Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture => Topic started by: Tony_Muldoon on December 07, 2008, 11:39:51 AM
-
I know brilliant writers. I went to school with a few, I've worked with a few, I'm friends with a few and I regularly read the rest that are out there in the world. There are none in golf, except maybe Dan Jenkins when he's on. It's hard to do with a topic that simply isn't that intellectually challenging.
Stoln from another thread.
Compared to what I've read about other subjects, golf literature is second rate. There’s only one golf book I can imagine wanting to keep when I can no longer play and lose interest. (Dickenson)
Have you ever told someone who doesn't get golf they must read book "A" because it will clue them into something special? We love Darwin etc because we're golf junkies, not because he has great things to tell us.
To me what's interesting is how golf operates in both the physical and the intellect at the same time. Hence we can be fascinated, while accepting that we can never know (master?) golf in its entirety. I'm now going to contradict Dave and ask why there isn't more great golf writers/writing?
-
Tony,
If we really, really look into it. Golf rarely has the kind of "character" that makes for a good story. Sure, Tillinghast had his problems, but he was still a man of means - and if anything - his character was one of waster opportunities elsewhere than one of triumph or the rise of the every man.
It's difficult to write about people or ideas that are bred out of the lack of something better to do. The idea is for a good writer to find someone who has a real legitimate passion for the game or a certain aspect of the game, and frankly, those people are sorely lacking.
I have a story concept, but little to no characters to drive it yet.
-
Quite an extraordinary thing to say. There are plenty of fine, even outstanding golf writers whose work transcends the ordinary. I'd argue that was the case with Wind, and that I found the early work of Feinstein really dug into the subjects and the material. Michael Bamberger is a writer who offers insights, and I think James Dodson, both in his first person material (The Dewsweepers, Final Rounds) and his biography of Hogan demonstrated his ability to tell a compelling story.
I'd also argue that the two golf books by Mark Frost are exceptional, though not necessarily for their historical fact. More for their readability and ability to link a variety of story lines.
To say, however, that golf writing, "isn't that good," is surely speaking in hyperbole.
-
I think our opinions on this are quite a ways apart. However, I'd argue that Frost's books have crossed over outside of the golf market, which makes them a significant success for a sport that has a lot of navel-gazing.
Out of interest, what would you characterize as a truly "good" book? Perhaps throw out a sports book and a work of fiction. At least then I'd have a sense of where you're coming from.
I'd suggest, for example, that Friday Night Lights is the best sports book ever written.
-
Maybe Barney can write a scathing, gonzo expose of online architectural discussion groups?
I'd buy it, even if it didn't reach Hunter Thompson-like levels of.notoriety and intrigue. ;)
-
Have you ever told someone who doesn't get golf they must read book "A" because it will clue them into something special? We love Darwin etc because we're golf junkies, not because he has great things to tell us.
I guess I'm weird. I don't think I've ever told anyone they must read ANY book because it will clue them into something special. I certainly wouldn't use a book to explain golf to someone who doesn't get golf. I think you only get golf by actually playing golf.
When you get right down to it, you only get out of something what you put into it. There's plenty of folks who could use a good read of Basic Economics by Thomas Sowell, but the only way they're getting anything out of it is if they actually think about what he writes. Most won't, most prefer to continue to believe their own beliefs.
It's the same reason that Huck Finn gets banned. Many see only the N word, not the literature.
I've found reason to enjoy the writing of many golf writers. I guess if you're looking for Joyce, you may go unfulfilled. I say may because I don't really get Joyce. Does that make me stupid? Maybe. Or maybe I'm just not willing to put in the effort to really think about what he wrote, understand and appreciate him.
-
Maybe Barney can write a scathing, gonzo expose of online architectural discussion groups?
I'd buy it, even if it didn't reach Hunter Thompson-like levels of.notoriety and intrigue. ;)
Barney is merely the online persona of the real John Kavanaugh.
As was stated last night: Kavanaugh online is merely his Kilgore Trout.
The whole problem is that John never got to the point where he had to insert his own form of Deus Ex:
"This isn't a very good book you're writing," I said.
"I know," I said.
"You're afraid of killing yourself like your mother," I told myself.
"I know," I said.
-
Wind is as unreadable as Faulkner and the Frost books are wonderful in lieu of dangerously addictive sleeping pills.
Maybe that's hyperbole; maybe it isn't ... but didn't you say something recently about defending the indefensible?
Gotcha ;)
-
Even with the few replies in thus far, I'd have to say taste in the written word is right up there with taste in food and taste in music for subjectivity.
-
Peripheral to the subject of golf but one of the most interesting reads connecting to the game, is Henry Longhurst's "My Life and Soft Times."
Like an old friend, it can be called upon years from its first reading to cherish and entertain.
Bob
-
I've always enjoyed Feinstein, Jenkins, and Updike writings on golf and they write to a broader audience beyond the golf junkie.
-
I have to say that comparing golf writing to "literature" is hardly fair. Compared to the writing about other sports, it stands up very well, if you ask me.
It was Plimpton who said that the quality of writing about a sport was inversely proportional to the size of the ball.
Now, I may be crass, but I prefer the penultimate chapter of Dogged Victims.
K
-
I have to say that comparing golf writing to "literature" is hardly fair. Compared to the writing about other sports, it stands up very well, if you ask me.
It was Plimpton who said that the quality of writing about a sport was inversely proportional to the size of the ball.
