"For Intimate Music, the Boldest of Designs" NYT Defense

Herbert Muschamp, the New York Times architecture critic from 1992-2004, was a champion of avant-garde, exuberantly experimental architects like Frank Gehry and Hans Scharoun. His protege Nicolai Ouroussoff was hand-picked by Muschamp's to be his successor in 2004, and since then he has taken up the mantle of applauding bold creativity in architecture quite well. 

His review of the Copenhagen Concert Hall, designed by Jean Nouvel, gives an immediate nod to the past with an evocative lead that alludes to Scharoun's Berlin Philharmonic. "It's usually considered an insult to say that an architect designs pretty packages, let alone that he borrows ideas from a dead genius." 

This is not only engaging because of the images of a sagely ghost and a gift-wrapped building, but because it hints that Ouroussoff really knows the scene. 

The "but" of the article comes literally right after that first sentence. "But Jean Nouvel should be forgiven for resurrecting old ghosts." It's implied that his work is an homage rather than a rip-off, and then the appropriate context for these historical references is given.

He reveals that the cascading balconies of the Copenhagen Concert Hall pay tribute to the similar interior of the Berlin Philharmonic. In a way it seems like Ouroussoff is also honoring the past by comparing one of his favorite ("Looking Skyward in Lower Manhattan" praises Nouvel) contemporary architect's work to one of his mentors'. He even name-drops Gehry in the next paragraph, further establishing his taste for the daringly imaginative.

Aided by his history with Muschamp and serious passion for everything post-modern, he is very knowledgeable about architecture's past, present, and future. He describes trends such as architects striving for decades to create more fluid spaces, declares that "we are in the midst of a glorious period in concert hall design", and gives an example of under-construction buildings that further prove his point. His authority comes from his education and obvious experience in the field. The density of information signals that this is coming from the perspective of an expert. 

The review is logically structured, progressing from the building's roots in history, to exterior descriptions, to cultural criticism, to interior descriptions, to praise of Mr. Nouvel himself. 

Despite his efforts to prove why this building is a step forward or relevant or culturally important, his physical descriptions are what really convinces me that this place is a masterpiece.  And the feelings he invokes from phrases like "the main performance hall wraps you in a world of luxury" complement his rave review quite well.