Aware of the weakness of the Basque Country and the seriousness of the situation, the alarm sounded: “If we do not bring the Basque country to the centre in our priorities, in our policies and in our actions, personally, socially and politically, our community does not have much future”.

In his work he has shaken the most common idea that has been used in recent years to shorten the situation of the Basque country, which said that we had a strong point in linguistic competence and a weak point in use. With data he has shown that the speakers do not turn their backs on the Basque. Considering that most Basques do better in Spanish, it has concluded, among other things, that its use is high. After this, the strong motivation for the Basque country stands out.

Critical of the discourses that have prevailed in recent years, “we have to think things differently,” he says.

What concerns have this work brought you?

The situation of the Basque Country, of course. I've never been neutral. But I've looked for objectivity. It seemed to me that by looking more deeply at the data, a more precise picture of reality could be given.

"We Basques form an extremely minority community of speakers," he says. Are we aware of current generations that our language almost disappeared?

I think not. Not even the seriousness of our degree of minorities, not just the new generations. Many Basques live mainly between Basques and surely we do not perceive a complete perspective. Those living in Euskaldunes will live more peacefully, and Vascophiles living in more Castilian speaking areas also form their own microworld.

He began his research in 1906 to describe the historical evolution of the Basque country. How did you come here?

I have analyzed all the censuses in the South to calculate how many children received Euskera at home at each time. The series is until the demolinguistic data bring back us, as further back you can't access census data.

Where was Euskera and its weight predominant?

At that time, about one third of the population of the Basque Country lived in respiratory territories. There was a continuous and compact territory where almost all citizens lived in Basque. Simplifying a lot: the whole of Gipuzkoa to the east of Bilbao, surroundings of Aramaio, part of northern Navarre and almost all of the Northern Basque Country. There lived the situation of diglosia: the top functions were performed in Spanish (administration, school, media, high culture, etc.). ), but daily popular life was mainly in Basque: family, street, art of friend, work in agriculture or in the factory... the Basque Country had a social primacy. There would be islands that wouldn't be like San Sebastian or Irún, but in 1906, the starting point, simplifying it a lot, was that.

In any case, Euskaldunes' policies came from earlier.

Of course, I have not analyzed it directly, but studies from a broader perspective say that change had begun throughout the 19 century, and that at the end of the Second Carlist War a profound process of change began that would directly affect the situation of the Basque Country, both in politics and in economics...

At that time, the persecution of the Basques and other dynamics led many not to transmit their mother tongue to their children. In the process of the disappearance of a language, that very serious signal, to what extent was it in us?

Data show that from the beginning of the 20th century until 1970 transmission was decreasing, but at the same time indirectly show that continuity has always been stronger than the attitude of abandoning language. At all times there have been more Euskaldunes that have broadcast the Basque than those that have interrupted the transmission. That's why we're alive. However, a significant group of Euskaldunes has decided not to transmit Euskera over these decades, so, as if it were a strangulation, the Basque was always losing. I know that with less loss than most European communities, but with a clear substitution dynamic. This disruption of transmission occurred mainly in urban areas.

Due to the greater presence of these superior functions in urban centers?

Yes, in the name of modernisation. “The language of the future and of progress is Spanish/French. The Basque language is the language of the baserritars, the late and the poor”. That was the dominant logic, and that's what minority languages have, it's prototypical. The odd thing, in any case, is what we have experienced today and in the last half century: it is rare for citizens to try to convey a minority language.

In relation to the political cycles, it is observed that in the 1920s it was possible to cut the decline and start the rise to 1936, when the Vasquist movement and nationalism were very strong. However, the loss of the war cut it suddenly and the most important losses occurred during the Franco regime. If he had followed that road, today the Basque would be very near death. But around 1955-1960 began a new era of revitalization of the nationalist and Basque world, which led to the ikastolas, the Basque Country, etc. Our data show that, along with this movement, there were changes in people’s normal lifestyle, specifically in language habits with young children (we do not have data for use in other areas of those times).

What has called the era of recovery (1971-2001) was such a huge explosion?

Awesome. From being fashionable in the South we go from “learning in Spanish” to the opposite: “Let children learn in Basque”. That is terrible. This trend also occurred in environments where Euskera was lost. The current Basque Country is the result of the phase of loss (Euskera very diminished, very fragmented, predominating in very few areas) and of that phase of rise is the consequence of the current strong social vasquism, which we often do not know how to value ourselves. Thousands and thousands of people who do better in Spanish also transmit the Basque to their children. This is very rare in the minority language landscape.