Now, I may be crass, but I prefer the penultimate chapter of Dogged Victims.
K
There must be some fantastic Marbles writing then... ;D
-
To say golf has a literature is not to say golf writing is literature. The quality of any such literature is more to do with the writers and not the sport; however, in the U.S. only baseball in quantity and boxing in quality can compete with golf as a sport for its attraction to top-flight writers.
Grantland Rice, Rick Reilly, Herbert Warren Wind, Tom Boswell, Leigh Montville, Frank Deford (a non-golfer whose 1998 diatribe against golf is a personal favorite -- we take what we can get from the greatest sportwriter who ever lived, or lives), these are but a few. You will know of more.
Furthermore, it's important to remember that so much of the writing is done on deadline, and this includes even Wind, although the old New Yorker "deadlines" give the lie to the term.
As far as writings I think non-golfers would enjoy -- for I enjoyed many of these before I became a golfer -- a short list:
Rick Reilly's game stories on the 1986 Masters and on the 1995 Open Championship, written on deadline, have held up very well, as have Tom Boswell's pieces on the mental and physical architecture of ANGC -- held up as an evocation of a lost architecture, that is.
As far as essays, those published by John Updike (who wrote the best sports essay in U.S. history), David Owen (especially the first essay in "My Usual Game"), and George Peper. All share the sublime and too-rare character of self-effacing humor.
George Plimpton did as well on golf, which is to say very good, as he did on other sports. Impossible not to hear "Japanese admirals" and not smile. I confess to hot-soaking my hands before a big match, too! In the category of participative journalism, John Paul Newport's entry is another funny read.
Dan Jenkins deserves to be called the father of deadline golf writing -- and his novels will confuse no one with literature, least of all him, yet they are equal in quality to, say, the works of top-tier crime fiction writers. (Let's remember that like the best sportswriters, he was drawn to golf but not only to golf -- "Semi-Tough" to offer the best example.)
And speaking of novelists, let's not forget Wodehouse, who still finds an audience of non-golfers.
There's a ton of dross out there, but that's true of everything, not just writing.
Mark
-
I think our opinions on this are quite a ways apart. However, I'd argue that Frost's books have crossed over outside of the golf market, which makes them a significant success for a sport that has a lot of navel-gazing.
Out of interest, what would you characterize as a truly "good" book? Perhaps throw out a sports book and a work of fiction. At least then I'd have a sense of where you're coming from.
I'd suggest, for example, that Friday Night Lights is the best sports book ever written.
FNL is strong, so was A Season on The Brink and The Game.
I really enjoyed A Good Walk Spoiled, but every Feinstein golf book since then has been less compelling.
I am less and less impressed by most of the offerings in GD and GM. Perhaps there isn't much demand for good writing in the mainstream...
-
Kelly - that was good post, thank you.
Peter
-
Kelly -- a thoughtful response. I recognize the book angered many.
Much of what you mentioned was addressed in the epilogue of the paperback edition of the book. You were a local? I can understand why locals didn't like the book -- it cast them in a less than flattering light.
It did, however, win the Pulitzer Prize, and last I looked, there isn't a higher award for a book, let alone a sports book.
I thought the book did much more than simply criticize the football team -- it talked about the political reality of high school football in Texas and how the sport became far more important than education within the school in question. Hard to say he exaggerated too much when the book opens with a high school football team flying by chartered jet to play in the Astrodome.
I think our opinions on this are quite a ways apart. However, I'd argue that Frost's books have crossed over outside of the golf market, which makes them a significant success for a sport that has a lot of navel-gazing.
Out of interest, what would you characterize as a truly "good" book? Perhaps throw out a sports book and a work of fiction. At least then I'd have a sense of where you're coming from.
I'd suggest, for example, that Friday Night Lights is the best sports book ever written.
There're a few people in Odessa who would disagree. Word from there is that Bissinger misrepresented the type of book he would write, and this didn't sit well with some there he consulted. I read it a long time ago then threw it away so I forget some of the detail, but do remember him making the pepette squad at Permian sound like some sort of slave trade for football players. It wasn't that way when I was there, I doubt that many girls would subject themselves to such abuses he seemed to insinuate. Bissinger came off as some sort of northeast intellectual that wanted to find a story of abuses that really didn't exist and he found the perfect spot where people are open and honest and pretty simple folk. I think he took advantage of them, wrote the story he had already written before he got there, and basically made the town look really bad. Permian football suffered for many years after that and only recently has begun to recover. Bissinger tried to destroy a way of life for many of us...yes there are some abuses, crazy parents, but I see that type of behaviour with my own eyes and with all sports. Some people just don't understand the meaning of playing sports for fun. They think it means fun in the sense of entertainment, when actually fun is derived from hard work, self sacrifice and winning. We lived and died with Friday night Permian football and we lived a great life doing it...not the life some northeast intellectual thought was a worthy life, but there are a heck of a lot more hardworking, honest people out there than Bissinger could ever hope to emulate. You didn't see the west Texas oil industry looking for bail outs when it collapsed in the 80's and I think that says a lot about the type of people out there. I don't think a book conceived by dishonest means is considered great.
-
John Feinstein's recent books rival the Merion threads for predictability.
-
Hmmm.
A corner of my Library is full of the stuff. What was I thinking?
