"TE/Michael
What exactly did Crump (or Father Carr) say about the need for isolatation on every golf hole?"
Tom MacW:
I don't know EXACTLY what Crump or Carr said about the need for isolation on every hole. Crump, unfortunately, didn't keep a diary during the creation of the course (although apparently there may be some letters by him to various people during the construction of the course that may shed light on what he EXACTLY said about holes 'being out of sight of one another' at PVGC.
What Crump certainly did do during the construction of the course is speak with a very large number of people, but I certainly didn't hear any of that as Crump died in 1918. It seems to me practically every one of them mentions this in one way or another, at one time or another. The idea was obviously spawned from his ideas on what a great course should be in his mind, at least where he chose to build one---eg no more than two successive holes going in the same direction, a real minimum of "parallelism". Jim Finegan states in the latest PVGC history, "He thought each hole should be out of sight from every other hole".
It seems to me you don't put much truth in some of what Finegan says in the latest PVGC history. I'm not sure why that is. I've known Jim Finegan for years as have many around here and we feel he's one of the best researchers and certainly one of the best golf and architecture chroniclers there is. Certainly, it’s true he did make a mistake or two in that latest history but I’m sure that’s to be expected in any history book.
Perhaps, you feel you're able to decipher what went on at PVGC and what the intentions for the course were better than he can. And this despite the fact that Finegan has belonged there for probably forty years and took home the entire PVGC archives for about four years and obviously researched numerous newspaper and magazine accounts (something you seem to truly enjoy) as well as the accounts left from those there at that time of Crump's life and afterwards.
Perhaps you feel Finegan is not very truthful or accurate because of some of what he said about Harry Colt's contributions to PVGC. If you read his history carefully you’ll also notice he was very praising of Colt call him perhaps the best in the world at that time! Finegan depended on what he reported in that vein from what's available in the archives as well as a number of contemporaneous newspaper reports during the creation of PVGC, and from others and their articles such as Tillinghast, Grantland Rice (apparently wrote in "The American Golfer" one of five reasons for the course's greatness being the separation of each hole), and a number of well known golfers of that time.
I depend for the accuracy of the "separation" or "isolation" feature of PVGC on what Carr said about the planting of hundreds of trees in an article in the early years—1914---would it not be logical to assume that tree planting continued in Crump’s lifetime following 1914? But mostly I depend on what I know of the course and what I can clearly see on the old aerials. The fact is that the golf course is routed remarkably wide---basically using the architectural principle of "triangulation' to create this separation and isolation (an entirely different routing arrangement from the more common style of parrellelism used in that day.
My point is that it's just completely obvious to see what he was attempting to do by looking at those old aerials. Some of the areas between holes may've looked a lot sparser obviously because Crump had done a ton of clearing to both initially analyze the ground and for prospective holes and hole corridors that were never used. Many people, and many on here who see some of those old clearing lines on aerials and on on-ground photos seem to assume they were intended to remain that way but in my opinion, clearly they were not.
But even from the earliest aerials and after the planting of hundreds, perhaps thousands of saplings had a chance to grow one can clearly see the use of trees separating the holes. And we all know when trees have a few decades to grow in they do create what we call visual isolation---particularly pine trees that are not deciduous. I think it's probably save to say that Crump understood what trees look like when they grow to full maturity.
But if you feel content to think that the holes of PVGC were intended to be mostly in clear view of one another, then be my guest. I don't believe that was the intention at all. And, if I happen to find something in the archives or anywhere else written by Crump or Carr I'll be the first to let you know EXACTLY what they said.
This entire subject of trees and PVGC, I think, has gotten sort of out of hand, particularly on here. There's no question there're a number of otherwise good architecture analysts on this site who feel very few or even no trees belong on any golf course. This, to me, is as shortsighted as someone who feels all golf courses should be completely planted in trees, isolating every hole from another.
The fact is, if we look at this subject of trees, and other subjects, intelligently and accurately in an historic context we will see that there was a good deal of difference and many interesting distinctions in what some of the very best golf architects wanted for their particular courses. Some may not have wanted any trees, such as Fownes at Oakmont or Macdonald at NGLA, but others, in certain areas, particularly those that were naturally treed did want trees. This might include Ross at Pinehurst and surely includes Crump at PVGC, in my opinion.
But lest you think I'm saying that PVGC did not become too encroached upon by trees over the decades I'm not saying that at all. I think, personally, as I’ve said many time on here the best tree management for the course in the future would be simply to remove those trees that are now within or overhanging Crump's constructed bunkering and sand waste areas that were intended to be in play. If they did that I think the course would play exactly as it was intended to play by him but that the holes would still be separated from one another visually.
Does this tree separation idea create some negative influence on others to over-plant courses that may not have been designed with trees in mind? Certainly it does. But that's for those who administer those other courses to understand. Neither George Crump, nor me, is suggesting that because he intended to have tree separation between his hole at PVGC that every other course should too.
One should always understand, in my opinion, that the styles and types of golf courses and their architecture should be different. That to me is a good deal of the interest and allure of the entire art of golf course architecture.