Hello All,
First before it gets completely blown out of the water; thanks to Mac and Tom D who managed to respond on the real thing that I visited the board for.
I want to prepare a written "something" regarding the dynamic origins of the art of GCA, which I would posit is a most unique fine art form worthy of humanities study, as is painting, music, edifice architecture, etc. Obviously, external critique is a great part of that demonstration and so I'm interested in what are the first bubblings of "hey, what are you doing there?"
(Tom, I shouldn't have qualified it by saying "long" article - ANYTHING of record is what I should be asking about) And it really shouldn't be the first ten either, it should be anything prior to 1935 or so, as I can kind of take it from there.
OK, as to the $800,000,000 Trust Fund Gorilla unleashed in the room, I say this:
1. Over ten hours and 40 posts in opposition to my message, not one of said detractors has addressed the issue for which I'm to be taken to some sort of task: what precisely, please, did I say about Mr. Paul's memoir that you object to? If you object to my sarcastic style in saying "Papa Paul" and the lampoon hyperbole of the wealthiest being dispossessed of half their wealth; (are you TRULY afraid that will happen in your lifetime?) I acknowledge it's not way to make a serious point; it's my failure. But is a man resigning the board at Seminole an act of grace and conscience, because 1969's Jack Nicklaus was too much of a longhair, for the reasons that it is ungentlemanly to breach with friends altogether over such an issue. This, when the same man -who we're told belongs to a dozen other clubs of such bearing--will just see most of them at the 11 other clubs. If that's not twisted dandism on direct display, nearly as factual as defecation, then there really is no point in going on. And this piece is larded with such syllogisms, interstitial maxims, and insinuations.
1a. Would not it break your heart to be a 44 year old person, who has only begun a transition to university life, who is confronted with the actual 18, 19 year old state college students who can afford or earn no better, who are loaded with debt before they hit the streets....would it not break your heart to see that and then hear such winsome, fond memories of basically "f***ing off" for a number of years? And still it was always going to turn up roses. What is the point of that story anyway? Meanwhile, seeing as it is for both myself and my students these days; knowing many scions and scion's scions of that world myself, it's bitter to think of the treasury and opportunity essentially wasted on such people. If it is the politics of the deadly sin of envy, so be it; the tone and account of the behavior itself smacks of the politics of sloth, pride, vanity, even gluttony -- all coming from the politics of greed. We might be equal in the politics of lust, so my side still wins: 1-5-1 on the Seven Deadly Sin count.
1b. Instead of addressing any particular point; I have heard instead about these big headline items..."Capitalism...would would you do?" WTC losses, a disgraceful person collecting welfare after a big lottery prize (btw: at 67, does Tom Paul collect SSI checks? Does he keep his address in FL and say he lives there a month and a day when he is actually not most of the time? These and similar schemes have long been deployed by our wealthiest in modern times) How can I possibly answer those questions? You can't answer them either. But I do say, just as the sun rose on Sept 12, after the crash of 1929, after the scandals, the assasinations, the thievery, the abuses of the welfare system, so would it rise if the wealthiest 10,000 were dispossessed of substantial amounts of their liquidable holdings, as it will if the 10,000 of me lose their home to foreclosure. Fortune cuts both ways, no?
2. Don't put September 11, 2001 in anybody's face; don't ask anyone if they were in grief for the loss of anyone who perished in terrorist attacks that day--it's only a prism through the personal, not the objective and it only matters when and where and how you start the clock. Do you know, actually know and/or are related to, any of the 3000 dead and the 20,000+ maimed US soldiers killed in Iraq, fighting for what again? Do you know any of the 8,000 civilians killed (no one, not even the red cross really knows) in Iraq, four times that in wound casualties and an entire citizenry for months without necessities of food, sewer, water, roadways, hospitals - not to mention a Vichy occupation that broke the dam on civil war that cost upwards of 140,000 lives and untold casualties. You don't think there's some overworked plumbing supply salesman in Iraq, who likes to read the newspaper and doesn't pray as much as he should? You think everyone in Iraq is sharpening swords for jihad against the great Satan, America? You don't think they have birthday parties and send greeting cards and have humorous email posting boards in Iraq? But none of that counts because you know someone who died in a dastardly attack...well I don't know as much as I could, but I know this: There are no flags or calendars in heaven, just souls.
