There's definitely a missing piece he hasn't explained well enough. I've seen the best code in the world because it was clean architecture and I've also seen so

There's definitely a missing piece he hasn't explained well enough. I've seen the best code in the world because it was clean architecture and I've also seen some truly atrocious code in the style of "clean architecture". To me the difference was in recognizing that the architecture advice is implicit - its not actually written down in the code, rather the code exemplifies it - and the business domain is explicitly modeled. When developers name everything "use case" and "interactor" and go crazy with packages and folder structures with architectural names it's a recipe for terribleness.