tom Morris and his accreditations. It goes on and on - there are hundreds of architects to wade through.

Would you take that on?


The other issue is Ron's interest in such a mamouth undertaking. he's probably more interested in doing something new and fresh than go back and revise the book.

Golf In Canada - Barclay's amazingly detailed book about the history of Candadian Golf was ready for  an update. He decided he wasn't interested in doing the update and passed along his information to another writer and asked if he would do it instead. I think you'll find an update may require the interest of a third party - who will be doing this for the love of it - since they will likely see very little for their efforts.

Therein lies the issue - would you take this on?

[Thomas MacWood]

I've talked to Ron about it too, and the book has been updated, unfortunately he can't find anyone to publish it. I would have thought it was one of the few sure bets in golf architecture publishing.

[JMorgan]

runcible spoon

[Mike_Cirba]

As one of the seminal moments that stimulated and enhanced my love of GCA, the tome "The Architects of Golf" is an awesome work, however inaccurate in some respects.

Two thoughts...

An update would be wonderful, and in the past I've sent all of my architectural findings (mostly in the mid-Atlantic) to C&W for inclusion in any future editions.

However, given some of the contention over architectural attribution of certain courses here (i.e. Bethpage, Merion), it's unlikely that we'll ever have anything but a constantly moving, somewhat controversial, 95% accurate target as we learn more and more about the history of our courses.

That being said, I  still think it's worth the effort, and hope that if neither C nor W have the time or energies, that they pass their findings to date onto someone equally impassioned to continue their important and groundbreaking work.

[Rich Goodale]

It would seem to me that there is no crying need to reproduce the entire book (i.e. enough demand to make such a venture profitable).  The text of the book is good enough and representative of the points of view of the authors at the time, but the cross-referenced details of attribution are continuously being made outdated by new revelations and technologies (searchable newspaper archives, etc.).

Given that, a dynamic data base correlating courses, dates and architects would be very useful for us wing-nuts, clubs and historians.  I would think this could be done relatively cheaply, and would lend itself to some sort of online facility which could be either free (the "Wiki" model) or available through some sort of subscription and/or usage fee.  As anybody writing about architecture or just following the various attribution threads on this site knows, the history of GCA is murky, and if you look closely at just about any golf course in the world you will find that the design which is on the ground today is the handiwork of many individuals and seemingly faceless "committees."

I suspect that putting such a data base together, setting up access and monitoring the flow of new information would be a labo(u)r of love rather than greed.  Paging Tommy Naccarato!

[Neil_Crafter]

This is an interesting subject, and as Rich says, there is no need to reprint the entire book - just the second half with the architect listings and the course index. I suppose if Ron has updated it then the task of vetting it and getting it into a format for some sort of on-line database would only be gargantuan instead of brobdingagian!

I know the issues associated with this sort of research, the Mackenzie work I am assisting with is very time consuming, guys like Brad Klein researching Ross, Philip Young with Tillie, Wayne Morrison with Flynn, Tom MacWood with a whole host of interests, the work is massive. The advent of searchable newspaper archives has been a boon that simply wasn't available when Ron and Geoff were researching The Golf Course and then updating the info for The Architects of Golf. That they got as much right as they did is a real credit to them. As far as their listing for Mackenzie's courses, I would say that while there a few that are wrong, it is where they have not included (through lack of information) a whole lot of courses Mackenzie designed and consulted to, that their list is lacking. I am sure Ron has got onto most of these in the meantime.

I would certainly subscribe to such a database if it was made available online, but its Ron's info to do with as he sees fit. I just hope, for the sake of golf historians, that the info can be distributed in some way that can provide him with some recompense for his amazing work over the years.

cheers Neil

[Scott Macpherson]

Scott

Given that the original often bring $200+ on eBay, how many GCA buffs would pre-pay $100-$150 for the latest edition?

Ken

Ken. I would buy a copy for sure. Maybe that's the answer. Create a list, and everybody who wants a copy should put there name on the list. And if you had to put down a $10 deposit, then we would see who is for real.

I like the idea of the cross referencing being web based, but does this requires people to contribute? Would people do this? There is a great site set by by a Dutchman called Frank Pont called www.golfarchitecturepictures.com (I think) that is meant to be a free library of photos of all the great courses, with people contributing there own photos, and Frank managing the site. But people have been slow to add photos to some of the great photos Frank has taken. Would the same happen if C&W was web based? Or would it be like wikipedia where people can update at their leisure? (If so, I suspect some courses would have to be closed for updates..i.e. Merion, due to their apparent controversy  )

Ron, if you read this, it would be great to hear from you and get an update on what's happening.

regards,

Scott

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()