[Jim_Kennedy]

"......done for the most influential people of the era at what were to become the leading golf clubs of the day. I don't think there is anyone else of that era whose client list is the equal of his."


I think that's a very good point too if one considers that Macdonald appeared to promote Raynor as he did and if one considers Raynor himself, where he was educated and such. I think Raynor's client list was one that included some of the most impressive people in business or in power in one way or another in that era but I have never believed it was the most impressive list that way of any architect.

TEP,
The first part of what I wrote, and that you failed to include when you were agreeing that Raynor's client list was so impressive, is the reason he was able to  maintain such a high level of work/clients, i.e  Raynor's being described as the "....leading architect in the United States" or  "The World's Most Distinguished Golf-Course Designer" as the title of a later article read, was probably due to the extremely high quality of his work, done for the most influential people of the era at what were to become the leading golf clubs of the day. I don't think there is anyone else of that era whose client list is the equal of his.

I would be interested in seeing one that was more impressive at that time. Can you provide it? 

[TEPaul]

"I would be interested in seeing one that was more impressive. Can you provide it?"


JimK:

Of course, I'd be happy to. This is not from some poll or anything but it has always been my personal opinion that the professional architect whose career long GCA inventory has the most impressive client list of influential and powerful people is William Flynn. I don't think there was an architect of any time who could touch him that way with the obvious and notable exception of C.B. Macdonald!

As for the overall quality of an architect's career inventory I would put Flynn at the top too. I wouldn't necessarily say it was simply the result of greatest talent necessarily even though he sure had it but simply more one of numbers and greater dedication to and time spent on and with every single project he did. He simply never tried to take on all the projects he could've done, apparently choosing to concentrate on quality with all of them rather than raw quantity.

Look at it this way----depending on who you believe, Raynor could've done between 100-250 courses in essentially a 12 year career on his own as a professional architect, while Flynn only did about 55 courses in about a 30-35 year career as a professional architect, and I think it showed simply because of the way he went about it in that vein.    

[Tom MacWood]

I was mistaken, both Greenbrier and St. Louis were prior to 1914. Lido was built more or less simultaneous to North Shore.

I read the the leading architect in America as a misuse of the term architect, what he most likely meant was Raynor was the leading golf course constructor in America.

[TEPaul]

Logically what he most likely meant was exactly what he said and wrote including the term he used for Raynor.   

[Tom MacWood]

TEP
You are right, my mistake, I believe the fellow who made the statement in early 1916 had a time machine which allowed him to see into the future.

[TEPaul]

"TEP
You are right, my mistake, I believe the fellow who made the statement in early 1916 had a time machine which allowed him to see into the future."


Tom MacWood:

Huh?? 

If you're speaking of the same man I am---Henry Calman, the president of North Shore GC at the time who gave the annual meeting remarks that mentioned Seth Raynor was the architect of the NS course, what would he need a time machine for?  He was simply explaining who HAD designed the golf course in 1914/15. If you aren't aware of it yet that would be called their architect or as some of us say, their "architect of record." 

I know it's really hard for you to be publicly proven wrong, Mr. MacWood, but come on----get a grip on yourself---it's not really all that big a deal, don't you know?   

[Jim_Kennedy]

TEP,
I think you glossed over what I wrote, once again, and only used the part of it that suits you.  I wrote: 

Raynor's being described as the "....leading architect in the United States" or  "The World's Most Distinguished Golf-Course Designer" as the title of a later article read, was probably due to the extremely high quality of his work, done for the most influential people of the era at what were to become the leading golf clubs of the day. I don't think there is anyone else of that era whose client list is the equal of his.

I would be interested in seeing one that was more impressive at that time. Can you provide it? 
                                                             ________________________________

Now, I've never said that Flynn wasn't a noteworthy architect and that he shouldn't be considered with the likes of Raynor. What I did say, however, was that at that time no one had a client list like Raynor. I don't know if Flynn's was as impressive as Raynor's by the end of Flynn's career, but I don't think you can show me that it was anywhere near comparable to Raynor's at the time Raynor was being called the leading architect by NSCC, or at the time of the later article, or quite possibly, even at the time of Raynor's death.

