Was Dr Mackenzie the same architect in the US as he was in GB&I?

[Peter Pallotta]

Started at home, ended in the US, and for a few years, I think, he was designing on both continents, going back and forth.
Was he the same architect in both places? Or are there signs that he tried to adapt his work to differing golfing cultures?

[Sean_A]

Pietro

I guess you would have to compare a 1925ish to 1930ish timeline of courses.  Places like Cork, Cavendish, Crystal Downs, CPC, Pasa, Lahinch(?), Valley Club and maybe a few Aussie courses that folks are confident are nearly 100% Dr Mac. 

My sense is that Dr Mac exhibited more flare with his bunker schemes in the US during this time than he did in GB&I.  I spose some of that may be down to sandy sites, but at Lahinch Dr Mac didn't get foo foo with sand.  I think for the most part, what we see in California is what Dr Mac really wanted to design...but thats a guess. 

Ciao

[Dónal Ó Ceallaigh]

I would say that the budget had a big influence on his designs. I doubt he could have done what he did in the US on GB&I sites, as the money simply wasn't available. What was the budget for Lido (probably not a good example in this case)? Was it something like $350k? I wonder when and where a project of similar scale was attempted in GB&I? Probably not until the 1980s. 

[Duncan Cheslett]

I have played maybe half of Mackenzie's courses in England, and it is clear that with a few notable exceptions he did not command big budgets and great sites from wealthy clubs in his early years. Colt courses in contrast tend to be in far more well-to-do neighbourhoods and on more obviously golf-friendly ground.


I get the distinct impression that to a large degree Colt and Fowler generally got the prime commissions before and after the Great War with MacKenzie and Braid fighting over the scraps.


Perhaps this goes a long way to explaining MacKenzie's desire to spread his wings and to fulfill his potential overseas.


The photos we see of his bunkering at the likes of Crystal Downs and Pasiatempo bear little relation to that found on his many English courses. I can only think that bigger budgets allowed his imagination to fly...

[Niall C]

Peter
 
That’s a very good question.


I’ll preface my comments by saying I’ve only seen one US MacKenzie course in the flesh, and that is Pasatiempo. I have seen Pebble Beach and the Cal Club where I think he had some involvement but as I understand it didn’t do the routing of the original course. Most of my comments on his US work therefore are based on Pasatiempo and photos I’ve seen of that time.


So that said, I’m not sure his work changed that much because of budget although I think I’m right in saying that his work in the US involved more machinery whereas in the UK, even in the 1920’s, was still horse drawn scoops and men with wheel barrows. Did he really shift that much more earth or was he more from the minimalist school ?


Using my US sample of 1 as a guide it seems to me that his style of routing didn’t change much although I suspect he worked on larger sites in the US. At Pasatiempo he used the landscape in similar ways building holes similar to back home such as the hog back par 4 which is similar to a hole at Cavendish and a hole at Pitreavie. One unfortunate legacy of his design at Pasatiempo that I noticed was his liking for shared fairways on holes going in opposite directions a la TOC, that have subsequently required tree planting to separate the fairways (my interpretation – haven’t seen original layout plan). He tended to do that back in the UK also.


Where I think his style did evolve noticeably in the 20 odd years he was active was in his bunkering and green complexes. Compare Alwoodley where he first started out to somewhere like Cypress Point and you go from “natural” to the artistic look. I’m not sure there was a change in philosophy as such but just over time he got better at designing and having his guys build bunkers. I’d also suggest that if Alwoodley is a good exemplar of his early work that he evolved into designing greens that were less open fronted although I don’t think that was peculiar to MacKenzie and was more how design evolved generally.


Some of the greens at Alwoodley also look as though they might just be lay of the land (3^rd and 17^th spring to mind), although could very easily be wrong. Either way his internal contouring got a bit more adventurous culminating in Sitwell Park before becoming a bit more muted again (?).


Interested to hear what the likes of Tom D or Neil Crafter think.
 
Niall

[Pete Lavallee]

As far as bunkering goes The Good Doctor's mantra was: put the bunkers on the hillocks not the hollows! His exposure to the Boer camouflage techniques convinced him that bunkers were more impressive when built into a rise in the landscape. So it was certainly site  dependent that where there were significant undulations he could build more impressive bunkering. There are examples on rather flat sites in the UK where he built small mounds and etched bunkers into their faces. I don't think it was a budget issue but rather a landscape issue.

