-In terms of sustainability, we already know that architecture can be more or less harmful to nature, but do you think architecture can have an impact on people’s health? How?
EA: I think it is fundamental to move forward and get out of this big trap to never use the term sustainability again. People’s health has little to do with that word. Good architecture already incorporates a scientific component that supports the thermal comfort margin of optimal use for each climate and the use of the necessary materials for its best development. The most sophisticated and difficult part, and therefore the most absent, is the part that affects the emotional part of our health and to which the least attention is paid. Designing buildings for emotional or spiritual wellbeing entails more risks and additional work, but it is what really puts man in intimate and intense contact with his environment, with others and with the world around him. It is architecture that shapes and protects this environment of human relationship, regardless of whether the universe is expanding or cooling. On the other hand, the rational tranquillity generated by knowing that the wood in the floor comes from a certified Nordic forest or that the ceramics in the bathroom are made in the next village through a circular economy, only lasts for a while as a feeling of moral tranquillity. But in the long run, our avid conscience asks for more: to reach a state of our own located between intimate comfort and peace of mind, something like a “being well” in the world where words and infallible alibis are superfluous.
-What are you working on now, do you have a project in mind or are you working on that you think is focused on the architecture of the future?
EA: I’m working on restoring some of the lost dignity to our profession, which is enough of a future. I am very interested in new uses in sports buildings as collective objects to share a healthy environment, because of their infinite spatial possibilities and because they are not yet speculative real estate objects. I am also involved in the generation of a utopian idea of a city that allows us to have a spatial image that excites us and encourages us to be together again and to share. On the other hand, I try, without much success, to ensure that neither financiers nor project managers define buildings beforehand, and to pedagogically help lawyers and builders to gain access to a little of the excellence that architecture brings to our lives, but also without much success. In general, a strange energy pervades me in search of a way of doing architecture in which Excel tables disappear and energy certificates and certificates of good conduct are extinguished.
-Do you think there is anything important you want to tell me that I haven’t asked you about?
EA: You haven’t asked me why the architect, being the one who designs, thinks and directs, has become the weakest link in the chain when constructing a building and the one who earns the least money being the one who goes to jail. Nor have you asked me why the university studies of Architecture to build our tangible world are abandoned and in decline and those of Algorithmic Mathematics applied to the invisible are on the rise. The latter is the million-dollar question.