The possibilities these authors envision for their immediate futures is a future that consists of moving forward and not backwards. They believed that technology is, or in the case of designing art that isn’t traditional, can lead to social change and purposeful change.

The role the authors imagine technology would play in shaping the futures is the social changes it will case. In Rodchenko’s Constructivism it was a movement that consisted of political, cultural and social changes. As for the Futurism manifesto, Marinetti spoke on how technology will change society because of its originality.

These artists anticipated that art and design would follow a movement of change and innovation in culture and society. The common views these authors share is letting go of the classic traditional bourgeois art and instead moving forward to change. What they may disagree on is that in the Manifesto, Marinetti talks highly of violence and conflict. As for Rodchenko ’s constructivism he wanted to rebuild a society that was destroyed because of the war. 

Elements from the text that remain relevant for the present is the consist changes that are occurring because of technology and the originality of ideas that can help a society. Elements that are problematic is the concept of destroying Museums and Libraries, it would be destructive because it is history and without history how can one learn to create a better future. Another, was Marinetti’s manifesto exalting violence.