[Niall C]

Pete

His early bunkering is quite crude and I don't think you'd have found too many afrikaners hiding in them !

Niall

[BCrosby]

To what extent are the UK/US differences we see today in MacK courses a function of different maintenance practices over the last 90 years?


I remember seeing a picture of MacK's Portland Course at Troon. It was well regarded when it opened. It had some fairly wild bunkering. The before and after pictures, however, are startling. You wouldn't think the course today is the same one in the old pix.


Which is not to say bigger budgets in the US didn't have a role. They must have set MacK free, as it were.


Bob

[Peter Pallotta]

Thanks, gents.


Bob, you and others have suggested that bigger budgets likely 'set him free'.  As an idea/concept I think I understand that; as a practical reality I'm not sure I do. 


Set him free in what way? Not to move tons of dirt, presumably. Or is that an unfounded presumption?
Free in a way a film director might if he was used to working on $1 million budgets and suddenly got $100 million? 
But then, would the director of kitchen sink drama suddenly want to make the next X-Men or Fast and Furious?


Are you gents suggesting an architect with developing ideas who just couldn't wait to get away from the modest, low to the ground, understated GB&I work/model and let loose with the spectacular?


Honest questions; I really have no idea.


Peter

[Rich Goodale]

As Deep Throat said, follow the money.


If GBI or Oz had any money for GCA in the 30's Ally MacK would have been there in a flash.  Even in the USofA those days money was short and he got shafted by the fat cats of Augusta.  He never really made any money as a medical doctor, and lived and died the last decades of his life in relative poverty.


His work was great, but he never achieved greatness in his lifetime.

[James Brown]

I have played maybe half of Mackenzie's courses in England, and it is clear that with a few notable exceptions he did not command big budgets and great sites from wealthy clubs in his early years. Colt courses in contrast tend to be in far more well-to-do neighbourhoods and on more obviously golf-friendly ground.


I get the distinct impression that to a large degree Colt and Fowler generally got the prime commissions before and after the Great War with MacKenzie and Braid fighting over the scraps.


Perhaps this goes a long way to explaining MacKenzie's desire to spread his wings and to fulfill his potential overseas.


The photos we see of his bunkering at the likes of Crystal Downs and Pasiatempo bear little relation to that found on his many English courses. I can only think that bigger budgets allowed his imagination to fly...

Some of the difference in bunkering can be attributed to the geography differences in general from the west coast of the US and GB+I.  Definitely not all. 


There are clearly differences between his major California courses and Augusta. 

[Tom_Doak]

  I think for the most part, what we see in California is what Dr Mac really wanted to design...but thats a guess. 

I think Sean has put it well.


I don't think the differences are all down to budget, exactly ... method is a part of it.  In the UK, most of Dr. MacKenzie's clients were existing courses that wanted an upgrade.  But it wasn't common at that time for clubs to pay for the architect to supervise construction.  The clubs wanted the final say in what happened, so they took his report and did what they wanted with it.


In the States, he was mostly building new courses, and set it up so that the courses were built either by Robert Hunter's construction company, or with Perry Maxwell as his on-site associate.  So MacKenzie had much more control of the construction process.  He also had rounded up a more talented crew by that point, and that's where the multiplication of pretty bunkers comes in ... not unlike the difference between my own early work and our courses of the last 15 years.

[Peter Pallotta]

Tom - you've often noted here your belief that gca is not a 'one-man'job'; and you have rejected the 'auteur' theory of course design that some have tried to foist upon you; and have often written about how your associates complement/add to your own skill set. The picture you paint above is of someone whose more recent courses look/play/are designed the way they are *in large part* because he was able to assemble a talented crew. But that suggests that either a) you *didn't*, say 25 years ago, already have a vision of what you'd like to one day build, or that b) you *did* have that vision 25 years ago, but had to bide your time until it could be realized.

Does the truth lie in one of those possibilities, or somewhere in the middle? And, do you think your answer to that applies as well to Dr Mac?
Peter

[James Bennett]

Peter Pallotta

I pose a different question to you?

Do you think Claude Monet changed his painting style as he got older and more experienced?

