News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Peter Pallotta

Critics or Critiques
« on: September 27, 2021, 03:25:12 PM »
"I've been all over the world and I've never seen a statue of a critic.”
Leonard Bernstein

What good/goods have critics of gca ever produced or accomplished?
« Last Edit: September 27, 2021, 03:56:44 PM by Peter Pallotta »

Steve Lang

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Critics or Critiques
« Reply #1 on: September 27, 2021, 03:44:23 PM »
 8)  Darwin wrote some nice books...
Inverness (Toledo, OH) cathedral clock inscription: "God measures men by what they are. Not what they in wealth possess.  That vibrant message chimes afar.
The voice of Inverness"

Peter Pallotta

Re: Critics or Critiques
« Reply #2 on: September 27, 2021, 03:52:53 PM »
8)  Darwin wrote some nice books...
Ah - but perhaps that's because he was neither a 'critic' nor proffered 'critiques'...

Or was he, and did he?

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Critics or Critiques
« Reply #3 on: September 27, 2021, 03:58:19 PM »
Peter,

The world needs the critics and the naysayers...and the best ones are those who couple great assessments with thought-provoking questions.  I've basically spent my entire career in this type of role, and while its usually thankless and people often don't like your message (or even you)...its very necessary.  ;)

But to answer your question, I don't believe critics deserve statues per se.  I will openly admit the hardest thing to come up with is that great idea or killer concept or even the ability to unite people around a common cause, even if you need the analysis to come along after too...

Mark_Fine

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Critics or Critiques
« Reply #4 on: September 27, 2021, 04:25:14 PM »
Peter,
I believe anyone who offers an analysis or an opinion is a essentially a critic.  In that regard any golf architect or consultant who renders a judgment or observation or recommendation for change or improvement to a golf course fits that bill. Not sure what you are getting at with your question?


One of the hardest things to do when it comes to restoration or renovation work is explaining to a club that their golf course could be improved with some modifications (big or small).  It can be very much like telling someone that their child is not as handsome or pretty as they might think.  The best way to do this is to help them figure it out themselves.  They end up being “the critic” and you simply guide them along the right path.

Stewart Abramson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Critics or Critiques
« Reply #5 on: September 28, 2021, 03:06:28 PM »

Roger Ebert statue at U of IL


Jason Topp

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Critics or Critiques
« Reply #7 on: September 28, 2021, 03:33:59 PM »
I hear retail golfers expressing ideas that have been discussed here for 20 years. 

Gib_Papazian

Re: Critics or Critiques
« Reply #8 on: September 28, 2021, 04:32:12 PM »
Without Anton Ego, how would I choose a restaurant in Paris?

Of course, a critique is only as valid as the person doing the evaluation - but I've come to believe organizations like the various panels are good for golf.

Otherwise, the hoi polloi and Budweiser punters would rate golf courses based on green speed and whether the beer wench is good looking.

Wine critics, who actually know what they are doing, help lead philistines and idiots past their unsophisticated palates - opening the door to appreciation of the finer vintages.

In other words, until you've thought deeply about the subject, an exercise in landscape architecture will have greater initial appeal than a rough hewn strategic gem - because you must look past the surface to appreciate the synthesis of strategic elements as a riddle to solve or untangle.

I used to quietly sneer at our "History Criticism Majors" in film school - under the theory "Those who cannot do, criticize." But while we were still trying to figure out contrast ratios, film stocks and depth of field calcs, the Confederacy of Dunces were busy studying thematic elements and narrative structure.

Even today, a sharp critic is probably a more unbiased evaluator of film than me, because while I notice lighting mismatches and slick camera and focus pulls, they are paying attention to the story itself.

I get too hung up on the technical aspects because that is what I do, while Her Redness (multi-award winning Director/Editor) is focused on the finished product - without wondering why the back window was not jelled or the motivation for that shrieking hair light on the blonde protagonist.

The same might be said for golf architecture critics. I'm sort of a hybrid, having heavily consulted on a few projects - but I believe the opinions of most well trained and well versed, experienced panelists are every bit as valid as a working architect.

Not to say they have technical knowledge on how to line a bunker or contour a putting surface to avoid mowers scalping the rolls and folds, but looking at ONLY the finished product from the standpoint of contemplating the synthesis of all elements (without knowing the trade-offs that were necessary) is the entire point of assembling a number of evaluations, since no one person can be the arbiter of bad vs. good vs. great.


« Last Edit: September 28, 2021, 04:37:54 PM by Gib Papazian »

Thomas Dai

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Critics or Critiques
« Reply #9 on: September 28, 2021, 04:44:33 PM »
And then there are sycophants.
Atb

John Kavanaugh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Critics or Critiques
« Reply #10 on: September 28, 2021, 05:12:59 PM »
I just joined a Rees course that I love to death. Did you or Tommy ever do a damn thing to make him better?

John Kavanaugh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Critics or Critiques
« Reply #11 on: September 28, 2021, 05:18:57 PM »
With apologies. The role of the critic isn’t to make the artist better. It’s more an exercise in the redistribution of wealth.