3. The least important--to me--of my grievances is that TP didn't speak very much about Golf. I too found this enormously entertaining, a pretty good read really and extremely informative. I really do like hearing about worlds that I only partly get a glimpse. Why DOESN"T Tom Paul post anymore? I really don't know what necessitated his self-imposed(?) exile from the board. I assume it was some Merion was/wasn't designed by somebody thing with 1683 pages of replies. Is there more to it? As far as I'm concerned, have him be the "interview" every week--of course we all get to say OUR piece, right?
3a. The second least important--to me--portion of my criticism of the piece is that it was proffered as an interview when we all know that it was nothing of a sort. Ok, really no harm, you got me (ha-ha) - but the obvious fact that it was engineered and presented that way--says that the traditional method of disclaiming or otherwise contextualizing that Part I (at least) has barely a whit to do with GCA and that it is a memoir of Tom's life (which RM sorta tried to almost did do in his posting intro) is evidence in and of itself that this is a vanity-pride exercise allowed to take place; done in this way so that it can be "masked" as a harmless story. again, I say, sure--as long as I get to call it for what I think it is.
3b. Yeah, lids off as to topic as far as I can say. Why not have a flame war here? there's thousands of topics, hundreds of posters, so just ignore what you will, engage what you will and go forth. Tom or I or the next guy, should not have to tone it down, talk about Golf, not talk about politics...just move on to the next topic about Whistling Straits stoopit waste bunkers or a new course opening in Abu Dhabi. We can all be like Tom's father in that we can just resign from a post on a board, but not leave the club, as it were.
4. I admit failure in keeping a civil tone, but I mean a personal attack on Tom in the same way those who disagree with what I say intend an attack on me. Unfortunately, he and his life were the subject of Part I. Part of expositing that subject meant saying things that were an ugliness disguised as virtue, in my opinion. I intend to attack those things and not Tom Paul, but how you can disagree with an autobiography and not come off as attacking the principal in your disagreements. Tom has come to wrong conclusions in my mind, and his story is indicative of a life that is highly ignorant, I believe, of the factual work and strife endured everyday by homo-sapiens that are only different in fortune. If I say I view Tom's life as one "wasted" (perhaps my most pejorative attack) it is through the prism of THIS story. With only THIS story to go on, I see a man who was born into enormous wealth, who idled in his youth, was not compelled to do or make anything of himself with no real consequence for failure of any sort, who took to playing a game for its aesthetic and personal pleasure, often alone (which speaks volumes about character) and then at age 50 or so - discovered a wormhole, an Easter Egg in the game to GCA and quickly contacted "the only architect he knew" Rees Jones and replaced the idleness of privileged youth with the idleness of middle age. OK, fortune is a bitch, but why must there be at every turn of his piece a note of social justification and the justification go unchallenged, when one thinks it is incorrect? Just as you would tell me I am wrong?
4a. What's a hero? Isn't a hero someone who sacrifices something of himself, perhaps even his entire life or puts himself in some sort of disadvantage or danger to alleviate or defend the sufferings of others who cannot? What did Tom Paul, in this Part I autobiographical preamble.
Ahhhh, as forecasted when I wrote last night; there's far too much to say and too many responders to adequately address to continue at this time. Maybe I'll refresh with some baseball, student papers to grade, some microwave pizza and the Rangers Senators hockey game later. It was a long but profitable day in the sun, I only need to have 250 more just like them in the next 200 days and perhaps I'll have REAL time to engage with everyone who wants to. I mean no injurious attack on TP; I don't know TP beyond the instrument of this memoir-view; everyone keep your money just as you see fit; it really doesn't matter as far as any solutions to anything on my mind. This I suppose is my own true rhetorical answer to the subject question.
cheers
vk