[Mark Bourgeois]

Is every writer's secret ambition for their writing to carry influence? (Well, Walker Percy said it was imprisonment, but that's another story!)

Isn't this why some writers cross the street into design? And would any in the business care what Tom Doak wrote in "The Confidential Guide" if they didn't fear the influence of his comments on clients and golfers?

Which brings me to two questions:

1. Was Herbert Wind the most influential golf writer ever? A few examples:

*After he called Oakmont "an ugly old brute" in 1962, the club planted 3,500 trees.

*"Amen Corner" remains in the lexicon of even the casual golf fan - astonishing when you think about it: no, really, think about it. Can you name a commonly-held nickname for a course, hole, or stretch of holes that can be attributed to a writer? ("Impregnable quadralateral" is the only contender that comes immediately to my mind, and I'm not sure anyone outside the hardcore fan knows it. Are "caning the loop" and "horrible horseshoe" vernacular, and even if not do they rise to the prominence of "Amen Corner"?)

*He deserves some credit for popularizing Dornoch.

Please add what have I missed!

2. What are other examples of a writer's *writing* (not a writer making recs in a design capacity or actually designing) influencing the course of action?

I love Darwin, but offhand I can't raise any memory of his writing carrying the influence of "Amen Corner" or tree planting, can you?

When Socrates spoke the people said, "How inspiring," but when Demosthenes spoke the people said, "Let us march!"

Mark

[Phil_the_Author]

Mark, you asked, "Is every writer's secret ambition for their writing to carry influence?"

I can only speak for myself by saying no.

"Influence" implies change even if that change is to aid in keeping something as is. For example, someone may write quite eloquently that a golf course should remain as is rather than being expanded or changed; haven't many a writer done just that recently when observing about recent and proposed future changes at Augusta? Isn't the purpose to "influence" the powers that be to NOT make a change?

This is a specific and purposeful type of writing, something that not all are interested in doing.

I write for myself first and others after. What I mean by that  is in non-fiction I am seeking to learn and get into someone's mind; to understand what motivates and might lay behind their thought processes.  

When I write fiction I view it as a creation, a child, and look to see what it will become as it "grows up" so to speak.

If after doing so and someone else reads it, the I hope they are pleased and moved, but unless it is written for a specific puprose, then I never seek to motivate.

All that to really ask you to consider your own question and ask why you think of "influence" when you think of Herb Wind.

By the way, your illustration of Socrates and Demosthenes speaks to what I am trying to say.

Socrates was inetrested in knowledge for its own sake and the joy of learning on its own. That he argued his point and made many enemies by proving them wrong in theirs was a character flaw. He was seeking truth.

Demosthenes spoke as a leader of men and was purposeful in influencing people to follow him.

Two very different styles.

[Peter Pallotta]

Mark
a neat question. I know just a little Wind and just a little Darwin, but I think I disagree with you.

I think 'influence' can take many forms, and that Wind's influence -- in terms of golf course architecture, if not on writing -- is of a more popular and ephermeral variety. Has anyone ever been inspired to take up gca or to design a magnificent course because Wind coined "Amen Corner"?

(as you know, based on the song by Mezz Mezzrow, a poor clarinettist, by the way, and IMHO not even quirky enough to be interesting, but popular amongst great jazz men because he was a key supplier of, let's say, an embellishment, to late night parties and jam sessions).

I would say that Darwin's influence, on the other hand, is deeper if more subtle. I think that as one of the first non-architects to write about gca, his beautifully-written articles on golf in general and on gca in particular conveyed a message deeper -- and more lasting -- than the words themselves, and that message went something like: "That a grandson of Charles Darwin and writer of such elegance and craft would chose to spend his life and creative talents discussing golf course architeture suggests that this craft, and the pastime of golf it supports, is worthy of attention, and worth the effort to learn about and appreciate its history and enduring principles".

That message never makes the papers, of course, and it's hard to quantify, but I think it has probably led many to a passion for gca, and led some -- through Darwin himself or his descendents -- to become architects themselves.

Just a guess, of course. And by the way, I don't mind Jim Nantz waxing poetic over the same shot of number 12 year after year; I think I enjoy it in fact, a lot. But "Amen Corner" is so pithy a phrase that it means not much at all, or at least doesn't convey any "meaning" much beyond the words themselves. And of course, the trees are gone at Oakmont.  