[Tom MacWood]

TEP
I'm referring to Calmans' comments that Raynor was the leading architect in America. Its difficult to understand those comments when you consider Raynor had only one or two completed designs/redesigns to his credit at that point. I think one could easily make that case in the 20s when Raynor had dozens of high profile designs to his credit...hence the need for the time machine. I suspect Calman used the term architect interchangeably with builder, or perhaps he was confused and thought Raynor was the architect of NGLA, Piping Rock, Lido, etc.

[TEPaul]

TEP
I'm referring to Calmans' comments that Raynor was the leading architect in America. Its difficult to understand those comments when you consider Raynor had only one or two completed designs/redesigns to his credit at that point. I think one could easily make that case in the 20s when Raynor had dozens of high profile designs to his credit...hence the need for the time machine."


Tom MacWood:

I understand now what you mean completely and on this point I agree with you. But we must understand that Calman did not really need any time-machine to say what he did about Raynor in 1916. He was definitely not the first or the last from that time period, or any time period, to engage in those kinds of exaggerations about a club's architect or the expected quality of a golf course. However, that kind of incredibly common exaggeration on the part of clubs and architects and newspapers and magazines etc of that time does NOT mean that Raynor was NOT North Shore's sole architect, as you seem to keep trying to insinuate and imply on here.  


"I suspect Calman used the term architect interchangeably with builder, or perhaps he was confused and thought Raynor was the architect of NGLA, Piping Rock, Lido, etc."



I know you suspect that. However, I don't agree with your suspicion at all about that as Calman and the club certainly appeared to be pretty specific in what else they said and recorded about the various rolls of the men the club hired to create the North Shore golf course.

[TEPaul]

Jim Kennedy:

If by "at that time" you only mean around 1914-1918 I would certainly agree with you that Raynor very, very likely, or actually undeniably, had the most impressive "client list" of any American architect of that time amongst professional golf architects; and if by an impressive client list you mean projects involving principals of a professional architect who were rich and powerful. I think the reasons WHY Raynor had such an impressive client list of rich and powerful project principals as a professional architect is very obvious and probably doesn't require much discussion or debate. Nevertheless, if you still want to discuss what I think and you think those reasons were, I'd be glad to discuss it with you.

[Tom MacWood]

Tom MacWood:

I understand now what you mean completely and on this point I agree with you. But we must understand that Calman did not really need any time-machine to say what he did about Raynor in 1916. He was definitely not the first or the last from that time period, or any time period, to engage in those kinds of exaggerations about a club's architect or the expected quality of a golf course. However, that kind of incredibly common exaggeration on the part of clubs and architects and newspapers and magazines etc of that time does NOT mean that Raynor was NOT North Shore's sole architect, as you seem to keep trying to insinuate and imply on here. 

TEP
In February 1916 Raynor was probably the leading builder in America and CBM was probably the leading architect. I was trying to give Calman the benefit of the doubt. I see no reason to view anything he said with suspicion like you apparently do...though you seem have some form of selective suspicion.

[TEPaul]

"TEP
In February 1916 Raynor was probably the leading builder in America and CBM was probably the leading architect. I was trying to give Calman the benefit of the doubt. I see no reason to view anything he said with suspicion like you apparently do...though you seem have some form of selective suspicion."


Tom MacWood:

First of all, there in that remark of yours is just another good example of how you contantsly dismiss or distort things said by others on this website. I have no idea at all if you constantly do that on purpose or if you just don't know any better and don't even recognize it.

You said in a post above that you SUSPECT Calman may've gotten mixed up between an architect and a builder. I only replied to you that I do not agree with your SUSPICION on that.

The next thing I know you're trying to imply something negative from me toward Calman or about my use of the word suspicion. In case you aren't aware of it the first definition of SUSPICION is "the act of SUSPECTING" and neither the act of suspecting nor the result of it----ie SUSPICION necessarily needs to infer or imply or indicate something negative or nefarious or accusatory, as you seem to be suggesting above.

