The biography of the book's front page says he did audiovisual studies and that his job is to design digital projects and services. When and how did you start doing it?

I learned audiovisual communication because I wanted to be a writer. I went to Madrid to study script, and when I went back to San Sebastian, I tried to get into that world, but it didn't work, and I started writing at an advertising agency. When the blogging issue came up, I started to fly, because I have computers that I like. At work, I asked that I move from offline advertising to online advertising, and there I met my partner and partner Goio Telletxea.

I just wanted to ask him why. In 2008 you created La Personnalité, a house dedicated to the design of digital projects and services. What has attracted you?

We saw applications and things like that were being created, and we wanted to explore that world. There was market and need for design. We wanted to do projects that we were interested in, not corporate websites, but that serve something or help people. We wanted to improve people's experiences through design.

What exactly do they do?

When you use a program, email or Twitter itself, someone has to think about all of them. Traditionally, it's been the world of engineers and programmers, but now the experience of users is becoming more and more valuable. For example, our commitment has been to work the industrial software used by the workshop operators, as they need a design that allows them to improve the lives of the workers and make things faster and more comfortable. Suppose an application serves to set up a machine. We think and design how this application can be as simple and useful as possible.

This is your motto: “We design digital projects and services with love and principles.” Is there a lack of principles in this professional field?

Some of them work very reactively, without judgment or direction: they have asked me for this, because I will do this. Like a bunch of reviews. We, with this slogan in general, want to state that we have some design principles, and that we do not put, for example, a button, just because it is available to us.

What are your criteria?

You need an address and you understand what you're designing. To do this, for example, we have to learn how a train is set up or how a warehouse works, and it's a demanding job, but we can't design something that we don't understand. Some of them do, of course. Design is not to put nice things, it's not veneer and painting, design is form and function. Design is not to color and decorate what engineers have thought; you have to be in the whole thought process, if you don't know what you're doing.

What about love?

It's love because we give everything. Taking care of the details is very important, after all the difference is noted in the details. At first you see something that looks very good, but then, aix! Something like that doesn't work. If you don't take care of all the details, the leaks will go somewhere.

Is that love perceived in dealing with clients?

Yes, honesty. You can't tell customers that you agree with something if you really don't agree. That is another principle. Then, you have to explain why you disagree, of course, and customers appreciate it. There are people who hire people to say amen, but most want them to tell the truth. You don't spend the money to confirm what you already know, but to get a look that completes your vision.

I would now like to speak about the writer Ana Malagón. Three years ago you published the book Lasai, ez da ezer mikro-ipuin and just a month ago you published the book Gelditu zaitezte with us. I do not know if you have already said so, but the phrase makes sense: Calm down, nothing happens; stay with us.

It's true. Both are very appealing and can be similar. I have not done so on purpose, but the two are phrases that we hear a lot: the first one is said a lot by us, at least by me, and the other one we have heard many times on television. Maybe it's that: take a very common phrase and put it as a title.

What happened when Lasai was published, nothing happens?

I had long wanted to write a book, and for several reasons, I hadn't done it before. Once you do, you calm down and it's already there. The truth is, nothing happened. People congratulate you on writing the book, and it seems like you've done it really, but then it's very simple, it's not going to change anyone's life, or yours. We put books into writing a kind of epic or romanticism, and it doesn't. I got to go a couple of readers to the group, do some interviews, have to explain myself and have to theorize about some things even if there's no theory behind them, but my life is my work and my environment, and those didn't change. Of course, it brought me other things, especially I saw that I was able to write a book, but in the day-to-day I hadn't put anything on my back. My life is not literature, my life is something else.

How do you start writing a story?

I'm not one of those who write to empty the bowels. Writing forces me to think, I wonder what I think of such a character, and that's how I start writing. Then it reflects in a very different way, or it comes out the opposite of what I think, but because we live so fast and we have so little time to think, writing is a way of reserving a space to think about this or that. Then there are several sources, for example, a story I've heard on the radio, or something I've read ...

The starting point is to start thinking about a subject, OK, but how does reflection become a story?

I think about the situations, what would someone who is not me or who has these characteristics do in that situation.

A group of readers told you that your micronarratives were very sad and the next time you encouraged yourself to make more joyful stories. You haven't. I have often been told about this issue, about “sad” literature, why does it give more fodder?

I have no answer, sad stories are no longer worth by themselves. What happens is that my point of view is rather pessimistic and, although my opinion does not appear in stories, there is a certain way of looking at situations. But the world is pretty shit, isn't it? In my environment, for example, there are not many happy stories, even though they are not particularly sad stories. Most stories that make you think or move are not joyful… Misery is more attractive. We identify more with misery than we do with super-chatter stories. We are very suspicious, and the Gipuzkoans are even more so.

In this second book I would say that you are more murderous; people die on 5 in 14 stories and there are everything: accidents, suicides, murders, “natural” deaths…

For me, death is the most important part of life. It's the most significant thing that happens to us. In addition, as I'm aging, it's becoming increasingly important. In everyday life we do not realize it, but there is death, or death, not, but mortality, that we are mortal and that there will come that moment, and how it marks that in our relationships and in our confrontations. This is an important issue for me. We often avoid it and, moreover, more and more has gone to hide death. Our ancestors had a more natural relationship with that, not so much us: we have tanatories so that the dead we had before would not be among us. We are increasingly striving to move away from death, trusting that we will save ourselves, but not for the time being.

He told me he wanted to write about fidelity and he finished writing about custody. Why do you want to work loyalty?

One of today's issues is that, lack of fidelity. Things are increasingly changing, we have more and more problems maintaining who we are or who we are, but we have that internal conflict: on the one hand we want to be free, but on the other we are afraid of loneliness. We want to be true to ourselves, but we have contradictions, and at the same time we want to keep those contradictions free, we want to have all the options open. I remembered these issues and the ways I wanted to deal with them.

What is the relationship between custody and loyalty?

I wouldn't say they're synonyms, but fidelity has an important part of your care. In life we go through several phases: first they take care of us, then we want to break that care, and then we take care of ourselves, then there are couples or not… I think that to maintain or break the fidelity, we take care of the person or the idea or what we are, or we stop taking care of. In short, loyalty must be watered down and watered with care, among other things.

Keep with us the characters in the book, often stay at the door of what you should or want to do. They're at a crossroads and they want to change things, but they don't.

They're in a pressure cooker and it looks like they're going to explode, but in the end they don't. We rarely burst. There are people who are convinced, but we've all thought that from time to time we'd like to put everything to the ruin, and in the end we haven't done it and we've stayed where we were for fidelity. We're afraid of change. And fidelity has something to do with that fear. How many don't leave your partner or work or a lot of things out of fear of it coming? Will that be worse or better? We ask ourselves that, but we do not have the will to listen to the answer.

Can the pressure cooker always hold more?

That's what we think. Then you release the pressure through a groove, it's not a big bang, but there's at least one escape route, and so we go on. I know few people who have made a big bang.