Upon gentle reflection I'd say that the genre has produced some excellent essayists. And that's about the best we can ask of Sportwriters. I don't see that comment as being in any way damning. If you don't enjoy Darwin's 'The Group Ahead' or Dobereiner's collections 'Well I'll be deemed' and 'Golf A La Cart' then, there is nothing here for you. It's light fodder, but deftly constructed and frankly I think there is a place for it. Shack's tone on his blog is the closest we have to this type of thing today.
And while he may not be a great writer, Bobby Jones could put words together pretty nicely and his insight into his own sport was valuable for some time after his retirement.
What I don't understand is why anyone would want to read a novel to help them realise that golf has a substantial Zen factor. Duh.
-
Tony,
I think there's a bunch of good 'golf' writing and it can be found in some of the collections of short stories. Along with Dickinson you can find tales by Ring Lardner, F. Scott fitzgerald, P.G.Wodehouse, John Updike, Ethan Canin, Walker Percy, etc.,etc.,etc..
One of my favorites is Lardner's "A Caddies Diary".
An excerpt, as it was written:
"But first will put down how I come to be writeing this diary, we have got a member named Mr Colby who writes articles in the newspapers and I hope for his sakes that he is a better writer then he plays golf but any way I caddied for him a good many times last yr and today he was out for the first time this yr and I caddied for him and we got talking about this in that and something was mentioned in regard to the golf articles by Alex Laird that comes out every Sun in the paper Mr Colby writes his articles for so I asked Mr Colby did he know how much Laird got paid for the articles and he said he did not know but supposed Laird had to split 50-50 with who ever wrote the articles for him. So I said he don't write the articles himself and Mr Colby said why no he guessed not. Laird may be a mastermind in regards to golf he said, but this is no sign he can write about it as very few men can write decent let alone a pro, Writeing is a nag".
-
Kelly -- a thoughtful response. I recognize the book angered many.
Much of what you mentioned was addressed in the epilogue of the paperback edition of the book. You were a local? I can understand why locals didn't like the book -- it cast them in a less than flattering light.
It did, however, win the Pulitzer Prize, and last I looked, there isn't a higher award for a book, let alone a sports book.
I thought the book did much more than simply criticize the football team -- it talked about the political reality of high school football in Texas and how the sport became far more important than education within the school in question. Hard to say he exaggerated too much when the book opens with a high school football team flying by chartered jet to play in the Astrodome.
I think our opinions on this are quite a ways apart. However, I'd argue that Frost's books have crossed over outside of the golf market, which makes them a significant success for a sport that has a lot of navel-gazing.
Out of interest, what would you characterize as a truly "good" book? Perhaps throw out a sports book and a work of fiction. At least then I'd have a sense of where you're coming from.
I'd suggest, for example, that Friday Night Lights is the best sports book ever written.
There're a few people in Odessa who would disagree. Word from there is that Bissinger misrepresented the type of book he would write, and this didn't sit well with some there he consulted. I read it a long time ago then threw it away so I forget some of the detail, but do remember him making the pepette squad at Permian sound like some sort of slave trade for football players. It wasn't that way when I was there, I doubt that many girls would subject themselves to such abuses he seemed to insinuate. Bissinger came off as some sort of northeast intellectual that wanted to find a story of abuses that really didn't exist and he found the perfect spot where people are open and honest and pretty simple folk. I think he took advantage of them, wrote the story he had already written before he got there, and basically made the town look really bad. Permian football suffered for many years after that and only recently has begun to recover. Bissinger tried to destroy a way of life for many of us...yes there are some abuses, crazy parents, but I see that type of behaviour with my own eyes and with all sports. Some people just don't understand the meaning of playing sports for fun. They think it means fun in the sense of entertainment, when actually fun is derived from hard work, self sacrifice and winning. We lived and died with Friday night Permian football and we lived a great life doing it...not the life some northeast intellectual thought was a worthy life, but there are a heck of a lot more hardworking, honest people out there than Bissinger could ever hope to emulate. You didn't see the west Texas oil industry looking for bail outs when it collapsed in the 80's and I think that says a lot about the type of people out there. I don't think a book conceived by dishonest means is considered great.
What political reality? Whose reality? Football more important than education...there are a lot of very bright people who did not get along in the educational system, but who had interests that drove them, they were much more interested in other things than the education system they were in and did okay for themselves late. If you mean the administration thought football was more important I don't see how you can administer a school district based upon football, you can't do it, further the kids have to meet state requirements to play each week, sure there may be abuses, individual cases, but he made it seem like it was a systematic problem...not true...There are a lot of us that went through that system and we received a pretty decent education I think.
Houston is probably a 10 to 11 hour drive by car, probably much longer by bus...it makes sense to fly for a 2.5 hour game. I suspect some boosters helped pay for it too, just like boosters just paid for their new indoor practice facility which the golf team gets to use as well.
I thought that the books was as much about education and football as it was about Bissinger's view of Western Texas, the up and down oil market of the time, and some general views on the economy, poverty and society. The story at the end about the legal battle over the grades for the player to be eligible, and whether a missed assignment was a 0 or F, and how it all got tangled into the legal system is an indictment not just of Texas football but of how sports have gotten out of hand at the high school level. Most of the stories could be true of most states, including basketball and football here in Indiana.
-
Tony, I think you might appreciate this -
Woody Allen wrote a line for a movie that went: "The difference between love and sex is that love causes tension and sex alleviates it".
When a critic told him he thought it was good line, Allen said: "No, it isn't - it's a pithy line. I could've written the exact opposite - 'The difference between sex and love is that sex causes tension and love alleviates it' - and it wouldn't have made any difference."