I think two things happened with Dr Mackenzie over his lifetime.
He grew in age and experience (and so his designs became more artistic).
He had more money available to spend on construction (I am not suggesting that he spent a lot on construction, just that it was more than he had available in the initial works in GB&I).

James B

[Peter Pallotta]

James - in one sense I understand your point, and you may be right. In another, I don't think the analogy is appropriate: in Dr Mac's case, I'm not talking about the differences between his first courses and his last ones; I'm looking at the fact that he built (in GB&I) courses like Cavendish and Seaton Carew in the mid 1920s, and then (in the US) Cypress and Pasatiempo and Crystal Downs just a couple of years later. In other words, any differences in style can't really be chalked up to an *evolution* and *maturation* in an artist's work (like they could be with Monet, over a long career). That's why I'm asking about Dr. Mac. And, the reason I'm asking Tom D the question above is that, as a young architect, he had all the models/inspirations already in front of him - Cavendish and Pasatiempo and Cypress were all there to be studied...and so again, there is a *choice* being made. I'm just wondering what went into those choices.
But maybe, as Tom suggests, the estimable Mr Arble has already explained it.
Peter   

[Tom_Doak]

But that suggests that either a) you *didn't*, say 25 years ago, already have a vision of what you'd like to one day build, or that b) you *did* have that vision 25 years ago, but had to bide your time until it could be realized.

Peter:


As you note, I have consistently rejected the idea that I have a "vision" of every design right from the start ... so what would make you think I had a vision 25 years in advance? 


There's been no plan.  The work is organic, and it evolves based on a lot of factors.  Support staff is one of those factors; so are different clients, and different settings. 


One other factor, which we talk about less, is that every course you build should incite some sort of response on the next project ... either taking an idea further, or pulling back, or deciding that you've "been there, done that" and want to do something different next.


As for Dr. MacKenzie, I think it's fair to assume that he knew his English clients for Cavendish would not be as happy with trying to maintain elaborate bunkering as his California clients were prepared to do.  Plus it rains more in England than in California [except maybe this year].

[Thomas Dai]

It would to interesting to know how many days Dr MacK' spent on site at each course he is credited with designing.
Also, what feedback and requests for instruction he was receiving during the construction phrase from his on-site representatives, whether that be his brother or others like Messrs Hunter, Maxwell, Koontz etc.
And how many plans and diagrams etc were drawn by him and how many by others (wasn't there, for example, a WWI army colleague, name escapes me at the moment, who used to do drawings/plans for him?).
atb

[Tom_Doak]

It would to interesting to know how many days Dr MacK' spent on site at each course he is credited with designing.
Also, what feedback and requests for instruction he was receiving during the construction phrase from his on-site representatives, whether that be his brother or others like Messrs Hunter, Maxwell, Koontz etc.
And how many plans and diagrams etc were drawn by him and how many by others (wasn't there, for example, a WWI army colleague, name escapes me at the moment, who used to do drawings/plans for him?).
atb

Thomas:


MacKenzie's participation varied tremendously based on the timing of particular projects and his travel schedule.  In Australia, most famously, he did plans for work at 17 different courses, but was only there for long enough to see one golf hole built.  [It was a good one -- the 5th at Royal Melbourne (West).]


I don't believe he would have corresponded with Perry Maxwell much, if at all, during the construction process.  The only letter I've seen between the two was congratulating Maxwell for his work at Melrose in Philadelphia ... a job that Maxwell had signed up just before they became partners, and then was part of the partnership.  It's clear from the letter that MacKenzie was surprised at the quality of the finished product that Maxwell had done without his input.

[Kalen Braley]

I can't comment on his courses overseas, but I sure as hell know that Pasa and CPC is an amazing 1-2 punch from almost any way you measure.  For me the real brilliance in those two tracks is the routing....just phenomenal how he uses one common area and routes so many holes thru it, up to it, and teeing away from it in such variety and splendor.  Simply amazing....

[Niall C]

I don't think the differences are all down to budget, exactly ... method is a part of it.  In the UK, most of Dr. MacKenzie's clients were existing courses that wanted an upgrade.  But it wasn't common at that time for clubs to pay for the architect to supervise construction.  The clubs wanted the final say in what happened, so they took his report and did what they wanted with it.


