Who ACTUALLY Designed National Golf Links of America?

[Phil_the_Author]

First off, this is a SERIOUS question based upon the idea of CONSISTENCY in attribution.

Secondly, I am begging that it be treated as a serious question and that the name-calling and other horsecrap that has occurred on the Merion threads NOT take place here.

Mt question then. WHY is CB Macdonald given SOLE design credit for the National Golf Links of America? I ask this question because on many threads arguments have occurred whereby those who have been accepted as the designers of courses are being challenged because a famous name has been attached to a course causing some to conclude that they must ahve been involved in the design phase.

Case in point... North Shore Golf Club. The ONLY mention of CB Macdonald was in the board minutes where the President of the Club thanked Seth Raynor and called him the greate architect ib America and CBM and refered to his expertise in COUNSTRUCTION of golf course. This single mention has him now being given co-design credit with Raynor.

On the "Desmond Tolhurst's Account" Topic for Discussion, Mike Cirba posted an article which is what has prompted this question and thread and which stated:

"The working committee to lay out the course will be CB Macdonald, Walter J.Travis, Devereaux Emmet and H.J. Whigham. The next five months will be devoted to planning the holes in detail..." [BOLD mine]

Based on this quite clear statement, how can CBM be given SOLE design credit for NGLA? It is quite obvious according to this article that there were 4 people, THREE of which were already well-known and respected golf course architects with numerous courses to their credit, who were ACTIVELY working on planning the design or "lay out" of the course.

Especially in line with the wonderful article in the latest MGA magazine about Emmet and how little respect he is shopwn in the design community, based on what was written I believe that assigning him (and the others) equal design credit for NGLA is long overdue...

[Dan Herrmann]

Perhaps "The Missing Faces of NGLA" is in order?

[Adam Clayman]

Phil, How is this any different than when Joe Lee covered Wilson's drunk butt? Or, any number of examples of where a team works together on a course, but, the name, gets the design credit?

[Dan Herrmann]

Adam - that used to be true, but not anymore.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Phil,
Why? = there would not be a NGLA without Macdonald. He found the land, assembled the men to purchase it, hired Raynor to survey it, was meticulous in laying out the holes to his 'ideal', and tinkered around with his plan during the entire construction process
I don't see how it can be a 'serious' question as CBM himself said that he was helped by others, but I think you'd be hard pressed to find any part of NGLA that didn't have the fingerprints of CBM all over it.

[Mike Cirba]

Phil,

I absolutely agree.

Dev Emmett has as much if not more claim as the father of American golf as anyone and Travis was doing and promoting "scientific bunkering" and strategic concepts prior to Macdonald.

[TEPaul]

Phil:

To answer your serious question seriously, Macdonald is generally given sole design credit for NGLA because it is generally easier to do that in print, on a scorecard or whatever than to try to add a laundry list of other names who he himself chronicled worked with him on that course and project and who he himself very obviously appointed.

And then one should add that there is no question at all that Macdonald was the entire inspiration behind the entire idea of NGLA; he was the man who thought of creating such a course and who searched over an extended area and over time for the site it ended up on. He was the one who organized the club and who was its president. The idea of a course like what NGLA became apparently gestated in Macdonald's mind for perhaps 5-6 years before the land was found and the committee to help him design and create it took shape around 1905 and 1906.

In a phrase, Macdonald was NGLA and NGLA was Macdonald!

Did he do the project with an "amateur/sportsman" committee? Yes, he did, and it seems pretty undeniable he selected the participants himself. If one doubts that they should just ask themselves the simple question-----who else do they think did it?

As with Merion East and the Wilson Committee it is probably just an effort in futility to try to determine who precisely did what or whose idea or concept any individual thing or hole on the course of NGLA was with Macdonald and his committee, because that kind of thing is basically just never recorded for posterity, not out in the field and generally not ever. The point is everyone probably participated and contributed in some or various ways but at the end of the day Macdonald was the leader and editor of the whole thing just as Hugh I. Wilson was the chairman and leader of the committee that designed and created Merion East and Merion West.

Did Macdonald or Wilson or a Crump do it completely solo? Of course not; they never said they did, but they were the leaders and apparently the editors of those projects and that is why they have always been given most of the credit for designing and creating courses like that that were projects that went into it with "amateur/sportsmen" committees that had a chairman or leader of those committees.

