News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


Jeff_Mingay

  • Karma: +0/-0
Howard Roark
« on: December 10, 2010, 09:17:07 AM »
Comments at another thread, from Ian A. and Tim Nugent specifically, just got me thinking about one of my favourite subjects: How building architecture and golf course architecture can some times relate.

How about this quote from Howard Roark, the main character in Ayn Rand's The Fountainhead:

Your house is made by its own needs. Those others are made by the need to impress.

Am I odd, or can anyone else relate this relatively simple, yet complex comment about building architecture to golf course architecture?
jeffmingay.com

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Howard Roark
« Reply #1 on: December 10, 2010, 09:30:03 AM »
Jeff,

I just commented on "ornamentation" on the other thread which was a term specific to architecture.  They build the buildings to stand up and meet space requirements, and at the end, decide what kind of facade there will be (and if budget is an issue how much)  Architects like MiesVR at different times decided that there was no need for ornamentation, and thus usually left it off.  A lot of what we did in the 90's etc. could be left off, sort of the definitions of minimalism, although that gets kind of clouded sometimes.
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Ally Mcintosh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Howard Roark
« Reply #2 on: December 10, 2010, 09:31:49 AM »
Good book that Jeff... Very inspiring...

I constantly relate it to golf course architecture.
« Last Edit: December 10, 2010, 09:59:03 AM by Ally Mcintosh »

Mac Plumart

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Howard Roark
« Reply #3 on: December 10, 2010, 09:33:27 AM »
Your house is made by its own needs. Those others are made by the need to impress.

The first part sure sounds like a description of a good members course to me.  The second part...not so much.

Nice quote!!
Sportsman/Adventure loving golfer.

Tim Nugent

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Howard Roark
« Reply #4 on: December 10, 2010, 09:41:13 AM »
Howard Roark, The Tom Doak of fictional building architects. ;D

Jeff, could it be that if an architect builds his own house/course, he does not have to 'Crystal Ball' what he thinks other want and will be satisfied with?  He only has to answer to himself.  The need to survive in the business and, in these times, feed a family, causes them to revert to the mean, to do what is considered basically safe, but embellished with some bells and whistles. The need to impress kicked in.
Coasting is a downhill process

Jeff_Mingay

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Howard Roark
« Reply #5 on: December 10, 2010, 10:21:15 AM »
I understand, Tim. But, like Howard Roark, I guess that's what (some of us) try to fight. It's not always easy. I know.
jeffmingay.com

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Howard Roark
« Reply #6 on: December 10, 2010, 10:24:35 AM »
Tim,

I don't recall that quote exactly, but I took it as him describing one of his clients, less extravagent houses.  Nor do I think satisfying your ownself in design is the easiest thing to do, since we have so many influences we like and have to narrow it to one.  I trust you and the wife have tried to redecorate your house, or you do the landscaping at least once, eh?

Slightly OT but I recall one of those college design field trips to FLW's first house in Wisconsin.  It had some ornamentation, etc. but I couldn't help but notice that somehow, he had aligned the second floor bathroom right over the dining room and a big ugly cast iron pipe came down right next to the dinner table.....like many of us, he learned there are some practicalities to design in any field.

And, as your Dad said often, you have to get the basics right for it to be a good design.  I do see a lot designs of all types that don't function well, but which are highly ornamental and attractive.  Or, form follows function and anything else is just a bonus.

Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Jeff_Mingay

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Howard Roark
« Reply #7 on: December 10, 2010, 10:44:53 AM »
Jeff,

For the sake of discussion, I think there'd be varying perspective on the cast iron pipe you describe. It makes me think of the ditches at Oakmont for example. They're functional, like that cast iron pipe. Some think Oakmont's ditches are cool, and attractive in a quirky way. But I know others, with different perspective, wonder why they're open rather than piped and covered. 
jeffmingay.com

George Pazin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Howard Roark
« Reply #8 on: December 10, 2010, 10:47:50 AM »
Tim,

I don't recall that quote exactly, but I took it as him describing one of his clients, less extravagent houses.

It's been too long since my last read, but I believe the quote Jeff provides was during the conversation between Roark and Austin Heller where Roark describes to Heller why he (Heller) enjoys his house so much, and so personally.

