The rumor runs that
The assertion is that
...it doesn't take a genius to see that the Disney Concert Hall works well in its urban context. Insofar as it is an art form, the whole objective of architectural design is to produce works that succeed in unexpected, original ways. The real merit of the L. A. Concert Hall is not just that it succeeds as a part of L. A.'s downtown (a claim which few would dispute); it's that it succeeds without conforming submissively to a set of rules.
It does take genius and imagination to conjur up what isn't there. Disney Hall has little to do with its urban context. It is a striking object -- maybe "art," maybe not: only time will trell -- but one which does not have much to do with the sidewalks around it. How Joe Clarke can suggest otherwise is a bit astonishing. Asserting does not make it so.
As well, Joes sneers at The Three Rules. Let's be clear: those are not my rules. They are a reflection of reality, of every pedestrian-oriented neighborhood and street in existence. Put another way, a walkable city built on anything but the default of The Three Rules does not exist. Don't like it? Don't like rules? Don't rail at me as I am merely reporting what is. And if anyone can offer an example of a pedestrian-oriented neighborhood (much less a whole city) built according to anything but the Three Rules, I would be curious to know of it.
UPDATE: My impressions of Disney Hall after visiting it just before opening is here: Disney Hall: The Good, The Bad and...the Beautiful?