Peter Pallotta

Re: Critics or Critiques
« Reply #12 on: September 28, 2021, 05:30:56 PM »
If prior to 1930 the critics had outweighed the creators, would there even have been an Old Course left for Behr and Crane to argue about, or for Bobby Jones to embrace as an ideal?

Countless critics and experts since then have praised St Andrews to the heavens without ever once having genuinely tried to 'replicate' it -- and without even once realizing that its very existence calls their very vocations into question.

Gib_Papazian

Re: Critics or Critiques
« Reply #13 on: September 28, 2021, 05:32:35 PM »
Barny,


Assuming you are referring to the Emperor - another wistful picture on the wall from a bygone Treehouse era.


I will answer your question with another question (kinda like an Armenian Rabbi):


"Did David Fay ever do a damned thing to make Rees better?"


I'd love to know the explanation for him continuing to allow the U.S. Open Quacktor to deface otherwise fabulous golf courses with hideous face-lifts and nose jobs. 




 

John Kavanaugh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Critics or Critiques
« Reply #14 on: September 28, 2021, 06:16:25 PM »
Gib,


I'm at a loss for a single instance where Rees's work for the USGA did lasting harm to any course he modified for an Open. Could you give an example more imaginative than Torrey?


Going by any standard on how executive directors are measured isn't David Fay a shining star?

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +3/-1
Re: Critics or Critiques
« Reply #15 on: September 28, 2021, 06:19:06 PM »

"Did David Fay ever do a damned thing to make Rees better?"


I'd love to know the explanation for him continuing to allow the U.S. Open Quacktor to deface otherwise fabulous golf courses with hideous face-lifts and nose jobs. 
 


Surely you are more worldly than that.  Clearly he kept getting hired because he was doing what the USGA expected of him.  That’s how you get to be Open Doctor.

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +3/-1
Re: Critics or Critiques
« Reply #16 on: September 28, 2021, 06:40:17 PM »

And then there are sycophants.



Indeed!  I called out a writer recently (whom I had never met) for saying he was rooting against one of my courses, only to find that he really liked it.  Criticism should have nothing to do with the person, but most reviews I read START with the writer’s general impression of the designer as a genius or a nice guy or temperamental.  After that it is all b.s.


The reason there is so little good criticism of golf architecture is because there is no venue for it.  The New Yorker and the Times do not pay someone to critique golf courses.  And the industry publications do not want to offend anyone, so their Architecture Editors are usually stuck defending rankings they don’t really agree with.  The only real critics now would be those who have their own platform, and most of them prefer to be well-liked instead of being called assholes for sharing a negative opinion with anyone outside their confidants.


Plus is there still really good criticism in art or architecture of film or music anymore?  It’s much harder because the prevailing style is to be “fair and balanced” - even the worst work is given some praise along with the criticism, and even the best courses get nit picked just enough to show that the critic is wiser than the designer.  ::)


Being a good critic and identifying things I did or didn’t like made me a much better designer, whether or not it changed anyone else’s minds about the courses I critiqued.

Gib_Papazian

Re: Critics or Critiques
« Reply #17 on: September 28, 2021, 06:46:57 PM »
Tom,


I was being snotty . . . . . I know perfectly well why David Fay kept handing over national treasures for Rees to screw up. But you know what? The changes Jones Sr. made at Olympic were also a net negative, but before the Renaissance, nobody knew better in those days. Obviously, you were the poster child for enfant terrible . . . . . .


And Barny,


Okay, let's put aside U.S. Open courses he screwed up (like Torrey) or Bethpage - unless self-flagellation is your kink of choice.


Wonder why MPCC redid the Dunes Course, just 20 years after the Rees remodel? Hmmm, maybe because the folly of letting a hack, spray paint modernistic graffiti on a period piece finally wore thin with an increasingly sophisticated membership.


Lake Merced? Well, Gil, Shac and Tommy are busy untangling ham-handed puke, just a few short years since the club let Rees "prepare" the course for a Women's Open that never happened.


Poppy Ridge? In the pantheon vapidity - 27 holes by a geriatric generic.


Atlantic GC? Absolutely terrible. I've not been back since the newest rerouting, but if I designed a mess like that, I would not have my portrait on the wall like I'm C.B. Macdonald.


See anybody beating a path to Florence, Oregon? The course is such a waste of good ground, they put it into the witness protection program and changed its name.


I could go on if you like . . . . . .


 


         
« Last Edit: September 28, 2021, 06:57:46 PM by Gib Papazian »

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Critics or Critiques
« Reply #18 on: September 28, 2021, 06:49:14 PM »
I hear retail golfers expressing ideas that have been discussed here for 20 years.

Fried Egg lives on shit discussed here forever. I take that as a good development.

Ciao
« Last Edit: September 28, 2021, 06:54:59 PM by Sean_A »
New plays planned for 2024: Nothing

John Kavanaugh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Critics or Critiques
« Reply #19 on: September 28, 2021, 07:01:37 PM »
As I have grow older I find complex equations more difficult to digest.