However, the recovery phase failed to completely reverse the damage suffered by the Basque Country in the replacement stage.

In 1906, 41% of the children born in Hego Euskal Herria had the first Basque language. This figure fell to 18 per cent by 1971. And at the summit of the ascent phase, the number of people who in 1996 had Basque as their first language reached 27%. We didn't get higher, it didn't get back lost territory or compacting communities like before. In addition, since 1991 we have a lot of data and from there I do not read it solely on the basis of the first language indicator of children born. If we look at most of the indicators I have worked on, we see a trend change in 1996, sometimes in 2001 or 2006, in a growing trend.

This is where the era of inaction begins. What are the signs of this inertisation?

Most data. On the one hand, the tendency to move forward in increasingly stronger domestic transmission was interrupted. On the other hand, usage data show variations around 2001 or 2006: according to the Socio-linguistic Survey, usage continued to grow but more slowly; Kale Neuretak data show a slight downward trend. Finally, on the subject of respiratory areas, they remained relatively well between 1991 and 2001, but then the decline was strongly resumed.

Instead of knowing who knows Euskera and who does not take it as a reference, you have preferred to see who is best performing in Euskera, who is best in Spanish/French and who looks like both. Relative capacity of languages. What innovation does this look like?

Throughout all the work, I've tried to see what sociolinguistic theory says. In this case, the fundamentals of psycholinguistics made it clear to me that we have to take into account the two languages: the competition in Basque and the competition in Spanish/French, and not only that of the Basque. And on the other hand, capacity is not a dichotomous variable, there's a graduation. That is clearly the case. With the rich material in the Socio-linguistic Survey, I came to a classification that establishes the erdaldun end, the Euskaldun end and five intermediate categories; seven classification groups of speakers by competence. I think it takes a more detailed picture of the situation.

And so it has come to the conclusion that “we are strong in terms of the knowledge of the Basque country, but weak in its use” the widespread belief of the last decades is wrong. Why?

The competition issue is dealt with differently in each place. The classification of three groups worked here, so common in the Basque Country, is absolutely asymmetric. In one category, in all Basques, five groups are grouped, which are qualitatively very different, giving us an image. However, a more detailed reading of the data reveals that linguistic competence is one of our main weaknesses. Summarizing the data and translating the classification of the speakers into three groups, it follows: we have 195,000 speakers who are best performing in Basque (7%), 222,000 (8%) who are similar in both languages, and all the others, 2,230,000 are best performing in Spanish (85%), although some of them also know Basque. This gives us a clearer picture of the situation. The situation is, moreover, more serious than that shown by this data. In fact, almost all those who work more easily in Basque also know the other language, but most speakers who do it more easily in Spanish do not know. The imbalance is enormous.

The logic of classification so far said that linguistic competence is stronger than use, and that therefore our weakness is use and our strength is capacity. Comparing the quantities that were made to say that does not make much sense. In all places and languages, knowledge is always greater than use. Go to Catalonia and knowledge is close to 80%, use to 40%...

...they are also more in Spanish and French than those who know how to do it.

Yes, of course. So it makes no sense to do that reading. So I said, "Can't you compare use and knowledge to decide who's stronger?" Let’s figure out how to compare.” I have worked on two paths.

First of all, I have studied how the Basque non-Basque relations networks are formed. Because, as Txillardegi said, when the monolingual speaker joins a bilingual speaker, the language of the monolingual will necessarily be used. And analyzing the composition of the relationship networks, I have calculated the real possibility of using Euskera in current face-to-face relationships. The conclusions are clear: Today, about 82% of the interviews are necessarily in Spanish in Euskal Herria (because the majority of the population only knows Spanish, therefore, among them they do it in Spanish and French and when bilingual Euskaldunes we have to do it necessarily in Spanish). Then, a very small number of interviews, 1%, is necessarily in Euskera – I have had to make estimates, because data from monolingual Euskaldunes are no longer collected in socio-linguistic surveys – and in 17% of interviews we have both languages available. The data for use, therefore, if we do not put the Castellanoparlantes in Basque, cannot exceed 18%. Under current conditions of competition, the use of Euskera will necessarily be between 1% and 18%. Using the same source we see that the use of Euskera is around 15%, much closer to the maximum possible than to the minimum possible.