Which is to say, most writing (golf writing included) I read seems to me pithy -- at best. It isn't true or false - it isn't anything. It's rhetoric. That's why I thought this line from Kelly particularly good..
"We lived and died with Friday night Permian football and we lived a great life doing it...not the life some northeast intellectual thought was a worthy life, but there are a heck of a lot more hardworking, honest people out there than Bissinger could ever hope to emulate."
...Because he meant it.
Peter
PS - Jim K - good call on Ring Lardner. He really knew how to string together an entertaining sports story. I think his son wrote M.A.S.H.
-
I have to say that comparing golf writing to "literature" is hardly fair. Compared to the writing about other sports, it stands up very well, if you ask me.
It was Plimpton who said that the quality of writing about a sport was inversely proportional to the size of the ball.
Now, I may be crass, but I prefer the penultimate chapter of Dogged Victims.
K
There must be some fantastic Marbles writing then... ;D
...not to mention weightlifting!
-
In fiction, I could read Wodehouse or Jenkins all day, and sometimes have.
In non-fiction, you can go right down the line and find great writing that was meant for its time and has stood up for all time: Hutchinson, Darwin, Rice, Wind, Jenkins, Verdi to name the internationally known. And there are many known in their cities as sages.
As for "Friday Night Lights," now I have to read it. Kelly's defense makes me think Bissinger, whatever his motives, was describing those hangers-on at high school events who live through the lives of their town's children, caring for the result on the scoreboard rather than the development of the young people playing the game. I see them often in my work.
-
Wodehouse's "Oldest Member" is still alive. I know, I met him a few months back. He still has a lot to say but he says the core values of golf have disappeared with a changing culture.
-
Wodehouse's "Oldest Member" is still alive. I know, I met him a few months back. He still has a lot to say but he says the core values of golf have disappeared with a changing culture.
Slag,
Seems everyman's prerogative to say culture is falling apart as they get old.
-
Disagree. I say in the grand scheme of things, culture moves forward positively.
"Culture regresses at a rate by 50 percent every 18 months."
Funny anyway.
-
In my opinion, the reason that most golf writing is pedestrian at best is because it is the product of reporters.
Sports, unlike all other avenues of literary genre's, has been most defined by the score of a player in an event rather than the stories that the games inspire. No where is this as evident as it is with golf.
Golf has also become defined by those who play the game for money and how they do week in and week out. Because of this, those who report on the results of these are considered the experts and most capable of writing what should be the literature of the game. Yet it is because they think as reporters first that any chance to create literature from this most wonderful of pasttimes becomes nearly impossible.
I have seen but a single review of a golf book where the reviewer encouraged those who would read the book to do so "slowly and to savor every word." It was written by the only major golf writer that i know who isn't/wasn't a reporter...
-
TonyM:
It's probably better and more indicative to quote everything in that post from another thread that you said in the first post of this thread was stolen from another thread. It was from Dave Schmidt to Tom Huckaby;
"I don't see it, Tom. And I still want to know what JK would see in that picture!
If what you said was true, somebody would have noted something original by now. Nobody has. Nobody will. We're just not that good.
Brilliant thought is a prerequisite to brilliant writing. The latter cannot exist without the former.
I know brilliant writers. I went to school with a few, I've worked with a few, I'm friends with a few and I regularly read the rest that are out there in the world. There are none in golf, except maybe Dan Jenkins when he's on. It's hard to do with a topic that simply isn't that intellectually challenging."
Tony, personally, I don't buy much of what Dave Schmidt says on here. For that reason I guess I don't buy that much of what he thinks about golf and golf architecture and it occurs to me he probably feels the same about me and what I say and think on here. That also includes what he apparently thinks about the Rules of Golf (because that happens to be the subject we've mostly discussed with one another and mostly off line). And now it probably includes what he says about golf writers or golf writing.
But when I say all that I sure don't mean to be rude or in any way denigrating and I sure don't mean to insult him personally or what he says generally. I don't intend any of this that way and I hope he doesn't take it that way.
But then what does it mean? What do I mean?
I believe, and have for years, that there is just something practically ineffable about golf and apparently golf architecture too, and in a way and a depth I'm not aware exists in most other sports or games. David Schmidt may not look at it that way and probably doesn't. I don't pretend to know why it is so in golf but I believe it is. I do recognize, though, that it is golf above all other games that I know best. I just don't know that much about other games and sports even though I've tried them and played them, but I guess never in the way and in the depth I have with golf and perhaps now golf architecture. If I had with other games and sports perhaps I'd feel about them and their playing fields the way I do with golf----but some nagging little jot always tells me I never really would with the others. ;)
Also I believe that there is some undercurrent phenomenon to do with golf and golf architecture that far more than other games and sports makes so many who play golf take it remarkably personally, perhaps internalize it somehow and filter out their opinions about it and all things to do with it as if they are the only ones who are right in their opinions and consequently most all others who don't completely agree with them are wrong.
What is it that makes so many golfers do that and think that way compared to other sports and games? I don't know, I probably never will but I have little doubt it is both true and one of the eternal fascinations about the entire thing. Unfortunately, that very thing may tend to make some of us or even most of us on here act both a little and perhaps sometimes a lot intellectually arrogant sometimes. :)
I'm not saying what David Schmidt thinks about golf writing is wrong. If he feels there's not any really good golf writing and that works for him that's fine. It doesn't work for me and I'm pretty sure his opinion may not work for numerous others as well. Matter of fact I know it, I've seen them, I know them and I've talked to them and I'm talking about both the readers and some writers.
