“We must develop some kind of consistent theory for relating one building to another and to the environment. The Ecole des Beaux Arts did have such a theory. I’m not proposing that we bring it back, but in the nineteenth century when the Ecole des Beaux Arts was in full swing, they did have a comprehensible theory in regard to the relationship of one building to another—as did earlier periods of architecture.
The 1893 Chicago World’s Fair has been damned for a great many years, but it is time we reassessed it. It was a comprehensible whole, not a collection of individual buildings. We may not like the individual buildings, but they read as a group. The spaces between them were well thought-out; some buildings served as anchors and dominated less important ones by their size, placement, proportions and relationship to the ground, the sky and their neighbors.”
Rudolph, Paul Marvin, 1918-1997. "The Form of the City." Canadian Architect 4 (March 1959): 49-67.

A recent article by Nicolai Ouroussoff in the New York Times highly praises the recent renovation of the Art And Architecture Building at Yale University, Paul Rudolph's signature work. The article is less impressed with the recently completed addition to the building. The article notes that the A & A will be rededicated as Paul Rudolph Hall in November. Thanks to Christopher Larkosh of the UMass Dartmouth Faculty for the alert.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/28/arts/design/28yale.html?em

“Hong Kong is an entirely different project. It is interesting in that it's being built on somebody else's foundations, and, therefore, the planning of Hong Kong is determined by foundations already poured in place. The owners changed because of the relationship with Red China and everybody got scared. They are totally commercial office buildings, unlike Jakarta, and therefore the ground rules are very different. Also there are multiplicities of owners, unlike Dharmala, which is a corporate headquarters. It is like home to them, and, therefore, they take great interest in it. It's not that they don't take an interest in the Hong Kong projects. It's just that the ground rules are very, very different, about what you can and cannot do. The Hong Kong project is two towers and I wanted to connect them with interlacing bridges. I don't know whether you've ever seen any of those sketches or not. They wouldn't let me do that. The reason for that was the prime developer/owner said that he made a substantial part of his fortune in textiles in Indonesia as a matter of fact. He said all of his factories had interconnecting bridges that take material and people from one part to the other. He didn't want these office buildings to look like that. I was really disappointed. I couldn't get around that argument though I did try.”
Interview with Robert Bruegmann, 1986