life and career, particularly the geopolitics, was given more prominence.^171 Pelkonen
disregarded the impact of the CIAM meetings on Aalto’s thought, although these were
the instances, particularly the meeting in Frankfurt am Main, where he built and main-
tained his professional networks. Another point of importance was that the movement
itself became more politicised during the early 1930s. Pelkonen also afforded little
attention to the role and presence of Aino Marsio-Aalto (1894–1949) as the architect’s
conversation partner and sounding board.
During the inter-war period, the body of architects was predominantly male. Finnish
art historian Renja Suominen-Kokkonen emphasised in her research the role of women
in architecture. In her doctoral dissertation, she described Aino Marsio-Aalto as an
architect who successfully combined her marriage and career.^172 She highlighted Aino
Marsio-Aalto’s role as a furniture and interior designer in joint projects with her husband
and in Artek, the furniture and design marketing business, which was established in 1935.
Suominen-Kokkonen’s research has made visible an aspect of Aalto’s work that had pre-
viously remained hidden and emphasised the collective nature of design.
Finnish Professor Pekka Korvenmaa has written about Aalto’s clients, particularly
the forest industry companies, which was the wealthiest sector in Finnish industry
in the 1930s. Korvenmaa drew attention to the differentiation of roles in factory
building design. The remit of the architect was limited to the design of the external
envelope of the building, which was, nonetheless, of great importance and interest to
the client.^173 Korvenmaa also examined Aalto’s role as the advocate of Bauhaus Mod-
ernism, which in the 1930s was largely seen as left-wing. Regardless of his radical
ideas, Aalto was able to convince his industry clients of the feasibility of modern for-
mal idiom.^174 In his article “A Bridge of Wood: Aalto, American House Production
and Finland”, Korvenmaa explained that the way Aalto embraced internationalisa-
tion and built contacts with American counterparts in the late 1930s was a practice
that had already been established by the previous generation. Korvenmaa went on
to add that while Germany was on many levels the primary model in technological
and cultural development, the individualistic model of democracy prevailing in the
United States, combined with social and technological modernity, became the ideal
for many.^175 Although the situation described by Korvenmaa is highly interesting
from the perspective of the present research, particularly in terms of technology
transfer, his study focused on a later period than the one of this enquiry.
Aalto’s light fittings and lighting designs have been widely covered by architectural
research because, even in his early career, he was a prolific lighting designer and showed
171 Alvar Aalto und die Schweitz (Alvar Aalto and Switzerland); Aalto and America; and Alvar Aalto i Sverige (Alvar Aal-
to in Sweden) also shed light on Aalto’s rich encounters and relationships with certain cultural areas. See Jokinen
and Maurer eds. 1998b; Anderson et al. eds. 2012; and Rudberg 2005.
172 Aino Marsio-Aalto is one the three “invisible” woman architects whom Suominen-Kokkonen has brought into
focus in her doctoral dissertation, The Fringe of a Profession, which covers the period from the 1890s to the 1950s.
Suominen-Kokkonen 1992.
173 Aalto 1931c, pp. 188–193; Korvenmaa 1998, p. 74.
174 Korvenmaa 1998, passim.
175 Korvenmaa 2012, p. 101.