I hope that helps.

By the way, I found that 1905 Brooklyn Eagle article about NGLA in a file on my computer I hadn't looked at in a long time. I have a whole file on Brooklyn Eagle articles. Back in the last decade of the 19th century and the first decade of the 20th century that was one helluva an informative newspaper on all kinds of things including some very in-depth articles on golf and golf courses.

[Bill_McBride]

From what I've read, it's hard to imagine that CBM would have ever shared the credit for NGLA with anyone!

[Phil_the_Author]

Jim,

Consider Merion. David wants to give design credit to include CBM because he is on record as "advising" and aiding in the choice of the final routing from the five presented. Macwood wants to give design credit to barker for simply giving a routing drawing without any follow-up that that was the routing actually built. As I already offered, others want to give CBM joint design credit for North Shore when he is ONLY referred to in regard to the construction of it.

This is NOT a judgement on those theories/beliefs/ proposals/etc... What it is, is an attempt for consitency in what we recognize. The article is blatantly clear in stating that the four men EQUALLY (planning and designing the holes) took part in laying out the course. In fact, they are specifically cited for this work unlike CBM with Merion and North Shore and Barker at Merion.

I can see no acceptable refutation if design credits are given to those above and in other cases discussed on here in the past...

By the way Tom, he most certainly did NOT do the design with an amateur/sportsman committee as Devereaux Emmet was a PROFESSIONAL architect who was paid for his designs... 

[TEPaul]

Phil:

I think if one were to write a fairly comprehensive article about the entire architectural creation of NGLA then maybe that would be the appropriate place and time to mention Devereux Emmet with NGLA but I think it would be very foolish to suggest listing him generally with Macdonald on a scorecard or generally in print as a co-designer.

I certainly cannot prove it but my sense has long been if anyone should get some kind of second billing with Macdonald on NGLA in a design context it should probably be Whigam ahead of anyone else including Emmet, Travis or Raynor.

[Phil_the_Author]

Tom Paul,

"To answer your serious question seriously, Macdonald is generally given sole design credit for NGLA because it is generally easier to do that in print, on a scorecard or whatever than to try to add a laundry list of other names who he himself chronicled worked with him on that course and project and who he himself very obviously appointed..."

Sorry, but that is inconsequential and has no bearing on the question. I am not asking why the other three haven't been given design credit by any and all in the past; I am asking why those on this site who give credit to others for designing courses which have been traditionally been ascribed to others now will not give the same recognition to the three others at NGLA.

If they don't or won't then their reasons simply fly in the face of the claims they make about others. For consistency sake, they MUST declare that Emmet, Travis and Whigham deserve and should be recognized as the equal co-designers with CBM of NGLA...

[Phil_the_Author]

Jim,

"Why? = there would not be a NGLA without Macdonald. He found the land, assembled the men to purchase it, hired Raynor to survey it, was meticulous in laying out the holes to his 'ideal', and tinkered around with his plan during the entire construction process
I don't see how it can be a 'serious' question as CBM himself said that he was helped by others, but I think you'd be hard pressed to find any part of NGLA that didn't have the fingerprints of CBM all over it..."

If CBM was so "meticulous" in "laying out the holes to his idea" then WHY does it clearly state that, "The working committee to lay out the course will be CB Macdonald, Walter J.Travis, Devereaux Emmet and H.J. Whigham. The next five months will be devoted to planning the holes in detail..."

It seems quite clear that all four were involved in the design, layout and hole selection process...

[Dan Herrmann]

Philip,
Are you suggesting that the thinking behind "The Lost Faces of Merion" applied to NGLA would result in CBM losing sole design credit there?

[Dave Falkner]

It has been my understanding that  Emmett surveyed the templates therefore it would  seem  he would have the  best idea of how they lay upon the ground

[Phil_the_Author]

Dan,

Not just Merion, but North Shore, White Bear Yacht Club and others where the same line of reasoning has been used.

I am seeking consistency in claims, theories and declarations of beliefs in what historically happened.

[JC Jones]

Phil,

Let's say CBM and Emmett spend 2 days on the site of Course X together co-routing it.  Emmett then spends the next 2 years building it (including greens, green contours, bunkers, etc.). 

Who should get lead credit?

