From what I understood from the article is that, designers need to develop and adapt to society in order to advance. This article I felt was similar to the other articles as they all speak on Technology and their perspective on how it effects us. It has become apart of our everyday life and to past artists such as Filippo Marinetti had an extremist approach towards his ideas and wanted to see a new type of future. Marinetti’s view on museums and comparisons show just how strongly they felt towards the idea of museums, and while in a way I can agree, places like museums can still give an artist ideas for any piece of art they ever come up with in the future. I think Marinetti also states how looking at old art and admiring it isn’t really a way of advancing, we are draining our energy into old dead work, which I kind of disagree with because I feel that every idea or concept can come from something that may have seen before or can bring inspiration to make your own form of art. At the same time, it makes sense because it is true that people rarely go to museums and when they do it’s maybe like 1-2 times in a year, and each time you go it will most likely be the same art like a cemetery would be with all the tombstones. El Lissitzki’s point of view on art was a very interesting one, they viewed every invention in art as a single event in time with no evolution, he had the thought that art and design would follow the idea of ” dematerialization”. Which in fact is true, because the more and more society evolves, the more technical we become, In just the span of 15 Years our technology has advanced dramatically, and doctor appointments, shopping, selling art, etc. can all be done virtually through your laptop or phone, and when it comes to making art, we now stray a bit away from hands on art, and now perform more art through computer software. Artists have fought to keep a balance, but one has to adapt to the technology to maintain having a smooth creative and communitive process.