Massengale asks a good question.
No, I do not necessarily agree with Don Padelford's idea that (paraphrased) "the Living Room is Seattle's great interior public space." He may well be correct. Then again...But honestly, at this point I have no opinion of the inside of the building as I haven't been there.
You know my very negative opinion of the sidewalk-level exterior, at least based on review of plans and model. You know my indifference to the Library as a large object, a Very Large Scale Sculpture. You know my feeling of revulsion and contempt for the giddy hero-worship which accompanies this object and its black-garbed starchitect of obscure words.
But I like to think of myself as ruthlessly rigorous. I haven't been inside the Library (nor did I ever study the plans) so I cannot possibly have an opinion. Yet.
But one related memory: the very first article about the design -- now some 4 years ago -- quoted the City Librarian, an otherwise charming and obviously astute woman named Deborah Jacobs, as lauding the library as having "natural light-filled reading rooms." (That's a quote from memory, to be scrupulous.) My bs-detector went off and that very statement got me interested in the library design. As one who has read many hundreds, maybe even thousands, of books from cover-to-cover, I can tell you that the last thing that a reader wants is a room which is in direct sun-light. The very idea is preposterous. Perhaps the glass used for the Library is of a type which softens and filters harsh natural light and so all is well. But bright sunlight -- as Ms. Jacobs offered as a positive -- seems to me to be a bizzare and inappropriate way to illuminate a printed page.
UPDATE: Btw, one dynamic which should not be overlooked in analyzing a building and how it contributes to the city is GIGO: "Garbage In, Garbage Out."
What that means in terms of a building is that if The Client is not clear and enlightened in explaining The Program to The Architect, then it's not fair to lay all blame on The Architect.
Now I have had enough experiences with professionals to suggest that it is extremely irksome and aggravating to run inro a problem and the response from The Professional is "Well, you didn't ask me to look at that issue." Of course, they are the Pros and are supposed to be able to anticipate the issues and to indform the client; after all, that's why they have the license and get the big bucks. So, while Rem Koolhaas can't escape entirely (should he need to escaoe) from designing an anti-urban structure, you also have to lay off some responsibilty on The Client. I mean, they are not potted plants, just sitting there on the window sill.