But my ultimate point is if he feels that way it in no-wise means he's more intelligent or better informed about any of it, including writing, than anyone else because I think more than most other games or sports anyone gets out of it what they bring to it, and that really is unique, personal and can be vastly different from one to another.
Intellectual arrogance on here seems to me to be something that has created some unexpected and unwanted dynamics, arguments, personal problems between some etc.
In that vein, I would give you again one of the coolest and most contemplative thoughts and adages I've ever heard on golf and architecture. Unfortunately I'm giving it to you for about the thirteenth time, but so what, if it's good, repeat it, even many times. ;)
Bill Coore said: "Always try to know what you don't know."
I thought about that for a long time (some years) and then I asked him: "But Bill, how can you know what you don't know?"
He just chuckled and said: "That's true, I just mean we always need to remember none of us know it all and none of us probably ever will."
I suspect golf has some real mysteries for the basic reasons of its unique differences from other games and sports that are both deep and enduring and it holds them close not letting them go easily and I think that's very cool. But I also feel maybe I've gotten somewhat anthropomorphic in my attitude towards golf and architecture by extension so maybe it's real mysteries isn't just golf or even in it, maybe they're in me and in you too.
Isn't it true to say that when one looks in the mirror they don't usually see what others see? Maybe they don't want to see what they see and maybe they do, but in my opinion, all of that is definitely not unimportant!
Same probably goes for what someone, anyone gets from a writer and a book.
;)
-
"For all the American positives, from democracy to the automobile to sending a man to the moon, we have been the single most destructive force worldwide to the notion of culture. I'm not sure whether it started with the free press, mobility and the automobile or the first retirement home, but somewhere along the line, we killed the family in the name of "progress", and that started the death knell tolling on culture. "
David:
I guess that would depend on how anyone views the subject of culture. If one is into change and the dynamics and benefits of change, the American culture is often viewed as not just a good thing but a remarkably good thing. I will admit there is surely a real duality built into that. Looking back, I realize how often I've been to particularly western Europe and how many over there I've gotten to know really well. In many ways most of the Western European nations and their peoples admire their own cultures that hold tightly to various traditions and traditional practices but within that always seems to be the duality of real frustrations with lack of change that would include various opportunities. It always seemed to me those peoples looked longingly at the USA (even if sometimes I had to keep them up drinking into the middle of the night before they would actually admit that) with their extreme willingness and propensity to promote change---sometimes even for the sake of change itself.
-
" It's also why that theory I floated this morning is completely backwards."
Mr. Schmidt:
Yes, I agree and I thought it was backwards too but at the time I wasn't sure whether it was backwards or whether it was you who's backwards. ;)
You seem to believe that Edison went through a million theories and trials and errors on his way to inventing the light-bulb. Do you think it's possible that he started out trying to invent "darkness" in the light of day?
Today you are touting John Kavanaugh as some brilliant mind and provoker of thought but perhaps tomorrow you might realize he is almost precisely the opposite of that----eg a mishmash of words and free associations that seem interesting at first but on analysis mean little. On the other hand, perhaps today I think he's the latter but by tomorrow I will think he's some brilliant mind and provoker of thought. I won't count on that possiblilty, however, because between now and then I don't believe I plan on speaking with him or reading anything he has to say. ;)
-
Tom Chiarella's Thurday's Game (from a professional writer)
A.B. Hollingsworth's Flatbellies (from an amateur writer)
Turk Pipkin's Fast Greens (from someone in between)
-
"I don't think somebody can really understand light until he understands darkness."
Hmmm, Wow, really deep, Kimmosabe! ;)
Which came first, civilization or the wilderness?
(warning, there's a semi-trick question on deck!)
-
John, the oldest member didn't say culture was falling apart, but that it was changing. Maybe he meant that the focus on the values of liesurely activities has shifted and that searches for deeper meanings are unsought, perhaps in lieu of the instant gratification of card and pencil scores, perhaps in the realm of the seven deadly sins, I don't know.
I'll ask him next time I see him.
-
Tom and Dave
Both of you should know that Edison didn't invent the light bulb. He just had a better lawyer than real inventor, Swan.
J-P P
http://www.coolquiz.com/trivia/explain/docs/edison.asp
-
I’m surprised noone has mentioned Michael Murphy’s novel up to now, considering some of the discussion group pseudonyms were taken from the book - or was Lloyd Coles’s reference to “Zen” indirectly disqualifying it from the discussion? There was a thread on GITK about a year ago - not many gave it much credence but some raved about it.
http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,31770.70.html
-
I wonder if combing a few elements of this thread is bad idea.....
The Edison Museum, not open to the public
Its haunted towers rise into the clouds above it
Folks drive in from out of town to gaze in amazement when they see it
Just outside the gate, I look into the courtyard
Underneath the gathering thunderstorm
Through the iron bars, I see the Black Mariah
Revolving slowly on its platform
In the topmost tower, a light burns dim
A coiling filament glowing within
The Edison Museum, once a bustling factory,
Today's but a darkened cobweb-covered hive of industry
The tallest, widest, and most famous
Haunted mansion in New Jersey
Behind a wooden door, the voice of Thomas Alva
Recites a poem on a phonograph
Ghosts float up the stair
Like silent moving pictures
The loyal phantoms of his in-house staff
A wondrous place it is, there can be no doubt
But no one ever goes in
And no one ever goes out
So when your children quarrel, and nothing seems to quell them
Just tell them that you'll take them to the Edison Museum
The largest independently owned and operated
Mausoleum
(Lyrics by They Might be Giants)
-
I believe, and have for years, that there is just something practically ineffable about golf and apparently golf architecture too, and in a way and a depth I'm not aware exists in most other sports or games. David Schmidt may not look at it that way and probably doesn't.
