reveal whether the standard parts were eventually produced on an industrial basis and, if
so, in which format. Therefore, I find that a closer investigation of Paimio Sanatorium’s
realisation will bring added insight into this ideologically essential theme, the role of the
standards as part of the design and its execution.
My earlier research discussed Alvar Aalto’s patents.^114 Aalto began to file for patents
for his inventions from the 1930s onwards. Like many other designers, Aalto aimed
to protect his immaterial rights and economic interests through patents. Even if only
a small number of European designers of the 1920s and 1930s were successful in pro-
tecting their innovation from financial exploitation,^115 Aalto was one of these few. He
worked on his first patent applications in the early 1930s in collaboration with the
furniture manufacturer Otto Korhonen (1883–1935), who had a wealth of experience
in this field and was knowledgeable about the critical questions in his industry and
the patent procedures.^116 Otto Korhonen knew from experience how to instruct Aalto
specifically on patent methods to ensure that the patent would secure as extensive pro-
tection for Aalto’s innovation as possible. The collaboration was based on the two men’s
mutual interests. Aalto wanted to develop serial manufacturing methods and make
financial gains as a furniture designer. Korhonen, in turn, saw an interesting business
opportunity in the collaboration, and he was prepared to dispense his knowledge for
the purpose.^117
Scientific management methods have been seen in architectural discourse as
a manifestation of Americanisation, in other words, changing European and other
cultures to follow American and Canadian models. Many European architects
were, for example, inspired by North-American building types, such as skyscrapers,
industrial buildings and hotels.^118
Architectural historian Mary McLeod from the United States studied Le Corbus-
ier’s views on modern industrial production methods as drivers of social change. In the
1920s, Le Corbusier, as well as many of his German colleagues, regarded Taylorism and
the serial production method as tools for social change. Industrial efficiency made it
possible to approach architecture as a social medium. Le Corbusier believed that only
modern production could facilitate the production of architecture at a cost that would
be affordable to all.^119 Le Corbusier’s Vers Une Architecture proclaimed that changes
in building design and production would bring such social advances that a revolution
could thus be avoided.^120 According to McLeod, Le Corbusier’s future-oriented urban
plans were, however, socially segregated. A new class division predicted power based
114 “Innovative Aalto” was an exhibition held at the Finnish Patent and Registration Office and based on the author’s
then unpublished manuscript and research material that was compiled on Aalto’s patents. The exhibition was
open from the end of 2002 until March 2003 at the Finnish Patent and Registration Office premises. Innovative
Aalto exhibition publication on the Finnish Patent and Registration Office website. See Nikkanen et al. eds. 2002.
115 Benton 1979, p. 13; Heikinheimo 2004, p. 16.
116 Heikinheimo 2004, pp. 10–11.
117 Heikinheimo 2004, pp. 9–16.
118 See e.g. Cohen 1995.
119 McLeod 1983, pp. 135–136.
120 Le Corbusier 1986 [1923]; See e.g. Forty 1986, p. 80, and Banham 1999 [1960], pp. 220–246.