Arthur Erickson's statement poignantly captures a transformational moment in design philosophy that occurred after 1980. His observation about the disappearance of "space" and the rise of a fascination with surface as emblematic of materialism reveals a deeper critique of cultural and aesthetic values. The emphasis on surface signifies a shift toward superficiality, where appearance overshadowed essence, and the conceptual or experiential dimensions of space were neglected. This change can be interpreted as reflective of a broader societal trend wherein material wealth and external show became predominant markers of success and identity, potentially at the expense of introspective or functional considerations.

This quote invites contemplation on how architectural and design choices mirror societal priorities. Space is more than a physical gap or volume; it represents context, freedom, and a canvas for human experience. When designers prioritize surface over space, they chase the visual and tactile appeal without considering how people inhabit and interact with their environments. This shallow focus may limit the emotional and psychological resonance that well-conceived spatial design can evoke. Erickson’s lament encourages a re-examination of the principles underlying design, urging creators to restore balance — reviving the importance of volume, depth, and meaning rather than succumbing purely to the allure of material surfaces.

What resonates particularly is the implicit call to resist cultural materialism by appreciating the intangible quality that space exemplifies in architecture and design. It’s a reminder to look beyond the facade and to seek authenticity, to value the unseen context as much as the visible form. Such reflection remains deeply relevant today, as the dominance of surface aesthetics continues to challenge creators across disciplines.