Well, it's too bad you think that, Tom, because I happen to agree with you. I think there is something absolutely etherial about golf and architecture. I think there's real mystery and beauty there.
My point is merely that the guys who write about this beautiful, mysterious and etherial game do a rather pedestrian job at it.
It deserves better. "Tiger then rolled in a five-footer for birdie and a two-shot lead" simply doesn't do the game justice in the context in which you and I think of it.
That's also why I thought Barney's exoticness topic was so interesting. It's also why that theory I floated this morning is completely backwards. There's nothing more exotic, unique and eternal than the risks presented by nature. But we'll get to that...
Not all writing ultimately get expressed in the format of words... and here all along I thought you took Caddyshack as a work of genius.
-
Memo to self: do the dumb things I gotta do today. Touch the puppet head.
-
Isn't there a significant difference between a columnist and someone doing a game story? I can think of a number of golf journalists I enjoy reading for their insight -- though it is very difficult to make a tournament wrap intriguing to anyone, especially those who saw the tournament.
I thought your point was that longform writing on golf wasn't any good. Now, apparently, the sport has no writing that meets your personal criteria. That's too bad for you, I suppose. I haven't seen your opinion backed up by many here.
I can think of plenty of worthwhile columnists -- Geoff Shackelford is surely one who offers a perspective worth reading, at least in book form.
Oh, and yes, John Kavanagh is a giant in the written word. Now it is too bad that he often communicated like insane philosopher -- one that couldn't write clearly -- and that you had to search anything he wrote for a nugget of insight. Or maybe that's just how I saw it. However, to actually debate John Kavanagh in the same posting as Herbert Warren Wind, Michael Bamberger, John Feinstein and others who have actually contributed to the sport really demeans the later.
And if you're looking for an intellectual's take on golf -- I'd throw Lorne Rubenstein into the mix. Lorne really does think a lot about what he writes, even if I don't agree with some of it.
Tom, I don't quite follow you and I don't pretend to be a terribly deep thinker. What I do know is Barney gets people thinking, and that without thought, you get garbage like "Tiger then rolled in a five footer for birdie and a two-shot lead, all but locking up his XXth major champoinship."
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
If there's more to this realtively simply point that I haven't thought of yet, well, that's no surprise to me, but it doesn't make the point wrong.
-
I’m surprised noone has mentioned Michael Murphy’s novel up to now, considering some of the discussion group pseudonyms were taken from the book - or was Lloyd Coles’s reference to “Zen” indirectly disqualifying it from the discussion? There was a thread on GITK about a year ago - not many gave it much credence but some raved about it.
http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,31770.70.html
Shivas Irons is a good story, but Murphy then was not a great writer. He is many things, but the first novel gets too bogged down at the end, changing from fictional tale to thesis. The conclusion has more interesting characters and locales, but ends up chasing one single kite: that Shivas is or is not, does or does not. Are they must reads? Certainly. Are they "that good"? I don't think so.
-
In fiction, I could read Wodehouse or Jenkins all day, and sometimes have.
In non-fiction, you can go right down the line and find great writing that was meant for its time and has stood up for all time: Hutchinson, Darwin, Rice, Wind, Jenkins, Verdi to name the internationally known. And there are many known in their cities as sages.
As for "Friday Night Lights," now I have to read it. Kelly's defense makes me think Bissinger, whatever his motives, was describing those hangers-on at high school events who live through the lives of their town's children, caring for the result on the scoreboard rather than the development of the young people playing the game. I see them often in my work.
Verdi - great writing that has stood up for all time? Are you kidding. I've read that guy my entire life. Never said "wow" once.
Look, the fact is that the primary criterion for golf writing is a default standard: simply having an interest in the game. That's a pretty doggone low standard.
Be honest, folks: Darwin, Rice and Wind wrote when the sport was in a boom time. THAT is why they're remembered. They wrote when there was boxing, baseball and golf and that's it. The writing is merely adequate. The subject matter simply happened to have been of greater interest at the time, hence the penman-worship.
I'll respectfully disagree and be done with it. As Frank Hannigan once said, "It's easier to criticize someone's wife than someone's golf course." I'll expand that to a definition of writing, great good and bad.
-
I'd say if one can't coherently articulate that perspective (re: Kavanagh), then the perspective should be questioned from the start and probably has little value.
That's why I'd take dozens of the golf writers you apparently yawn at over the paving king any day.
-
Tim, Speaking of great writing, when is the Beverly Bible to be finished. I would like to order my personalized copy as soon as you finish the work of art! Keep up the good work and don't let the amateur writers get you down. ;) Jack
-
I'd say if one can't coherently articulate that perspective (re: Kavanagh), then the perspective should be questioned from the start and probably has little value.
That's why I'd take dozens of the golf writers you apparently yawn at over the paving king any day.
You need to try to interject more sarcasm and condescension in your writing. It's very flattering.
