In this sense the builders and proponents of modernism saw their work as a direct response to a material need which could be satisfied by the use of current technological advances which would both allow for the creation of large, functional spaces while simultaneously creating a distinguished presence in their cities which reflected the revitalized nature of American business. Though some have pointed to classical elements in modern architecture such as the symmetric use of geometric forms, attention to corners and joints, the modern tradition is unlike its predecessors in terms of presence, simplicity and, if nothing else, use of technology. If the goals of the modernist movement can be defined then as the creation of a form of architecture suitable to the changing modes of business that is sensitive to the general anti-historical sentiment in the nation, then its proponents seem to have achieved a certain degree of success. SOM's clients included many of the largest corporations of the time, the Pepsi Cola Company, Chase Manhattan Bank and Union Carbide. The product of their demand was the development of what seems to be a universal corporate style, whose form came to exemplify the magnitude of American business.
Nothing can be a-historical or timeless.
Other failures of modernist architecture are apparent. The enormous skyscrapers that now dominate the skyline of most major cities have not done well in standing the test of time. Pedestrians also suffer as the height and proximity of the buildings create unpredictable and unusually strong wind currents at street level. The failures modernist architecture have then been in idealogy, engineering and their effects on individuals. Though Blake's criticism seems harsh, he responds to a sentiment felt by many, that our cities are simply unattractive, overwhelmed by generic forms made from taut glass and steel.