In a second simulation, I have calculated how much the use of the Basque language would be taking into account the current networks of relationships, provided that the bilinguals meet each other, when it is possible to use one language or another, that is, if each bilingual speaks in the language that is most comfortable for him. If those who speak better in Basque always do better in Basque and Spanish. Thus, the use of the average Euskera would be 8%, but the use is 15%. The Basque Country is therefore heavily used for the land of existing capacity. More under a microscope, the data is clear. In general, the Basque people who most easily speak Basque live in Basque. The bilinguals that express themselves more easily in Spanish live mainly in Spanish, but they grant the Basque an important place in those who can do so. In other words, the place that Euskaldunes who speak best in Basque give to Castilian in their day-to-day lives is much less than that given to the Basque bilingual people who speak best in Spanish. From different perspectives we come to the same conclusion: the soil of existing linguistic competence is now widely used.

And why is that?

Because the speakers have a great adhesion to the Basque. Because attitudes in favor of Euskera are strong and materialize in the language practices of the speakers. There is no lack of concern in the world of attitudes. But today is our main strength. As a result, the Basque Country is up to and not far below.

That changes the current perspective, right? What are the consequences of this for language recovery?

With the classical approach so far, as capacity was above use, it was concluded that there was no real practical connection. That's the prototypical order of a language that's being lost. Put to mind, that provision would lead to death. 80 years ago we were like this: the Basque country was used below the level of the soil of capacity. Today the situation is the opposite. And that offers possibilities for linguistic revitalization. However, we must see how it materializes in intergenerational dynamics.

What do you mean?

Two faces. On the one hand, this is a matter of pride, but on the other hand, it has caused the Basque Country to occur more and more in the last 30 years in part of those who speak better in Spanish. That is also a pride and a clear sign of the will to live of our linguistic community, which would wish all minority languages. But if we do not make that group of speakers easier and easier in Basque, if you always have to “suffer” with your language, we will be making a big deal in the long run. Especially if it is repeated between generations. And if the children of these Euskaldunes who would speak more comfortably in Spanish continue to learn Euskera, in addition to at home, but as they grow they are easier in Spanish.

Is the largest number of Basques living like this?

I have not studied it so precisely, but much of the Basques live like this, yes. I would say that most Basques from more Castilian speaking environments are chained in this dynamic.

And how to get out of that vicious circle?

Firstly, to produce truly trained Basque speakers as a prime objective. I would say that up to now the absolute priority in capacity has been to increase the number of Euskaldunes, Euskaldunifying the Castilian speakers. I think just as important is that there are changes of speaker between the set of bilinguals that make it easier in Spanish and the set of bilinguals that do it better in Basque. We need superiority speakers who are more fluent in Basque. That is our goal.

Do we need more and more people with the right skills to live in Basque?

Yes, the increase of this 7% that is better developed in Basque should be a priority. In fact, in the last 30 years, the number of people who know Basque has increased, and that's important and wonderful. But in the meantime, the group of people who make Basque easier than in Spanish has not risen, is on the same level as 30 years ago. And a truly loyal speaker, with a strong natural tendency to speak in Basque, and the one who uses most in practice is that set.

And how do we extend it?

Asking is easy. What else can you do in schools to work language, orality, fluidity or expressiveness? It is essential. Same outside school with young people and adults. What tools can be given to the Euskaldunes that do not use the Basque so easily, to sharpen our Basque and, after all, to make life easier and euskaldun? Do television stations in Basque offer the speaker a suitable model to learn how to use a living and fluid language? This chip needs to be given another priority because we're charging people. The Basque prototypic, who lives in more Castilian speaking areas, always fights or suffers: many times he has to do it in Spanish because his interlocutors do not know it, and when he has the possibility to do it in Basque, he has to decide: to use the Spanish that is easier and more comfortable, or to throw away his dream and his militant attitude, to speak in Basque more complicated... This vicious circle is what the Basque lives in these environments, and the most worrying thing seems to be perpetuating from generation to generation. We could sum it up as follows: “Although I make it easier in Spanish than in Basque, I have made an effort and have grown my children in Basque. The Euskaldunes of the house I have sent them to class to model D and after a few years they work in Spanish. And I put television on them, and almost all the offer is in Spanish.” Concho! People are making that effort and you have to think things differently if you want to break that chain. The criteria for grouping school groups, for example, do they contribute to the formation of a group that experiences childhood and adolescence in Basque in more Castilian speaking environments? I don't think so.