It's akin to the political threads that some would call certain politicians by cutsey, derogatory names. As soon as it becomes name calling, all respect is lost.
Joe
-
Tim, Speaking of great writing, when is the Beverly Bible to be finished. I would like to order my personalized copy as soon as you finish the work of art! Keep up the good work and don't let the amateur writers get you down. ;) Jack
Hi Jack,
We're within days of being finished. Paul Richards is looking through pages even as we speak. We've squeezed in as much as we can. I'll let others judge the literary value.
Tim
-
Peripheral to the subject of golf but one of the most interesting reads connecting to the game, is Henry Longhurst's "My Life and Soft Times."
Like an old friend, it can be called upon years from its first reading to cherish and entertain.
Bob
I found that book in a used bookstore in North Berwick, and loved reading it for the rest of a trip. Longhurst - what a companionable writer!
And great golf taste too - #6 Beacon at Painswick was among his favourite holes in England! Here's a photo of the hole from behind the green, 200+ yards with wild undulations in front and the Beacon (a signal tower on the ancient Iron Age fort berm) behind.
(http://www.painswickgolf.com/upload/main_img/01.jpg)
-
"Quote from: Robert Thompson on Today at 07:14:49 pm
I'd say if one can't coherently articulate that perspective (re: Kavanagh), then the perspective should be questioned from the start and probably has little value.
"You really believe that? That only the thoughts of those who can expertly articulate them are of merit?"
Well, pretty much Dave. How else is anyone going to be able to seriously or intelligently consider what anyone, including John Kavanaugh, means unless his thoughts are relatively well articulated?
I've been both amused and somewhat confused by John Kavanaugh for years now because he sure does seem to have a real wit with words but every time I try to consider if there is more in his posts and messages than that I never seem to be able to get much farther than that. If you're trying to insinuate that me and most others on here who've come to that conclusion aren't intelligent or sensitive or whatever enough to find more in him than that then I'll disagree with you every time.
I've seen a ton of writers, even some famous ones try to get clever with words and create the illusion for some that there's more to it than that but if anyone really thinks so and they have a brain they do tend to reread, reconsider, truly look into it and analyze it, maybe many times and that is where it all gets vetted in the end, in my book.
As Cirba said about Kavanaugh he probably isn't any Jack Kirouwac. In my opinion, even Jack Kirouwac shouldn't have been considered the modern literary icon some crack him up to be. He was probably a very observant man who was quite troubled who just happened along at a time where he actually said some things that nobody thought a writer with good sense and good taste would say.
To me that's just shock not necessarily intelligence or that interesting. But maybe I'm wrong about that not necessarily for me but for lots of other people.
-
Deciding that there really isn't any good golf writers seems to me to be merely an expression of boredom. If you can't find anything up to your standards, I reckon you don't find anything up to your standards in just about anything subject in life, thus robbing your ownself of the pleasure to become captivated with another person's views. Oh sure, there is the use of language and grammar, which is essential to the crafting of good writing. Well, maybe even grammar isn't as essential as language or vocabulary - just the right word at just the right time. But, I honestly can't imagine a blanket statement that there isn't any good golf writing, if you are truly interested in golf.
Afterall, what does a good golf story really need? A contest, a place to take place whether scenic, austere, lovely or historic, a winner, a looser, and if you really want to throw some pizazz into it, a mysterious red head, a gun, a buried treasure, and a little sex.
-
Rich,
You noted that, "Edison didn't invent the light bulb. He just had a better lawyer than real inventor, Swan..."
He also didn't play golf. But he was a member of the Essex County Country Club.
-
Whilst maybe not strictly Golf Writing, does anyone know of the following book?:
Andrew Greig - Preferred Lies
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Preferred-Lies-Journey-Heart-Golf/dp/0753821567/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1228738829&sr=1-3
It looks fascinating...
-
Rich,
You noted that, "Edison didn't invent the light bulb. He just had a better lawyer than real inventor, Swan..."
He also didn't play golf. But he was a member of the Essex County Country Club.
Phil
So was my uncle Ben, and other than being a scratch golfer and introducing me to my first hooker, he really didn't accomplish anything on his own in his life.....
Rich
-
I'd say if one can't coherently articulate that perspective (re: Kavanagh), then the perspective should be questioned from the start and probably has little value.
You really believe that? That only the thoughts of those who can expertly articulate them are of merit?
I didn't say anything about "expertly." But clear grammar that would be expected of a 12-year-old in grade school isn't setting the bar exceptionally high.
Of course one has to be able to express their perspective with some degree of clarity. For most that's the barrier of entry.
So aside from the Bible, you haven't named a single book that qualifies as "great."
Perhaps you're just not a fan of books?
-
My point is merely that the guys who write about this beautiful, mysterious and etherial game do a rather pedestrian job at it.
It deserves better. "Tiger then rolled in a five-footer for birdie and a two-shot lead" simply doesn't do the game justice in the context in which you and I think of it.
How much more can someone ask for then this:
http://vault.sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1134482/1/index.htm
-
My point is merely that the guys who write about this beautiful, mysterious and etherial game do a rather pedestrian job at it.
It deserves better. "Tiger then rolled in a five-footer for birdie and a two-shot lead" simply doesn't do the game justice in the context in which you and I think of it.
How much more can someone ask for then this:
http://vault.sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1134482/1/index.htm
Sweet!