In the States, he was mostly building new courses, and set it up so that the courses were built either by Robert Hunter's construction company, or with Perry Maxwell as his on-site associate.  So MacKenzie had much more control of the construction process.  He also had rounded up a more talented crew by that point, and that's where the multiplication of pretty bunkers comes in ... not unlike the difference between my own early work and our courses of the last 15 years.

Tom


You may well be correct that a higher percentage of his projects in the US were for new courses than in the UK, but he still did plenty of new courses in the UK, and with his brothers construction company. From reports I've seen he wasn't slow in putting forward his brothers company and suggesting that his fees be rolled into the construction contract thereby giving him the same level of control you refer to in the US. That's what he did at Hazlehead with unhappy results. I don't think you'd confuse the styling at Hazlehead with Cypress Point so not sure level of control explains that.


Niall

[Tom_Doak]

From reports I've seen he wasn't slow in putting forward his brothers company and suggesting that his fees be rolled into the construction contract thereby giving him the same level of control you refer to in the US. That's what he did at Hazlehead with unhappy results. I don't think you'd confuse the styling at Hazlehead with Cypress Point so not sure level of control explains that.

I don't think anyone would confuse Charles MacKenzie with Perry Maxwell or Robert Hunter!


Also, from my reading, Alister and Charles were estranged after his divorce [because their wives got along], so whatever was built in the UK in MacKenzie's name after 1926 should have an asterisk after it.

[Thomas Dai]

Also, from my reading, Alister and Charles were estranged after his divorce [because their wives got along], so whatever was built in the UK in MacKenzie's name after 1926 should have an asterisk after it.

Tom,
So who after 1926 would have been Alisters course constructors/lead on-site reps in GB, particularly in relation to layouts on new sites?
Atb

[Duncan Cheslett]

I've just had a happy hour revisiting the MacKenzie Chronology. and it is quite clear that a metamorphosis took place between 1925 and 1926.


In May 1925 MacKenzie and his brother Charles were halfway through building Low Laithes GC, an uninspiring but functional course on the side of a windswept moor outside Ossett in West Yorkshire.


Less than a year later, in Feb 1926, he was in California receiving the commission for Cypress Point.


He may or may not be the best ever golf course architect, but he was clearly one hell of a bullshitter salesman!


 

[Tom_Doak]

Tom,
So who after 1926 would have been Alisters course constructors/lead on-site reps in GB, particularly in relation to layouts on new sites?
Atb

I don't know, at all.  How many courses did he DO in the UK after 1926?


My guess would be that his brother still oversaw the work, or just did the work himself.  But Alister was still making regular trips back to the UK through 1932, according to the MacKenzie Timeline project, so it's possible he oversaw some work there.

[Thomas Dai]

......How many courses did he DO in the UK after 1926?
My guess would be that his brother still oversaw the work, or just did the work himself.  But Alister was still making regular trips back to the UK through 1932, according to the MacKenzie Timeline project, so it's possible he oversaw some work there.

I've had a quick look-see at the Timeline.


It seems that from 1926 onwards he was still involved with various ongoing/already underway work including with his brother, 'Major' Charles.


As to 'new' GB&I projects that came along from 1925/6 onwards these were apparently -


Worcester
The Worcestershire (Malvern)
Pulrose/Douglas (Isle of Man)
Lahinch
Limerick
Otterburn Hall (Northumberland)
Walsall


There are references in the Timeline to his brother Major Charles being involved at The Worcestershire and at
Pulrose/Douglas.


There seem to be no references in the Timeline to his brother in relation to Lahinch, Limerick or Otterburn Hall.


As to Walsall, this would seem to be a considerable revamping of his course from several years earlier - due to a new road bi-pass system. There is no mention in the Timeline of his brothers involvement in the later Walsall work though, but if his brother was involved in the earlier work......?


Other than previously ongoing/underway projects Would this be the extent of all his GB&I work from 1925/6?


Given the close geographical proximity there would seem the possibility that the work at The Worcestershire (Malvern) and at Worcester could have been conducted by the same constructor/onsite rep and even construction crew, ie maybe Major Charles, particularly as The Worcestershire opened one year before Worcester. Walsall isn't that far away either, but the work there wasn't finished for a few more years so maybe not so likely.


Lots of conjecture, speculation and 2+2=5 kind of stuff though.


Any information or advice from the MacKenzie community would be welcome.


Atb