Furthermore, perhaps Calman did think that in some ways Raynor also served as an architect with NGLA, Piping Rock and The Lido. Frankly, I've never thought of that before but I might suggest that it is very likely that NONE of us, including you or me or even George Bahto really knows that he DIDN'T!  

How would we----we weren't there on any of those projects between 1908 and maybe 1915!

[Tom MacWood]

TEP
You said he was exaggerating. An exaggeration is a conscious and deliberate distortion, most people usually look at those who consciously and deliberately distort with suspicion...apparently you do not.

[TEPaul]

"TEP
You said he was exaggerating. An exaggeration is a conscious and deliberate distortion, most people usually look at those who consciously and deliberately distort with suspicion...apparently you do not."


Tom MacWood:

Good point; interesting point! I should think about that----eg whether I should suspect every architect and club and particularly magazine and newspaper account of deliberate and conscious exaggeration and distortion when they all (including architects and clubs and newspaper and magazine reporters) said this or that course was going to be about the best in America or this and that architect was the best in America.

Frankly, from reading as much of that stuff from back then as I have over the years I can't remember all that many times when those people back then DIDN'T say something just like that.

Perhaps what you need to do next is read some more of those accounts back then or perhaps read them more carefully and if you get lucky you might begin to see what I mean!  

But again, this isn't about whether or not I suspect Calman of something----it is only about whether or not he and the club actually said it was only Seth Raynor who was the architect and architect of record of North Shore's golf course in 1914/15. And in fact, he said just that about Raynor and not about Robert White. But of course when people like you hear and read something you don't want to hear or read it seems you're automatic reaction is to just assume and imply that they must have been mistaken somehow. How many times have we all seen that response from you on these club's whose history you gratuitously question? Pine Valley, Merion, Myopia and now North Shore.

[Tom MacWood]

"TEP
You said he was exaggerating. An exaggeration is a conscious and deliberate distortion, most people usually look at those who consciously and deliberately distort with suspicion...apparently you do not."


Tom MacWood:

Good point; interesting point! I should think about that----eg whether I should suspect every architect and club and particularly magazine and newspaper account of deliberate and conscious exaggeration and distortion when they all (including architects and clubs and newspaper and magazine reporters) said this or that course was going to be about the best in America or this and that architect was the best in America.

Frankly, from reading as much of that stuff from back then I can't remember all that many times when those people back then DIDN'T say something just like that.

Perhaps what you need to do next is read some more of those accounts back then or perhaps read them more carefully! 

TEP
I've read quite a few old account myself and I would characterize your opinion as a gross exaggeration of the facts.

[TEPaul]

"TEP
I've read quite a few old account myself and I would characterize your opinion as a gross exaggeration of the facts."


Of course you would characterize it that way, Tom MacWood, as that is and has always been your only fallback characterization and response and position to everyone on here about everything they say when it doesn't fit in with your increasingly egregious speculations on the facts of the histories of these clubs.

In about equal measure your responses have been:

1. It's speculation or speculative theory
2. It's exaggeration and hyperbole
3. They must have been mistaken
4. It doesn't make any sense





But as far as the future architectural attribution of North Shore GC that is now in their hands and I believe Steve Shaeffer will be helping them out in that vein with what he found in NY in the New York Historical Society in their old club records. They will make the call now as to who they attribute their course to as the architect of record. From what I know to date if they solely attribute it to Seth Raynor they are doing nothing whatsoever that could be considered to be historically incorrect, at least in the minds of anyone and everyone who thinks logically and without some preconceived agenda about this subject.

[DMoriarty]

I was mistaken, both Greenbrier and St. Louis were prior to 1914. Lido was built more or less simultaneous to North Shore.

I read the the leading architect in America as a misuse of the term architect, what he most likely meant was Raynor was the leading golf course constructor in America.

I am curious bout the the description as well.  CBM says something similar about Raynor in Scotland's Gift, noting that by the time he built the Lido, Raynor had a post graduate degree in golf architecture.   Yet CBM wrote this after listing projects where CBM was in charge of the design.  I wonder if perhaps they are using the term architect to mean something a bit different than we do.  Something more of someone with the skill to plan out every minute detail of how the course must be constructed.   This wasn't what CBM did, but it reportedly was what Raynor did.   So in that sense you could have an architect who wasn't the designer.    The designer could come up with the general plan, but not the specifics, and the architect would come up with the more specific instructions as to how to make the design work.