We had a fairly long thread a long time ago about The Fountainhead and gca - as I recall, Tom D took umbrage at the notion that he is a Howard Roark type character, but at the time he hadn't read the book and was relying on the (flawed) descriptions of the book and Roark. So tread lightly!
Big drivers and hot balls are the product of golf course design that rewards the hit one far then hit one high strategy.  Shinny showed everyone how to take care of this whole technology dilemma. - Pat Brockwell, 6/24/04

Tim Liddy

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Howard Roark
« Reply #9 on: December 10, 2010, 11:32:25 AM »
Howard Roark would hate this site.

George Pazin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Howard Roark
« Reply #10 on: December 10, 2010, 11:37:48 AM »
Howard Roark would hate this site.

Gotta disagree. Roark spent a good bit of time enjoying conversations with Heller and Wynand, there's no reason to believe he couldn't find enough common ground with some on here to enjoy the site in some manner.

He might dislike certain people on the site, but I don't see that he would hate the site.
Big drivers and hot balls are the product of golf course design that rewards the hit one far then hit one high strategy.  Shinny showed everyone how to take care of this whole technology dilemma. - Pat Brockwell, 6/24/04

Adam Clayman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Howard Roark
« Reply #11 on: December 10, 2010, 11:39:16 AM »
I'd relate the "own needs" to playability. Focusing on the fun factor. And the need to impress would be the golf course which is high on framing (aesthetics) without much substance.
"It's unbelievable how much you don't know about the game you've been playing your whole life." - Mickey Mantle

Chris_Blakely

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Howard Roark
« Reply #12 on: December 10, 2010, 11:44:26 AM »
The first thing that I thought after reading the tile of this thread was, "who is the Peter Keating" of golf course architecture???

Chris

Kyle Harris

Re: Howard Roark
« Reply #13 on: December 10, 2010, 11:46:35 AM »
None of the main characters in The Fountainhead could ever exist in real life. They are their respective ideals.

Adam Clayman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Howard Roark
« Reply #14 on: December 10, 2010, 11:56:35 AM »
So, who is the ideal Keating? Who are the poseurs, who have built their careers on being 'safe", and good at cocktail parties?
"It's unbelievable how much you don't know about the game you've been playing your whole life." - Mickey Mantle

George Pazin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Howard Roark
« Reply #15 on: December 10, 2010, 12:10:49 PM »
Ayn Rand, is her first language English.

Nope, Russian.

I'm always surprised at those who don't care for her style, but I guess that's almost as subjective as eating or music.
Big drivers and hot balls are the product of golf course design that rewards the hit one far then hit one high strategy.  Shinny showed everyone how to take care of this whole technology dilemma. - Pat Brockwell, 6/24/04

Derek_Duncan

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Howard Roark
« Reply #16 on: December 10, 2010, 12:16:45 PM »
I LOVED The Fountainhead (and Atlas Shrugged)...



when I was 18.  ;)

As fantasy, it's stimulating. As literature, fairly awful. As reality, silly. What's virtuous about ferocious unwillingness to compromise or collaborate?

There are periods in history where architecture that is almost all decoration remains both stunning and revered.

I don't recall, how did Howard Roarke get the financing to design and construct his buildings?
www.feedtheball.com -- a podcast about golf architecture and design
@feedtheball

JMEvensky

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Howard Roark
« Reply #17 on: December 10, 2010, 12:20:35 PM »

None of the main characters in The Fountainhead could ever exist in real life. They are their respective ideals.


Not just the Fountainhead--Wesley Mouch(sic) in AS excepted.

Ayn Rand didn't go in for much nuance in her characters.

After first reading the Fountainhead in high school,I wanted to be an architect until I realized that I can't draw a straight line with the proverbial ruler.


Norbert P

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Howard Roark
« Reply #18 on: December 10, 2010, 12:23:58 PM »
Howard Roark would hate this site.

Gotta disagree. Roark spent a good bit of time enjoying conversations with Heller and Wynand, there's no reason to believe he couldn't find enough common ground with some on here to enjoy the site in some manner.

He might dislike certain people on the site, but I don't see that he would hate the site.

George, in ten + years I don't think I've ever disagreed with you, but I doubt Roark would lurk or get involved with GCA.com as he already knows everything.  Besides,  we've got plenty of Ellsworth M. Toohey's here, and you know what Roark thinks of Ellsworth . . .  He doesn't.