Peter

[Mark Bourgeois]

Philip, to clarify, I didn't mean to imply Wind wrote to influence; rather, his writing influenced.  I hope I appreciate the (valid) distinction you have made.

Regarding your excellent point on Socrates, and leaving aside the fact that Socrates didn't actually write stuff down (writer's block?), (let's use Plato's account) nevertheless generations of law students can attest to his influence!

Not to make this too personal -- and OT! -- how would you react if people hung on your every word and your writing became highly influential, despite not writing to influence?

Mark

[Mark Bourgeois]

Peter,

Regarding Darwin, doesn't that make his career choice influential, rather than anything he actually wrote?

And to tie the loose ends, you're saying he was "pre-influenced" by the movie(s) "The Jazz Singer"?

Mark

[Peter Pallotta]

Mark,
good question, and I think it makes my point better than I made it myself, i.e. yes, I think the fact THAT Darwin wrote about gca is more important and influential than any of the specifics of WHAT he wrote (thought what and how he wrote certainly helped the cause). In this area of writing, I don't think the distinction applies as it would in, say, the novel form, in which WHAT someone like Faulkner wrote was more important than the simple fact that he decided to write novels.

Oh, and please ignore that jazz aside; unlike Darwin's writing, it actually says LESS than it appears to.

Peter

[Phil_the_Author]

Mark, since you ask, "Not to make this too personal -- and OT! -- how would you react if people hung on your every word and your writing became highly influential, despite not writing to influence?"

I would be very much afraid of anyone who "Hung on to my every word!"  

[Mark Bourgeois]

All that to really ask you to consider your own question and ask why you think of "influence" when you think of Herb Wind.

By the way, your illustration of Socrates and Demosthenes speaks to what I am trying to say.

Socrates was inetrested in knowledge for its own sake and the joy of learning on its own. That he argued his point and made many enemies by proving them wrong in theirs was a character flaw. He was seeking truth.

Demosthenes spoke as a leader of men and was purposeful in influencing people to follow him.

Two very different styles.

Philip,

In the case of Oakmont, I suppose Wind's influence lay in revealing a "truth," at least as felt by the club's president Fred Brand Jr.  The revelation of "truth" led to the action.

In the case of "Amen Corner," I suppose for that phrase to have endured it must have some ring of "truth" to it as well.  Perhaps the phrase reveals the importance of playing that stretch well; it reveals a "truth" in execution akin to the "Golden Ratio."

So Wind's influence may be in his ability to articulate certain "truths" held in common belief, or at least by those with real influence.

At any rate, I liked the neat cause and effect of these examples from his writing and am curious to know what more is out there, from Wind or anyone else.

Mark

[Phil_the_Author]

So what makes Wind's writing influential is that he had a capacity to reveal deeper understandings of the game in a way that moved the reader to want to continue reading, as well as it inspiring memorability; thus "Amen Corner" as a phrase and an eternal truth came into being with a few strokes of the pen.

That one was for my friend Brad!  
 

[Mark Bourgeois]

Philip,

You know, there's something interesting about that "Amen Corner" piece: if I recall, it doesn't appear at the beginning or the end but rather the middle.  This wasn't some narcissistic look-what-I-"discovered" piece. (Wind couldn't write that way anyway.)

My point being that the "Amen Corner" and "ugly brute" truths weren't little "fox truths" but rather big "hedgehog truths" that led people to act on them.

I wonder if Amen Corner might have "evolved" in a different way (especially the 11th) had the term never been coined. Maybe, maybe not.  But reading lately about the Alamo and its impact on history, I can tell you never underestimate the power of mythology, even over "history," "facts," and "truth."

Mark

PS So do you have any examples or not!

[redanman]

I promise that I am not trying to be difficult, but influential to whom?

I found him a source alone among reasonably modern writers to create prose that has no peer.  I always waited for my New Yorker to come .......  What a picture painter.

He influenced me to seek out more of his writings!

Writers influencing by education?

Brad Klein is currently a most influential writer as he sows the Johnny anti-tree seed.  