-
John Updike has published golf-related short stories.Hard to argue that his writing isn't "good".
Apologies if my quick read of this thread missed an Updike mention.
-
Updike is a very good but not great writer (~Doak 8). As a golf writer he is closer to mediocre (~Doak 6) than very good. IMO, of course.
-
Rich, I can't agree with that. John Updike is a member of the American Academy of arts and letters. he is - literally, and recognized by the world - a literary lion. That's a doak 8-9 at least.
-
Jay
You should learn to read before you try to write. I said Doak 8, above. 8)
Rich
PS--I haven't looked at their top 100 recently, but I'd bet that there are a lot of Doak 4s and 5s in the American Academy of Arts and Letters, just as the "Pantheon" of British Poet Laureates is made up mostly of snivelling hacks (Tennyson excluded). ;)
j-p p
-
Updike is a very good but not great writer (~Doak 8). As a golf writer he is closer to mediocre (~Doak 6) than very good. IMO, of course.
You just called him 6 here...as a golf writer...
-
You really believe that? That only the thoughts of those who can expertly articulate them are of merit?
Isn't the title of this thread about golf writing ?
If it's just about golf THINKING then that would be a very different subject.
I have to admit that I haven't read a lot of great golf writing, but my level of experience isn't so broad that I can say I've read enough to make any pronouncements about it. It seems to me that "golf" and "golf architecture" are two different animals, as "golf" seems to me something that I'd rather DO than read about, while "golf architecture" seems like a subject that merits study and the reading of books.
Heck, the best books on golf I've read are probably Five Lessons and Harvey Penick's Little Red Book.
Oh, and Jay, the first sunglass-wearing emoticon in Rich's post was a result of typing the number 8 followed by a parenthesis, so he did refer to Updike's writing in general as a Doak 8, and only a 6 as a "golf writer."
-
Just as a FYI, there is a way to make 8s show up normal especially when used as 8)
Click on the Additional Options button before you post your reply and check the box that says "Don't use smileys".
-
I wonder how the Discussion Group at literarylions.com rates Tom Doak as an architect!
What do you think? A Fadiman 7?
-
So wait, I should drive 2 hours to a library to read Updike?
-
Maybe Updike would say Tom is a Doak 8)
-
So wait, I should drive 2 hours to a library to read Updike?
Kyle, I'll bet you would drive 2 hours to play with Mr. Updike at The Country Club in Brookline should he be so gracious to invite you! ;)
Jack
-
I think we’ve been overlooking some of these most important literary works.
There are some wonderful instructional books, such as:
-ANGLE OF REPOSE by Wallace Stegner and Harvey Penick
-OF HUMAN BONDAGE by W. Somerset Maugham and Jimmy Ballard
A couple of good diaries:
-A LONG DAYS JOURNEY INTO NIGHT by Eugene O’Neill
subtitled: My day at Pebble Beach w/Huckaby
-THE SUN ALSO RISES by Ernest Hemingway
subtitled: Day two w/Huck
Some good architectural tomes:
-DUNE by Frank Herbert w/ David Kidd
-THE FOUNTAINHEAD by Ayn Rand w/ Ted Robinson
-THE MASTER AND THE MARGARITA by Mikhail Bulgakov w/a foreword by
Alister MacKenzie
-TOBACCO ROAD by Erskine Caldwell - from an original idea by Mike Strantz
A few smartly written selections from the Tour:
-ON THE ROAD by Jack Kerouac and Seve Ballesteros
-IRONWEED by William Kennedy w/a F-word by Tommy Bolt
-THE CATCHER IN THE RYE by J.D. Salinger and Tommy Bolt’s caddie
-UNDER THE VOLCANO by Malcolm Lowry and Mrs. Bolt
-AN AMERICAN TRAGEDY by Theodore Dreiser and John Daly
-PLAY IT AS IT LAYS by Joan Didion, w/ Tom Watson and Gary Player
Let's not forget some of our homegrown efforts:
-ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SOLITUDE by Gabriel Garcia Marquez and Wayno
-THE SHIPPING NEWS by Annie Proulx, w/ Mike Cirba & Joe Bausch
-A CONFERACY OF DUNCES by John Kennedy Toole w/ various contributors
Subtitled: Reminiscences Of Our Hours Wasted At GolfClubAtlas
.....and finally:
-BELOVED by Toni Morrison w/Ran Morrisett
I'm sure I missed some...............
-
Bravo, Jim!
You are living proof that great golf writing is still possible.
Rich
-
Has there been anyone ever in golf writing to make being use of metaphors than Rick Reilly? Open one of his articles and/or books, damn near any page, and count the number of creative similes and metaphors he uses. Creatively coming up with these is much harder than you may think. JC
-
Creatively coming up with these is much harder than you may think.
Using them well is even tougher. (Sorry if that's written poorly, I'm no Stanford English major... ).
Lisa: Oh no! With a felony on my record I'll never get into an Ivy League school!
Bart (jeering): You're going to Stanford, you're going to Stanford.
Now that's good writin'!
-
Has there been anyone ever in golf writing to make being use of metaphors than Rick Reilly? Open one of his articles and/or books, damn near any page, and count the number of creative similes and metaphors he uses. Creatively coming up with these is much harder than you may think.
Coming up with good, unlabored similes and metaphors is much harder than Rick Reilly thinks.
-
Does Rick Reilly actually think? ;)
-
Does Rick Reilly actually think? ;)
As well as he writes.