I've said numerous times that I don't know MacDonald and Wigham's work much at all, but the number one thing I would expect in the context of Merion is more evidence of their presence and contribution.
One example is what we are beginning to touch on...why would the Alps, Redan and Eden be failures if CBM were really active in the process?
I think that Merion's Redan was and is a very good hole. That it would not be considered a "real" Redan by today's standards doesn't mean it wasn't considered a redan then, does it? And it certianly doesn't make it a failure, does it? And CBM and HJW apparently did not think it a failure, given that they used it as an example in their 1914 article on the Redan concept. M&W were apparently not as dogmatic about these holes concepts as many are today, yet ironically, they are the ones who are often portrayed as formulaic. Here is their last paragraph:
There are several Redans to be found nowadays on American courses. There is a simplified Redan at Piping Rock, a reversed Redan at Merion Cricket Club (the green being approached from the left hand end of the tableland) and another reversed Redan at Sleepy Hollow where the tee instead of being about level with the green is much higher. A beautiful short hole with the Redan principle will be found on the new Philadelphia course at Pine Valley. Here also the tee is higher than the hole, so that the player overlooks the tableland. The principle can be used with an infinite number of variations on any course. In reality there are only about four or five kinds of good holes in golf. The local scenery supplies the variety. Here is one of the four or five perfect kinds. The principle of the Redan cannot be improved upon for a hole of 180 yards.As for the Alps, I know that it has been portrayed around here as an abysmal hole, but accounts about the early course often single out the 10th for praise as one of the better golf holes! Yes it was changed, but not until over a decade later, and then by all accounts this was because of increased traffic on Ardmore Avenue, not because of any failings of the hole.
As for the Eden, you mean the reported attempt at the Eden green on No. 15? I have a hypothesis about what was going on there, but I want to wait to get into that until I can see if it checks out. Tillinghast (?) was quite critical of this green, but I am not sure whether his criticism had merit or not. My understanding is that this was
not one of the greens that was rebuilt early on, and to my knowledge, whatever changes have been made since then have preserved the original design characteristics.
So I wouldn't characterize any of these three to be a "failure."
As for your general point, just how much more of CBM do you need to see? NGLA only had three or four holes that could be considered to be actual templates of great holes abroad, and even a few of these don't look much like the holes they were supposedly copying. The rest of the holes were a combination of concepts and features combined with what could be done with the landscape. Would you expect more of Merion?