(and no, JK I am not sucking up.  I just don't. Nancy Reagan had profound influence on me.)

[Andy Hughes]

Would there have been a Wind if Darwin had not come first?

PS redanman, didn't have you pegged as a Journey fan.  

[Tony_Muldoon]

Wind is high in my pantheon of Golf writers and I would certainy like to read more of his stuff on other subjects.

I believe we talk about todays "four majors" because a journalist discussed them in an article about Palmer. HWW again?

[Jason McNamara]

"We took a sudden leap into intemational prominence when world-acclaimed golf writer, Herbert Warren Wind, wrote an article ranking Ballybunion in the world's Top Ten Courses."

http://www.ballybuniongolfclub.ie/history.htm

[Mark Bourgeois]

Tony, wasn't that Bob Drum?

Jason, I have been searching high and low for that article! It's mentioned in Paul Daley's book, "The Sandbelt," sourced to The New Yorker. ("The 10 Greatest Courses in the World and Why They Are Great," or something like that.)

I think Paul got the reference second hand, as I believe it actually appeared in Sports Illustrated.

By chance, has anyone out there seen this article -- I very much would like to read it!

Mark

PS Jason, not a bad example...

[redanman]

PS redanman, didn't have you pegged as a Journey fan.  

Always loved Journey.
Perfect coda to the Sopranos.

p.s.  I got laid a lot to Journey when I lived in Chicago.  Police, too.

[Brad Klein]

Herb Wind also created the myth or saga of RTJ Sr. as the Open Doctor with his New Yorker profile in the summer of 1951. His two-part series on architecture in Nov.-Dec. 1966 Golf Digest did more to spawn an interest in the field than any thing ever written before or since. And also wrote (with Hogan) the best selling instructional book ever published.

Yes, he was unsurpassed in his influence, and certainly not for trying, as he was incredibly modest, disheveled in appearance and unassuming, even embarrased about being recognized. But he semed to have hit the mark with a few trenchant phrases and some incredibly astute analyses when no one else was paying any attention to that stuff. And it helped that he had two major fora for his views, The New Yorker (1947-54/1961-1988 or so), and SI (1954-1960). So he could write, knew the players and the people he was describing, had an unparalleled outlet, had no competition, and didn't worry about TV/radio/cable/Web out-doing him. By comparison, the only writer of any national reputation during his tenure was Dan Jenkins, who was more interested in turning cute phrases and stereotyping than in explaining in detail nuances of the game and where it was going and how it got there.

[John Kavanaugh]

I promise that I am not trying to be difficult, but influential to whom?

I found him a source alone among reasonably modern writers to create prose that has no peer.  I always waited for my New Yorker to come .......  What a picture painter.

He influenced me to seek out more of his writings!

Writers influencing by education?

Brad Klein is currently a most influential writer as he sows the Johnny anti-tree seed.  

(and no, JK I am not sucking up.  I just don't. Nancy Reagan had profound influence on me.)

I've never sniffed a word of Wind...but can say with full confidence that if not for Brad Klein I would have not dropped writing poetry and taken up this attempt at making the golf community a better place to be.  Foolish, perhaps...but far less selfish than the role of a poet.  Thank you Brad.

[BCrosby]

Good post Brad. I agree.

Wasn't Wind also one of writers for The World Atlas of Golf? A pivotal book for many of us.

Wind was also the editor of a number of Sports Illustrated books on golf instruction that were very good. There was a set of four, as I recall, that covered various aspects of the game.

Darwin is HWW's only rival, but HWW was more influencial. Darwin's stuff is much more meditative. More an internal dialogue between between himself and the game. As good as it is, it never found much of an American audience.

Bob
 

[KBanks]

In addition to writing about courses, Wind also helped launch Shell's Wonderful World of Golf, thereby raising public awareness of some of the great venues.

Consider the variety of the game's great awards conferred upon HWW: portrait in Golf House, portrait in the press room at ANGC, USGA Bob Jones award, ASGCA Donald Ross award, among others. I believe he is the only writer to have received the latter two honors.

He and Darwin were peerless, not only as writers, but as bards of the game.

