[Peter Pallotta]

Just a random reflection, mostly OT:

Now that I have *no* golf courses to play, just about *every* golf course I've ever played seems, in memory, like a very good one.

That's not to say that they are all '10s', or even close; certain qualitative differences do clearly remain present in my mind.

But the many & varied & taste-and-temperament-based *distinctions* I've always made, the specific ways I've compared the good ones (ie the ones I liked) to the not-so-good (the ones I didn't), have now mostly faded away.

It's as if I've long been 'looking at' the golf courses I play through a microscope or magnifying glass, and now (in memory) I'm looking at them with a bird's eye view instead.

Right now, that latter 'lens' seems like the much more sensible -- and even more relevant/meaningful -- one. What a silly/fruitless way to look at a golf course, it now seems, to look at a 200 acre field of play through a magnifying glass.

And truth be told, from that bird's eye perspective a Stanley Thompson course isn't very much different at all than one by Rene Muylaert, nor is one by Dr Mac all that different than one by Doug Carrick, or one by Robbie Robison than one by Mr Anonymous.

I wonder: when things get back to whatever is 'normal', will I be able to retain this new perspective? But also: should I even want to try?

[Bernie Bell]

I think it's a good question.  I got to thinking about a list, beyond my home course, of proximate courses (leave from and return to home same day) that I want to play when the darkness lifts.  It seems more relevant to me now than another list of the 10 Scottish (or Irish, Welsh, etc) courses I want to play.  I have plenty of those lists if and when the time comes again.  The more I thought about my proximate list, it had very little to do with the architecture and most to do with who I would expect to play with at the various places.  Maybe heretical here, but I don't see it as OT. 

[JESII]

Agreed that this is right on topic...and a good one.


To me, this is a refreshing point of view...or at least potentially liberating.


After all, it's the game and its core features that deliver the ultimate value. Having the time, energy and opportunity to discuss and debate a nuance such as the architectural quality of particular fields of play is a blessing...but it's purely an add-on to me.


Hope you're well Peter!

[JMEvensky]

After all, it's the game and its core features that deliver the ultimate value. Having the time, energy and opportunity to discuss and debate a nuance such as the architectural quality of particular fields of play is a blessing...but it's purely an add-on to me.

I think this is exactly right. Golf is a game to be played--playing it on, or talking about playing it on,  a good/great course is just a bonus.

[BCrosby]

Well said Peter. It's a new world, at least for a while.


Bob

[Adam Clayman]

I would beg to differ, that even in hindsight, "Caddyshack 2" does not resemble it's original, just because the medium and process used to create them were the same or similar.


It's how the parts are put together that separates.


Ps.And, when Alan Smithy comes-in to alter the story, he sure as heck better respect what the guys before him had in mind.

[Peter Pallotta]

I think "liberating' is a very good word/description, Jim.
It does feel like some self-created weight is lifted of my 'shoulders' (ie my consciousness) when, far from adding more (and increasingly nuanced) distinctions and critiques, I instead step way back and rein in my judgements -- simply enjoying the forests instead of constantly comparing the trees. 
It struck me: if I want 'freedom golf', it might be a good idea to start with being 'free' in my own mind.

We're all well, here - thanks. Much health and peace to you and your family too.
P

[MCirba]

I believe it was Joni Mitchell from Canada who paraphrased what we're all feeling when she sang about not knowing what you've got til it's gone.

Sheesh, I'm having some really wonderfully nostalgic memories at the moment about some truly architecturally abysmal golf courses. Something about how bad they are makes them even better.

[Ira Fishman]

Peter


I think I disagree. It is true that in this time of death and illness and anxiety, the differences among golf courses can seem trivial, especially when just playing the game would be a great lift to our spirits. But the same could be said of music, literature, or art. And I have found myself lifted by engaging with or at least remembering the sublime. I have done the same regarding golf courses that I have enjoyed.


Yes, that is all very self centered and trivial in the context of our current times, but it also gives hope. Not nearly as important as tending to loved ones and friends or supporting food banks and other relief efforts, but still something upon which to hold.


Ira

[Peter Pallotta]

Ira -
I certainly understand your sentiments and POV.
But two things: I'm not saying that the way we dissect golf courses/design is trivial in the context of the pandemic; I'm suggesting that, with just a little bit of distance & perspective, that kind/degree of 'comparative analysis' now seems misguided in *any* context; what a '10' and a '5' have in common vastly outweighs what sets them apart. And: I too take comfort and pleasure in, say, Bach (over pop) or Shakespeare (over a sitcom). But with those art-crafts, I stand apart and observe/listen, whereas with gca I actually participate *in it*, I'm a part of it. And as a part of it, seeing and focusing on the 'negatives' is only hurting myself.
Or so it seems to me now.
Best
Peter     

[Ira Fishman]

Peter,


I take and understand your perspective. However, my memory (aided by the WWW) of the differences among courses is quite vivid even for course that I have played only once.


Also, I am listening to Ella as we "speak" and although I am not on the field of play such as when I play golf, I am definitely participating.


Stay safe.


Ira

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()