>Its very modern, or in other words it will come to be a monstrosity in only 20-30 years. And thats not too long now is it?

I’m no fan of modernism and I understand your point. Really, it would categorize this as “deconstructionist” (which I also, generally, don’t like). My caution is simply this: It is not good to be to in love with rules and categories. Slavish devotion to them (regardless of how well founded) tends to have an insidious effect of eventually making you ridiculously wrong. Among all of Frank Lloyd Wrights brilliant ideas you will find some absurdly wrong judgments and concepts simply because he became a slave to his own (admittedly inspired and brilliant) rules.
I lived through the modernist era and the buildings looked sterile to me even when they were new and I was gleeful at the arrival of post-modernist architectural movement. I was never surprised that the modernist stuff was recognized as abominable ( I always thought it was). You may be right about the fate of these buildings but I see a playfulness and warmth in the multiple projecting surfaces and a human scale to the architecture that makes me think it will do OK (I’m not in love with the design but I like it). There’s probably a good book to be written about Zeitgeist, philosophy and aesthetics; How ideology effects sensibilities but, as much as I’m aware of the connection I’ve never seen such a book. I’m sure that my lack of sympathy with the internationalist movement played in my rejection of the modernist aesthetic. Perhaps it is some philosophical resonance that is blinding me to the obsolescence of this design but only time will tell.