Peter Pallotta

Re: Critics or Critiques
« Reply #20 on: September 28, 2021, 10:05:50 PM »
Being a good critic and identifying things I did or didn’t like made me a much better designer, whether or not it changed anyone else’s minds about the courses I critiqued.
And I'd suggest that if you *hadn't* gone on to design your own golf courses, and specifically the courses you have, the influence/impact of your critiques -- as insightful as they were -- would've been even *more* limited!

If you were not a designer-creator yourself, you would not have changed almost anyone's mind, and very few distinctly new kinds of golf courses would've been built -- and certainly not enough to have us talking about a renaissance.

I think that might be what Bernstein was trying to say, i.e. that an art-craft moves forward/evolves and continues to make manifest great new works not because of any critics *words* but because of the created *works themselves*.

It is the art-craft *itself* that engenders the masterpieces, not the many opinions *about* the art-craft.

I was a big fan of Roger Ebert too, and am happy to see his statue. But Martin Scorcese and Quinten Tarantino and Francis Coppola made the great films they did not because they were *listening to the critics* of their day but instead because they had *watched the great films* of years gone by.

That's the theory.

PS to Jason and Sean: yes, ideas foster more ideas and critics engender more critics -- but none of that is building great golf courses. And if/when a dramatically *new kind* of golf course is indeed built, it won't be because of ideas-critics at the Fried Egg or gca.com, but because of one brave and talented architect who *doesn't listen* to the critics!
« Last Edit: September 28, 2021, 10:42:19 PM by Peter Pallotta »

Jeff Schley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Critics or Critiques
« Reply #21 on: September 29, 2021, 12:59:52 AM »


PS to Jason and Sean: yes, ideas foster more ideas and critics engender more critics -- but none of that is building great golf courses. And if/when a dramatically *new kind* of golf course is indeed built, it won't be because of ideas-critics at the Fried Egg or gca.com, but because of one brave and talented architect who *doesn't listen* to the critics!


Good comment Peter. Or most likely you have a developer with deep pockets that wants to change the status quo. We all hope for days where public courses (muni's) get the resources needed for a Memorial Park or NLT type of project. Each course could be the best version of themselves without going Rees Jones, we hope for those days in the future.
"To give anything less than your best, is to sacrifice your gifts."
- Steve Prefontaine

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Critics or Critiques
« Reply #22 on: September 29, 2021, 02:57:04 AM »
Being a good critic and identifying things I did or didn’t like made me a much better designer, whether or not it changed anyone else’s minds about the courses I critiqued.
And I'd suggest that if you *hadn't* gone on to design your own golf courses, and specifically the courses you have, the influence/impact of your critiques -- as insightful as they were -- would've been even *more* limited!

If you were not a designer-creator yourself, you would not have changed almost anyone's mind, and very few distinctly new kinds of golf courses would've been built -- and certainly not enough to have us talking about a renaissance.

I think that might be what Bernstein was trying to say, i.e. that an art-craft moves forward/evolves and continues to make manifest great new works not because of any critics *words* but because of the created *works themselves*.

It is the art-craft *itself* that engenders the masterpieces, not the many opinions *about* the art-craft.

I was a big fan of Roger Ebert too, and am happy to see his statue. But Martin Scorcese and Quinten Tarantino and Francis Coppola made the great films they did not because they were *listening to the critics* of their day but instead because they had *watched the great films* of years gone by.

That's the theory.

PS to Jason and Sean: yes, ideas foster more ideas and critics engender more critics -- but none of that is building great golf courses. And if/when a dramatically *new kind* of golf course is indeed built, it won't be because of ideas-critics at the Fried Egg or gca.com, but because of one brave and talented architect who *doesn't listen* to the critics!

I agree. But I look at the product - critic- success - more product deal as a circle. Making the product is most important, but marketing the product is also important. Yes, I think of critics as a type of pr, but the pr can swing both ways.

Ciao
New plays planned for 2024: Nothing

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +3/-1
Re: Critics or Critiques
« Reply #23 on: September 29, 2021, 03:36:21 AM »

I look at the product - critic- success - more product deal as a circle. Making the product is most important, but marketing the product is also important. Yes, I think of critics as a type of pr, but the pr can swing both ways.



Yes, and that circle (I want to add a word there but this is a family blog) is more about whether the architect is friendly with the critics, than about whether the work is really great or not.  That’s why Rees Jones was successful even if Gib didn’t like his work - and, also, why Gib gives credit to Gil and Tommy and Geoff for transforming golf in SF when they are still yet to build anything.

Niall C

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Critics or Critiques
« Reply #24 on: September 29, 2021, 03:40:27 AM »
If prior to 1930 the critics had outweighed the creators, would there even have been an Old Course left for Behr and Crane to argue about, or for Bobby Jones to embrace as an ideal?

Countless critics and experts since then have praised St Andrews to the heavens without ever once having genuinely tried to 'replicate' it -- and without even once realizing that its very existence calls their very vocations into question.

Peter

TOC became what it is because of critics. If it wasn't for the critics it would still be a 22 hole narrow gorse lined strip of ground.

Niall