  Is Ron Whitten the Ellsworth M. Toohey of golf architecture?
"Golf is only meant to be a small part of one’s life, centering around health, relaxation and having fun with friends/family." R"C"M

George Pazin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Howard Roark
« Reply #19 on: December 10, 2010, 12:29:33 PM »
George, in ten + years I don't think I've ever disagreed with you, but I doubt Roark would lurk or get involved with GCA.com as he already knows everything.  Besides,  we've got plenty of Ellsworth M. Toohey's here, and you know what Roark thinks of Ellsworth . . .  He doesn't.

  Is Ron Whitten the Ellsworth M. Toohey of golf architecture?

He might be too bored to indulge, but I doubt he'd hate a site populated by a bunch of devotees. If you were to posit that he wouldn't even get involved ala Bill Coore, I could see that - but I don't see Bill Coore hating this site, just not really understanding it or wanting to get involved.

Derek D, assuming your question is not a jab of some sort, Roark was an architect, not a developer - someone else did the financing.

Loved the quip, Kelly.
Big drivers and hot balls are the product of golf course design that rewards the hit one far then hit one high strategy.  Shinny showed everyone how to take care of this whole technology dilemma. - Pat Brockwell, 6/24/04

Peter Pallotta

Re: Howard Roark
« Reply #20 on: December 10, 2010, 01:07:46 PM »
Ayn Rand didn't go in for much nuance in her characters.

I was thinking this too. Nothing against Rand, or these kinds of Novels of Ideas. I tend to like them in fact -- but you can't find in them an actual character if your life depended on it. (Who are some real characters you ask? Think Ahab or Lear for creations that are not simply facets of their creators' personalities). What I get from Rand are stick figures - not people but points of view and intellectual positions of a political, philosophical, aesthetic and moral nature. The novel is one grand dialogue (or monologue) with herself and the straw-men of her own creations. Read the book as debate and it's fine; try to read it as moving human literature and it leaves me cold. Trying to draw comparisons between the characters in that book and people of the world is like trying to dance with the shadow of a shadow.

IMHO.

Derek_Duncan

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Howard Roark
« Reply #21 on: December 10, 2010, 01:17:48 PM »


Derek D, assuming your question is not a jab of some sort, Roark was an architect, not a developer - someone else did the financing.


George,

I know he was the architect. Who hired him to build a skyscraper, and then gave him a blank check to design it and fill it in any way he wished? And then blow it up when things didn't go his way? That's pretty good work if you can get it.

It kind of shows how preposterous the whole concept is.
www.feedtheball.com -- a podcast about golf architecture and design
@feedtheball

Kyle Harris

Re: Howard Roark
« Reply #22 on: December 10, 2010, 01:19:55 PM »


Derek D, assuming your question is not a jab of some sort, Roark was an architect, not a developer - someone else did the financing.


George,

I know he was the architect. Who hired him to build a skyscraper, and then gave him a blank check to design it and fill it in any way he wished? And then blow it up when things didn't go his way? That's pretty good work if you can get it.

It kind of shows how preposterous the whole concept is.

Derek:

Read Ayn Rand's noted. They explain this very phenomenon.

Derek_Duncan

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Howard Roark
« Reply #23 on: December 10, 2010, 01:31:56 PM »


Derek D, assuming your question is not a jab of some sort, Roark was an architect, not a developer - someone else did the financing.


George,

I know he was the architect. Who hired him to build a skyscraper, and then gave him a blank check to design it and fill it in any way he wished? And then blow it up when things didn't go his way? That's pretty good work if you can get it.

It kind of shows how preposterous the whole concept is.

Derek:

Read Ayn Rand's noted. They explain this very phenomenon.

Kyle,

Can you save me the time and give me the Cliffs Notes?
www.feedtheball.com -- a podcast about golf architecture and design
@feedtheball

Norbert P

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Howard Roark
« Reply #24 on: December 10, 2010, 01:34:01 PM »
  It is a didactic novel.  The characters had to be specific archtypes for the presented concepts.  They were vehicles for minds.

  Though Rand is often ridiculed as a novelist, she had a lucid imagination for using characters to manifest ideas.











  " . . . he dived into the sky."  AR
"Golf is only meant to be a small part of one’s life, centering around health, relaxation and having fun with friends/family." R"C"M

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back