I really object to the notion that if we say "modernism has failed" then we must mean "we can't have new ideas". I also really object to the notion that "moderism is a new idea." It's lazy thinking of the worst sort.
In very simple terms, I define modernism as architecture that seeks to create beauty primarily by means of geometric sculpture, meaning that the shape of the building is its most important feature. In these terms, early modernists built plain, light boxes in order to stand out from the heavy ornamented masonry buildings common in the past. It worked until the plain boxes didn't have anything to stand out from anymore. And, by the same token, Frank Gehry (who I consider to be a modernist) builds cloud-shaped buildings in order to stand out from the boxes that have become common.
This is opposed to traditionalism, which I define as architecture that seeks to create beauty primarily by means of decorating buildings (using ornament as well as other tools), regardless of their shape.
within these two basic paradigms, there are many styles. Gehry's cloud-shaped buildings are a different style from Meis' boxy ones, and the contemporary metallic office building I pictured above is a different style from any example of historicism.
So, I don't accept that "modernism" is inherently contemporary because we've been building geometric sculptural buildings for many decades, and at the same time I don't accept that "traditionalism" is inherently non-contemporary because it is clearly possible for architects to decorate buildings in contemporary ways.
What I would like to see from the architecture field is less whining that people asking for traditional decorated buildings are historicists and more creative thinking about how to provide decorated buildings in contemporary ways. In my opinion, any architect who decries the public's desire for decoration as "not of our time" is a lazy shit of an architect. It is not "of our time" to rely on the geometric sculpturalist tricks of Meis. On the other hand, it would actually be creative to invent a new, fully contemporary language for ornament.
I want to see more of this:
Basically, I'm sick of architecture being really conservative intellectually while claiming to be really open. I'm sick of people whose only idea is to use a different shape for their geometric sculpturalism being called geniuses, while anyone who would dare to try something actually new and different being stamped out because they're "not of our time".