[Mike Cirba]

Interestingly, it was Emmet who brought back sketches of holes overseas which were used by Macdonald.

Also, do people realize that Travis was involved with almost all of the best early US courses...Ekwanok, Garden City, Pinehurst#2, NGLA Pine Valley....the only conspicuous absences are Merion and Myopia.

Heck, Travis was even involved at Cobbs Creek in the later stages.

[Tom MacWood]

Phil
Did you sleep through the other threads on this subject?

[Mike Cirba]

Phil
Did you sleep through the other threads on this subject?

Phil,

I believe HH Barker was on a train going through Southampton at some period between 1906-1911.

Given his relationship with Travis, and his affiliation with Garden City, it is ludicrous to believe that NGLA would not have used the greatest architect of his time to design their course.

After all, what was Macdonald at that time but an inexperienced amateur who sold stocks on Wall Street and who had a decade prior created a course in Chicago where every hole had a left-side boundary and numerous geometric cross bunkers that was very quickly completely redesigned by Seth Raynor.

[Tom MacWood]

Phil
Did you sleep through the other threads on this subject?

Phil,

I believe HH Barker was on a train going through Southampton at some period between 1906-1911.

Given his relationship with Travis, and his affiliation with Garden City, it is ludicrous to believe that NGLA would not have used the greatest architect of his time to design their course.

After all, what was Macdonald at that time but an inexperienced amateur who sold stocks on Wall Street and who had a decade prior created a course in Chicago where every hole had a left-side boundary and numerous geometric cross bunkers that was very quickly completely redesigned by Seth Raynor.

Thats not funny. Your reputation is such that people take these joking claims seriously. In this case thankfully Wayne Morrison is not aware of HH Barker's final resting place.

[Mike Cirba]

Tom,

It was meant humorously.  

You should consider your own advice, Tom, because your own reputation is similarly one where folks here, myself included, feel has earned a considerable degree of gravitas and respect.   Perhaps that's why I try to hold some of your more off-handed, petty comments such as the one you just made about Wayne Morrison to a higher standard and I appreciate you doing the same to me.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Phil,
As you seem to keep on forgetting, CBM gives a lot of credit to Whigham, Hutchinson, Raynor, Payne, and others. Having said that, whose holes do you think Mortimer Payne, under Raynor's direction, placed onto the ground at NGLA, the committees?  

I think your credibility as a 'historian' will go the way of Mike Cirba's (read his two replies   ) if you think that the outcome was not of Macdonald's making.

[Mike Cirba]

Jim,

There is no question that CBM was the driving force at NGLA.

That does not tell us who routed the holes, or who designed the holes.

I think all Phil is asking for is the consistent application of a standard here.

I agree with him.

To my mind, CBM was the head of the design committee at NGLA so ultimate responsibility and ultimate credit or blame rests on his shoulders.

In the very same way, Hugh Wilson was the head of the design committee at Merion, yet you've seen no reason to defend him in the same way, nor have others who are huge Macdonald-fans, which simply leads Phil to note the inconsistent application and question why the lack of a standard here, noting some obvious hypocrisy (without wanting to put words in his mouth).

I'd be surprised if both Travis and Emmet didn't have large input into NGLA, frankly, but that doesn't make them the architects of record in my mind.

If you think that hurts my reputation as a "historian", then that's ok, too, because it's clearly obvious to me that much of what is being presented as "history" on this website is factually erroneous and almost presents a mythological, "groupie" application of events around certain architects and events.  

I would seriously like you to cite which items I've mentioned that you find erroneous about either Emmet or Travis, or about CBM's course at Chicago.  Would you please let me know the offending comment(s)?

[Jim_Kennedy]

Mike,

Macdonald told us who routed the course.   

As to your credibility, your first reponse was to profer Emmet as the father of architecture in America, a remark not even remotely germane to the topic at hand.

You're reliving past arguments, forget Merion because no one believes that Wilson shouldn't be credited as its architect. 

[TEPaul]

"You're reliving past arguments, forget Merion because no one believes that Wilson shouldn't be credited as its architect."


Jim Kennedy:

Is that right? Is that what you think Moriarty and MacWood believe and have argued on GOLFLCLUBATLAS.com? Is that what you think they continue to write and argue on GOLFCLUBATLAS.com?