Melvyn started a thread about some of these issues that is somewhere on the first or second page.

[Steve_ Shaffer]

From Tom MacWood's post on another thread:

"For me the most important information that thread (or 2 threads) uncovered:

1. Raynor was hired to redesign North Shore (making it perhaps his first design/redesign).
2. The original course Glenwood was designed by Devereux Emmet (& George Hubbell)
3. Five the original Glenwood holes were incorporated into the redesign
4. CB Macdonald was a consultant on the NS project
5. Tilly did not list NS as one of his designs/redesigns, and his list of courses in 1925 was apparently a very thorough one"

"Some of the unanswered questions:

1. Were the five holes retained from the original course the prototypical CBM holes that Emmet was also known to use?
2. Was Robert White simply the grow in guy or was he involved as an active collaborator?
3. What was CBM's involvement?
4. Did White continue to tweak the course over the years?
5. Where did the Tilly attribution come from?"

"I would not be surprised if we later learn Tilly was involved at some point, most likely after 1925. There are usually good reasons why a name gets associated with these designs."

Tom,

I have been in communication with the club.  They have been working in house to try and find some documentation to the Tillinghast attribution.  Also, as I previously noted, they have contacted Harmonie Club to find out if Raynor's "diagram" is somewhere in their archives. I have also contacted a gca member who may have access to Donald Zucker, the new owner of NS, to communicate with him my willingness to work with the club on these matters.

Time will tell if the unanswered questions can be answered.. Also, wouldn't it be interesting if Raynor's letter to the Board as referenced in the minutes of February 29, 1916 could be found?

[DMoriarty]

Steve,

I've taken a look at the website for the club and the aerial, and it looks like great fun.   

Is it possible that Tillinghast's involvement occurred when he was touring courses for the pga?     

Do you have any idea of changes, major or minor, that have been made to the course?  Anyone have an original scorecard or old scorecard? 

[George_Bahto]

Emmet built the old course in 1912 not Tillinghast - stay tuned

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEP
I'm referring to Calmans' comments that Raynor was the leading architect in America. Its difficult to understand those comments when you consider Raynor had only one or two completed designs/redesigns to his credit at that point. I think one could easily make that case in the 20s when Raynor had dozens of high profile designs to his credit...hence the need for the time machine. I suspect Calman used the term architect interchangeably with builder, or perhaps he was confused and thought Raynor was the architect of NGLA, Piping Rock, Lido, etc.

Tom MacWood,

I see it a little differently.

I see Raynor being annointed with that title due to his association/lineage/pedigree, his ties to CBM.

CBM, with his social, business and golfing connections and stature was the springboard for Raynor's career BEFORE Raynor's designs stood on their own merits, thus, giving him that title merely seemed like passing the baton in the architectural world and the world as it existed in NYC and LI at the time.

[Tom MacWood]

Pat
I think that is what I was getting at. Calman was confused, he either did not differentiate between who was the builder and who was the architect of CBM's courses or he thought CBM was the construction man and Raynor the architect. Here is Steve's quote:

"He [Calman] said the results are the product of the deep thought of Robert White, our greens expert, Seth Raynor, the leading golf architect in the United States and Charles B. Macdonald, the recognized authority among amateurs on golf course construction and the well considered work of our Greens Committee."

If one takes his words on face value one could easily get the impression Raynor was the leading golf architect and CBM the golf course construction expert.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom MacWood,

Agreed.

[George_Bahto]

North Shore CC:   information surfacing that Seth Raynor was initially contacted and paid by North Shore in Nember 1914 to build their course.

North Shore joins Westhampton, CC of Fairfield and Greenwich as the first courses Seth worked on when he struck out on his own. Work started in 1915

[Steve_ Shaffer]

George,

The minutes of North Shore clearly state that Raynor was hired in Novemember, 1914 for $400 as a consultant. Are you saying that there is contemporaneous evidence of this in newspaper articles such as in the NY Times?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()