When and how did you start writing?
I would say that I have had the habit or the impulse to write since I was young. At the ikastola, he was very shy and came through creativity; most of the time, in writing. Then, take the step of publishing it... After 18 years, I started writing more, especially poetry, and I got really stuck in the world of the fanzines. In addition, Mikelazulo was being created at that time, and thanks to it, from the beginning we joined the writing and the stage, although at first we made recitals and not so much theater.

What did it mean to play the fanzines?
I remember very nice and subjective experiences. You start writing individually, but I did it because of the collective character and the story of the fanzines.

Why is the group so important?
It serves to remove fear, to trust, to explore, to contrast: you discover a whole world. At first it was much more instinctive, there was no such intellectual or political thought.

So, you lived close to the birth of Mikelazulo.
Yeah, but I didn't create it. I was part of the first generation of what Mikelagro wanted. It was created in 1995.

The situation in Euskal Herria was very different, and that of Orereta, of course, was a continuous explosion. At that time it was very rare that there was a space where, for example, programming was prioritized and not the bar.

I often wonder what it would be like if Mikelazulo hadn't been, and I don't know. I think it was a very key piece for the collective character to take root and hold for so many years. I'm clear that these kinds of projects are really impulsive or impulsive, so it poses beyond space.

He underlined the political dimension of Mikelazulo.

From the point of view of the Left, there were many people here, not all of them exactly the same, not even those on the Left. Here we learned that every thing we do needed a speech, and therefore, nothing we do is casual politically, contradictory contradictions, although sometimes we seek more debate and not so much the construction of a discourse.

How would you summarize Mikelazulo's experience?A
meeting point and an immense living laboratory, as well as a wild art laboratory in which we have made barbarities.

Do you remember especially?For me,
the travels we made within cultural internationalism were especially strong. We were doing a campaign, totally self-managed, to get money and go outside, and there we were presenting a cultural project.

I especially remember the show we did in a quechua community in Ecuador. They were crushed by the paramilitaries and we made a representation before them. It was the first time you saw something like this. It's the most impactful performance I've ever done. In the end, we made a forum with the public, we were all crying: we were listening to their stories, they were our... So I understood what the meaning of what we actually do could be. Then here's not the same thing, but his trail stays forever.

And what is the meaning of what you do?In the end
you always seek communication, here too, and you get it, sometimes more than other times. But there was no such filter, no media, no how we sold ourselves, no photographers, no press, no wanted to be OK, no programmers ... It was a savage, face-to-face communication: see if what we really do is shit or not. People weren't going with a bias, because I had read one or the other criticism. People left and gave him what we gave him and it didn't help him. Consequently, we were in a very violent situation, because we only had one tool: communicating something. Nobody valued our dramaturgy, our aesthetics, our trajectory ... We had to go to the bottom of what we do.

So far, we've talked about collective work and stage work. We now turn to your poetry books. Others
were before the first book in the official biography, but I've tried to hide them. On the other hand, Mikelazulo published several collective books, especially about poetry, and they were very important to us.

Later, he published the works through several contests.
It was, after all, a way to get it out of the closet. I presented myself mainly to competitions that published works. At that time, I wasn't sure of myself and I was sending things, I didn't really know where, and maybe, if it's published, you see the work differently.

And then, Eskuen sustraiak, from Susa's hand. No competition, for the first time. Knowing Susa's
family was very important to me. I believe that, through the poetry section, they have made a big bet with some people. What I sent you in the beginning was really bad. They were very demanding and for me it was a great lesson. There I saw how important the figure of an editor is, its involvement and its voice, even if it is between lines. It's an art of the editor, it's becoming a craft, and I don't know if to say too much, but I think it can be on the path of disappearance.

And when it comes to writing theater, is the process different?For me, it has always been two
parallel paths, writing poetry alone and writing texts to play as a team: they have gone away and come closer. At first, this relationship was conflicting. Then, years later, I accepted, I accepted that I needed the two and that, in a way, they could join with time. I think I've done it, because I've found a way to write theater.

What is that path to writing theater?
Renouncing the author. Don't think the writer who writes theater is a writer. That there be one more member of the group, that is part of a process, and that the figure of the author who writes a work, done, sacred, and when someone takes it, and that he put himself on stage, that he respects everything, points and commas and all the appointments. I respect that figure, and maybe there has to be a model like that, because when it comes to aesthetics, there has to be everything.

