GolfClubAtlas.com > Golf Course Architecture
C.B. Macdonald said (in his autobiography) he thought his NGLA.....
TEPaul:
I do not view a discussion or analysis of why CBM said in his 1928 autobiography that he thought NGLA was the first example of golfing architecture when courses such as Huntercombe existed 7-8 years previous to NGLA as some childish trap but apparently that's the way you view it.
If one stops to consider that remark by CBM it is actually pretty damn startling when one considers the history and evolution of golf course architecture previous to NGLA. ::)
I'm interested as well in what Tom MacWood just said about his understanding of Park Jr at Huntercombe borrowing heavily from Musselburgh's architecture, including what he said about his feeling that CBM apparently got his timeline confused or wrong. The latter is pretty ironic considering you said earlier on another thread that the detractors of MacWood had something TO PROTECT!
Who is it that seems to have something to protect now? It seems to be you Jim Kennedy. Why is that? ;)
By the way, I see you can't exactly get your mind around the idea that CBM may've gotten the idea for a biarritz swale from the landform of Wilson and committee's 17th hole at Merion East on April 6, 1911 which preceded any biarritz hole Macdonald ever did. That does not surprise me in the slightest since you apparently have something you think you should protect. Again, may I ask you what it is you think you should protect? :-X
TEPaul:
It seems you are suggesting that CBM was only referring to NGLA as the first example of golfing architecture in America. Well, that is certainly a reasonable suggestion to make about what he may've meant.
Even though that would certainly beg the question of Myopia and GCGC that even he mentioned were quality golf courses in America. Do you suppose despite that he felt they did not qualify as golfing architecture in America because they did not utilize template holes from abroad or their classical principles?
If so, I should point out that Myopia had a hole known as "The Alps" about 7-8 years before CBM did NGLA----and of course that is assuming Leeds knew there was an "Alps" hole abroad previous to his creation of Myopia's 10th hole in the late 1890s. But maybe Macdonald failed to notice that or just decided to not acknowledge it to promote himself and his NGLA.
Oh, sure, I'm quite sure you will categorize that last statement as just another example of bashing Macdonald again. I actually view it as another very important question to discuss in the history and evolution of American golf course architecture.
Eventually, the most important subject of all should also be discussed-----why did some of the more significant architects in America beginning in the teens decide to vocally, philosophically and actually move away from Macdonald's template or classical GB architecture model and philosophy and even begin to criticize the very idea of it?
If you think the very idea of that question is another example of bashing C.B. Macdonald, well then, I'm sorry about that----I don't think it is at all----again, I think it is one of the most important and fundamental questions in the early history and evolution of American golf course architecture, particularly considering who Macdonald was and the remarkable effect he had had on early American architecture!
Jim_Kennedy:
In 1897 Macdonald wrote:
"The proper distance between the holes, the shrewd placing of bunkers and other hazards, the perfecting of putting greens, all must be evolved by a process of growth and it requires study and patience"
So, 12 or 13 years before his other remark, he understood what it meant to be an architect.
The paragraph, as posted, reads:
"I was intensely interested, and it was from this discussion I was urged to carry out the idea of building a classical golf course in America, one which would eventually compare favorably with the championship links abroad and serve as an incentive to the elevation of the game in America. I believe this was the first effort at establishing golfing architecture----at least there is no record I can find preceding it."
He's talking about transplanting the architecture found abroad to courses in America. It's ridiculous, no it's ludicrous, to think that he didn't understand that those courses were built, not found. It's ludicrous to think he didn't know what was going on in the UK because that's where he went for his inspiration.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Tom Paul,
You're a coward. You continually accuse me, wrongly, of having something to protect, but you have never said just what that is. Instead of skulking around like a jackal why don't you be a man, and reveal to everyone on this site just what you think I'm protecting. I'd like to know what is, because as it stands right now you look more like a delusional paranoid who's taking wild swipes at someone who simply disagrees with you.
TEPaul:
"Tom Paul,
You're a coward."
I'm a coward? ???
You think I'm a coward for wanting to discuss why C.B. Macdonald said in his autobiography that he thought his NGLA was the first example of golfing architecture??
I see. That's pretty interesting! ::)
"Instead of skulking around like a jackal why don't you be a man, and reveal to everyone on this site just what you think I'm protecting. I'd like to know what is, because as it stands right now you look more like a delusional paranoid who's taking wild swipes at someone who simply disagrees with you."
Wow, now I'm a jackal; now I'm not a man; now I'm a delusional paranoid! That's really interesting! :P
No problem and definitely no skulking or delusional paranoia. I think what you seem to be PROTECTING is Charles Blair Macdonald or his image or his legend or something of that kind FROM a discussion on here about how he preceived or else promoted his architecture and how others in this country (and perhaps abroad as well) apparently took exception, certainly after a time, to what he was doing and the way he was going about it.
If you aren't trying to protect CBM from a discussion or analysis of something like that then why did you just call me a coward for this particular thread and my attempt to discuss its subject? And lastly, Jim Kennedy, my interest in you or in you disagreeing with me or in me disagreeing with you is pretty minimal, actually just about immeasurable; it is Charles Blair Macdonald, his architecture, his architectural style, his architectural model for America and how others of his contemporaries viewed it in different ways and at various times that I am primarily interested in and interested in discussing with others on here who are capable of discussing it and analyzing it.
Jim_Kennedy:
Yes Tom, I think you're a coward. You still haven't given a reason why I would be 'protecting' C. B. Macdonald from any discussion of his legend.
Please, tell us. Am I writing a book about him? Nope, that's been done. Does his estate send me money to watch over his image? No need, the whole 'golf' world respects him. Could I be an illegitimate grandson? I'll show you my papers that prove otherwise.
You have no valid reason.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version