i can't defend the 'vandal ' so to speak but this article has problems the first line refers to neo futurism as a st century movement and yet the gallery has many structures that were done during the th the st louis gateway arch for instance is old i was brought here by the article of buckminster fuller and he died in if you can't tell us what century something is from this does create a credibility problem also and this is just personal musing the nomenclature is problematic and recursive how many times are we going to reinvent futurism if i built a building today and designed it to look as futuristic as possible would that be neo neo futurism