Generally speaking, I am not a fan of blind shots, especially when I am playing at a course that I am unfamilar with. Imagine this scenario (as I'm sure you've probably experienced it, I don't think this will be too difficult to do): you are playing a course for the first time and you hit a shot in the direction that you think is correct based on the way the direction the fairway appears to be moving up until it falls away, you it flush and on line with your intended target, and then you walk/drive up to find that your ball has found the heavy rough or a hidden bunker/water hazard. I don't think that golfers should ever have to be presented with this type of agony, because they haven't necessesarily done anything wrong. I disagree with blind shots as those that have been described for this reason.
Although I'm young and my architecture expertise pales in comparison to my fellow GCAers, I think that a golf course should be an artistic chess board of sorts: it incorporates art because a course should have a variable character (in difficulty and design), be aesthically pleasing, be in tune with its surrounding environment, and force a player to think; however, like a chess board, a course should be transparent and a golfer playing on it should make scores that are understandable (meaning that all of their good shots should be rewarded, and most of their bad shots should be punished).
Don't get me wrong...I love local knowledge (like hitting it on a portion of the green where you know the ball will roll towards the hole, or hitting it in certain parts of the fairway where you will enjoy a bit of a kick that bumps you an extra 10-15 yards), but the blind shots unfairly place a local player in a position of power, which doesn't suit the pure nature of the game.