Ken

[Jason McNamara]

Jason, I have been searching high and low for that article! It's mentioned in Paul Daley's book, "The Sandbelt," sourced to The New Yorker. ("The 10 Greatest Courses in the World and Why They Are Great," or something like that.)

By chance, has anyone out there seen this article -- I very much would like to read it!

Mark

PS Jason, not a bad example...

Thanks - sorry I don't have a copy of it.  But I remembered that it was Wind that led to Watson at BB, etc., and sure enough they give credit where due.

[Tony_Muldoon]

For Bob Crosby

[Tom_Doak]

The most influential paragraph in Wind's writing -- for me personally -- was in the foreword to Bill Davis / GOLF DIGEST's 1973 book on great golf courses (with Oakmont on the cover I think), where Wind proclaimed that if he could come back and start over again he would be a golf course architect.  He mused about the appeal of visiting interesting places and meeting interesting people and making interesting sums of money.  He was right on all counts!  

Getting back to the general subject, though, I think his biggest influence was getting people hooked on the history of golf and past championships on the same golf course -- painting the big picture and drawing you into the subject of architecture.

He didn't write nearly as much on the architectural merits of particular courses, at least that I have seen, although his piece for GOLF DIGEST on why Cypress Point and Seminole and Merion were his favorites was excellent.

[BCrosby]

Tony -

I've never seen that book. Is it a bio of Wodehouse or a collection of his stories?

BTW, there was a recent piece published (I forget where) about Wodehouse's controversial radio broadcasts from inside Deutschland during WWII. Very interesting. The author concludes, correctly I think, that Wodehouse was unfairly treated by England after the war. It was something he never forgot or forgave, and thus finished out his days on Long Island.

Sean -

Yes, Darwin was the go to guy on golf in the UK during his day. Yes, his tournie reportage was an important part of that. But so much of that was daily sports coverage type stuff that doesn't age very well. At least for me. It can be like rereading an account of the 1927 World Series. I don't have much of a connection with the players 80 years on.

That tournie reporting is the kind of writing that tends not to be included in anthologies, which is how I know about Darwin. I'd bet that's pretty typical for an American reader.  

The pieces collected in his anthologies tend not to be those that are time and place sensitive. They tend to be his more philosophical and meditative stuff. Unfortunately, there's never been a big audience for that kind of golf writing in the US. Thus his limited influence here.

HWW's real influence was not so much his coverage of tournaments or players, but his introduction of golf design as a separate subject deserving of attention. For those that were paying attention, HWW made the case in the 50's and 60's (when no one else was talking about it) that golf architecture matters.

Bob  

[Rich Goodale]

Darwin is HWW's only rival, but HWW was more influencial. Darwin's stuff is much more meditative. More an internal dialogue between between himself and the game. As good as it is, it never found much of an American audience.
Bob
 

I don't know who was more influential, but I can say that Darwin didn't just write meditative pieces.  He reported on golf and was THE go to man in England for tournament reports for many a year.  I don't think Darwin is getting quite the accolades he deserves for this sort of grind work.  To be honest, Darwin could do any sort of piece concerning golf.  From a British perspective, Darwin knew everybody and their brother in the business, he was around for the passing of British dominance in the game to American dominance and so had a very good understanding of tournament golf in both countries, he was fairly successful in the business of tournament golf, he could turn a phrase with the best of them and the man was intelligent.  

I always think of Wind  as carrying the torch that Darwin lit.  The one aspect of Wind that I really admire was his paying attention to architecture.  I always thought that this was a weak area for Darwin.  This may sound strange given the fame of his British Golf ...., but that book never really gets into a lot of nitty gritty about why holes work - if you know what I mean.

Ciao  

Sean

That last paragraph (particularly the last phrase) makes a very important point.  I believe strongly that "Why holes work" (or don't work) is the essence of of golf course architrecture.  You are right that Darwin wasn't particularly good at that, but I think you are wrong to think that Wind was better.  I just took a look at some of his stuff from "Following Through" and all I can see about architecture is a little bit of second hand information (some of it very wrong, some of it very non-GCA.com PC) and some nicely crafted prose.  Very little in terms of original observations or learned insights as to "Why holes work."  IMHO, Wind was a very good journalistic reporter, but not a particularly expressive observer.  Darwin was both.

Rich

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()