sunshades. The lower ribbon was also equipped with an awning, which would shade the
faces of patients reclining outdoors on the terrace outside the window.
The terraced hospital type had a topical example in the Waiblingen Hospital near
Stuttgart (1928), designed by Richard Döcker. According to Markelius, adding terraces
was applicable only in fairly low, two to three, or at the very most four storey buildings
located on low-density sites. In terraced hospitals, patients could benefit from fresh
outdoor air for most of the year. The writer anticipated that the hospital building type
would be popular among physicians, as it would speed up recovery.^427
Interestingly, Aalto made no mention about Markelius’ hospital ward in his critique of
the Stockholm Exhibition in Arkkitehti (The Finnish Architectural Journal). However, it
must have provided real and concrete solutions for a number of detailed design questions
that Aalto was working on at that time. Markelius specifically stressed his attempt to
freely experiment with new possibilities in hospital design rather than showcase existing
solutions. The exhibition hospital ward focused on the floor plan of two key spaces, the
patient room and the operating theatre, as well as hospital technology, furniture, interior
arrangements and equipment.^428
Both Markelius and Aalto were familiar with Henry Ford Hospital in Detroit, although
neither mentions this in their articles. This particular hospital concept merits further discus-
sion because Ford approached the problematics of a hospital from a completely new angle:
the patient. This approach must have had a bearing in both Aalto’s and Markelius’ design
ideology. Ford recounted the story of the Detroit hospital in his best-selling book My Life
and Work, in the chapter “Why Charity?”.^429 Ford had donated funds for the hospital, which
was built as a charity project. As the project exceeded its original budget, Ford redeemed
himself for the project by returning all donations to their origin. Ford regarded charity as
passivating and humiliating for the beneficiary. He set out to develop a hospital concept
aimed at middle-income population that would support itself. The idea was to produce a
maximum volume of services with as low expenditure as possible, but the purpose of the
hospital was not, in the end, to generate profit. Ford changed the plans for both the building
and the hospital operations. Rooms were to be private and exactly identical. The hospital
fee depended on the length of stay and the nature of treatments, which were priced in
advance. According to Ford, it was difficult to say whether the hospitals of the day had been
designed to benefit the doctors or the patients. To avoid misdiagnosis and the supremacy
of doctors, each patient was given several, independent diagnoses. Doctors and nurses were
on a monthly salary with one-year contracts, so the doctors were not tempted to order
unnecessary treatments for patients to increase their own income. One nurse had no more
than seven patients at one time. Ford called for a more constructive approach to organising
public services and the inclusion of economics in general education.^430
427 Markelius 1930, pp. 173–176.
428 Ibidem, pp. 173–176.
429 The description of the hospital can be found in the Chapter “Why Charity?” Ford [1922], pp. 215–219.
430 Ibidem.