However, my path has been to put an end to the author and renounce his power. I can contribute, and it is important to do as best as possible and to value the text, but it is not sacred. Power is in the group, and the group decides where we are and where we are going. Also, when you relax and end up with the author, you discover a very nice dimension of the text. The texts go much further, at least in our experience.

Mr. Señora (Txalaparta, 2016), a book that gathers seven plays, has just been published. Why publish what is going to be staged?

Very little theatre has been published, but there is demand, and people continue to use the texts of the 1980s. There are no contemporary texts, even if there are many: they are not available. There's another theater and you have to get out.

I can do it for myself. Arra.Arraroarekin I learned that it was very important to extract texts that reflect contemporary concerns as a tool for people to be able to stage their concerns, but also for there to be another type of writing. People picked it up Arra.Arraroa and felt very free: they don't have to use it all, they don't have to do exactly what it says in the placements.

I propose an imaginary and a few texts: a starting point. If a group accepts that imaginary, it can use those materials and create its own; feel free to act as a believer actor. Or maybe someone from contemporary dance takes a piece of Mr. Miss and expresses with the body what I have said with words. Why not? Why should we always stay in a way of doing things? Let people go as far as possible.

You work within the Metrokoadroka creative lab as a creative actor.
At first, it was an art platform with various languages. After that, the theater has gained more strength. The tablate shall be one of the unique arts in which all other gears may be included. It becomes a shareholder meeting point naturally. It's the only time through the scene where we can all do something, whether it's physically on the scene or in the direction, make scenography, make poster, music, lights...

How do you set up a show?
Because we're not a company, and because we're not within that dynamic, every project has its history. There have been different stimuli. Someone has an idea, they come up as a group, and then they start building alliances naturally, they sense the moment, the agenda and they create the group. There is minimal coordination for paper management and others, but in each project they send those who are in the project, there is no direction. Even though I put forward an idea, once the group was created, I completely lose power. I like loss of control. In the end, teamwork doesn't mean everyone does the same and everyone does the same. There are roles and that's OK. The point is that everything is being negotiated. We have also learned this: if one person is a better actress in truth, and the other more skillful in clothing, because it makes no sense that I am going to look for shirts to traperos. Let us take our limitations and then negotiate important decisions between all of us. Teamwork also consists in accepting the qualities and limitations of oneself and in reconciling those of all.

Has any of the shows you made left you some special trace?
Joy was very key to us. It worked very well, despite being very experimental and doing it very kamikaze. In this work, after many years, we found a lot of things that we really wanted to say, in some way it put us in.

Where?For the
first time we worked intensively, until then we met on loose evenings. On that occasion, however, we took fifteen days and we met the whole group in a closed place, where the creation was savage. For the first time, we start with autobiographical materials and perform autofication in the strictest sense: we start with our own materials, but we transform them and we build fiction. For the first time we felt there was a way to pass poetic texts through the body. We didn't have a director, we ran it by the five colleagues. At the point of departure, we had poetic visuals and improvisations, totally physical, and we even put in absurd humor, but not so much jokes, but pulling the physical work.

What balance does your trajectory make?
I feel very accomplished and very happy, especially because I don't feel alone, but as part of something. It also feels tired and precarious, which as the years go by it becomes slower. Sometimes I see actors that I admire a lot, 60 to 65 years old, loading a truck after a ball, and I really worry, maybe because I'm also closer to that. How is it possible to value so little? What do we do with those people who have given us so much? I have no solution. What saves us for the moment is to continue working as part of a collective, risking both politically and aesthetically, with all the contradictions, conflicts and difficult moments that this entails.

From your point of view, how are the performing arts today?The journey through Mikelazulo
has taught me something: there is a reality we don't know, there are people who are doing wonderful things, much more than we imagine, and we don't recognize or recognize that it exists. In theatre, this is precisely what happens: in various forums it is clear that there is a very interesting and powerful experimental and human material. I have read many times that Basque culture is in crisis, but I believe there is a way of looking at Basque culture in crisis. Sometimes you don't need to create something or create something else, you need to look at what's generated.