The new ideas at the Stockholm Exhibition provoked public debate as late as 1931,
when the apologist publication for the new movement, acceptera [sic] (To Accept),
was published. It was edited by six architects and critics, Gregor Paulsson, Eskil Sun-
dahl, Gunnar Asplund, Wolter Gahn, Uno Åhrén and Sven Markelius, collectively.^403
According to Rudberg, Åhrén was responsible for the highly polemic layout, with its
collages, journalistic formats and choice of photographs reminiscent of the Danish
Kritisk Revy (The Critical Journal, published in 1926–1928), Ernst May’s German
publication Das Neue Frankfurt and Le Corbusier’s writings. Acceptera was optimistic.
Architecture should respond to its time culturally, socially and technologically. For the
writers, hand-made and industrial production were complementary and they needed
not to be treated as opposites. Democratic development and the change in women’s
status were major cultural challenges to which architecture was expected to react.^404
Uno Åhrén was an active writer and served as the editor-in-chief for Byggmästaren
in 1929–1932. He was Sweden’s other representative alongside Sven Markelius in
CIRPAC, the preparatory committee for CIAM, from 1930 onwards,^405 where his role
also included the work of the press committee. In his article “Brytningar” (Breakages)
from 1925, Åhrén described Le Corbusier’s inspiring take on architecture based on the
latter’s books Vers Une Architecture and Urbanisme (The City of Tomorrow).^406 Åhrén
went on to become a major advocate of architecture in Sweden and wrote reviews on
the major late 1920s architectural exhibitions, such as Weissenhof Siedlung in Stutt-
gart 1927.^407 According to Swedish Professor of Art History Thomas Hall, who has
conducted in-depth research into the urban structure of Stockholm, Uno Åhrén, who
backed the idea of an open urban structure and opposed closed city blocks, was one
of Sweden’s leading theoreticians and proponents of urban planning at the turn of the
1920s and 1930s.^408 Åhrén was also involved in launching radical study circles^409 dis-
cussing architectural and social issues, some of which were also attended by Sven Mar-
kelius^410. Although Åhrén and Markelius’ professional paths thus frequently crossed,
Åhrén and Aalto had probably not built a close friendship. Arkkitehti (The Finnish
Architectural Journal) published Aalto’s critique on the Swedish Acceptera publication.
He used the opportunity to remind readers that architects formed a body of scientists,
whose unquestionable duty was to create flexible and organic culture.^411
403 Asplund et al 1931.
404 Asplund et al 1931; Rudberg 1981, pp. 74–78.
405 Rudberg 1981, p. 54.
406 Urbanisme by Le Corbusier was first published in French in 1924. Le Corbusier 1998 [1924].
407 Åhrén 1927, pp. 253–261.
408 Hall 2009, pp. 87–89.
409 Examples of such groups were Fritt forum (The Free Forum), a group established in 1924 that dedicated itself to
philosophical and social questions; a group formed by architects in 1928 to discuss economic matters; Tretton-
klubben (The Club of the Thirteen), established in the early 1930s by architects and cultural luminaries; and Clarté
(Clarity), also established in the early 1930s by radical architects. Activists in all these groups, including Åhrén,
were prolific writers. Rudberg 1981, pp. 81–83.
410 Rudberg 1989, pp. 75–76.
411 Aalto 1930d, pp. 119–120.