In addition, the respiratory areas that are the most efficient factories of entire speakers must be looked after and expanded. And in that sense, I do not know if we have to correct lines that have not been addressed so far. [Mikel] I once read to Zalbide the question: “When are the Model D neighborhoods?” Can not the Basque industry think and create, in the next century, neighborhoods that live in Euskera in San Sebastián, Baiona or Pamplona, and then radiate the Euskera throughout the city? Can we not create new Euskaldunes in more Castilian speaking areas? It doesn't look like an easy challenge, but nor was the generation of our parents, who launched the ikastolas in the middle of black Franco, very easy.

He says that many Basques who often go to Castilian have been judged unfairly and that whoever wants to promote Euskera should approach this sector more effectively so that they speak more in Basque.

I incorporate a reflection. Many times we Euskaltzales compare the use of speakers with the ideal situation: that everyone always speak in Basque. It is a typical example, to see in the park the couple of parents with the child in Basque and among them in Spanish. We find this behaviour very ugly and we criticise it. And it's true, this behavior is not entirely effective for transmission to occur. But we often forget that these parents would make it easier with the child in Spanish. This plus they do is huge and you have to appreciate it. I do not think we value it. From there we will be able to connect with these less militant sectors and reach greater commitments, recognizing and accepting the efforts they are making.

Let's talk about the respiratory spaces that guarantee the natural transmission of language. Erosion continues and use decreases. Is it so serious?

Yes, it's serious. [Joshua] Fishman, and in our case Zalbide, have done theoretical work in this regard and qualitatively raise the importance of respiratory spaces, neighborhoods, municipalities and counties where minority languages predominate in normal daily life. The situation most similar to that of living and normalised languages is there. I have worked on the data and the conclusion is clear: while in the areas where Spanish predominates, dynamics incite Spanish, in the respiratory areas, in the territories where Euskera is strong, dynamics favor Euskera. In a way, they're different sociolinguistic ecosystems.

If you place a family that does not know Basque or Spanish in Ondarroa or Azpeitia (Magrebí, Chinese or German, for example) the logical dynamic is that their sons and daughters will speak more easily in Basque than in Spanish and will live in that language for 12 years. If you put the same family in San Sebastian, of course in Bilbao or in Tudela, they will do better in Spanish than in Basque and live mainly in that language. In the respiratory areas it is difficult to live in Spanish, you have to strive. You are becoming more Basque without hardly doing anything. Every time you use language better, you live in Basque, time leads to that. In Donostia it is the opposite.

To illustrate this trend he has used the metaphor of the automatic ladder in his thesis.

To want to live in Basque in territories where Castilian predominates (learn Euskera, use Euskera, transmit to descendants...) is like to try to climb in the opposite direction from a descending mechanical staircase. It must do a lot of force to match the stair speed in the opposite direction. In the respiratory areas, however, the ladder moves from the bottom to the top, it is easy to climb effortlessly. It must therefore be a clear priority to increase the population living in the respiratory areas, the spread of respiratory areas. The locations 60% use go to 80% and those 40% to 60%. I would strengthen the bet there.

However, a small percentage of the population lives in respiratory areas. Therefore, most Basques live on the escalator, from the bottom up, trying to rise in the opposite direction.

This is one of the main weaknesses that define our situation: the vast majority of the population, nine out of ten, lives in areas with predominance of Spanish. About 4% live in respiratory areas, in municipalities where Euskera predominates, and another 6% in municipalities where Euskera is relatively Spanish. The worst thing is that, instead of increasing the weight of the respiratory areas, it has decreased over the last 20 years.

It says that the 10% who live in places where Euskera is greater or equal produces half of what is produced in Euskera. Azpeitia is produced in Bilbao, Zarautz, Vitoria, Baztan and Pamplona. What do you mean?

Catalans use the concept “Parlants a temps complet”, calculating the number of “full-time workers” in the economy. We add the proportion of part-time or part-time workers and calculate the number of full-time working days in companies. If a person’s use of Catalan is 50%, they count as a speaking medium. Following this logic, with the data used, I have calculated the total number of speakers and it serves to quantify the living Basque that is actually spoken. In this sense, approximately half of the Basque population learned occurs in localities where the Basque knowledge is greater than 60%, in which the use is greater than 40%. Include localities such as Azpeitia, Azkoitia, Baztan, Ondarroa, Lekeitio, Zarautz, Tolosa, Zumaia, Gernika...

On the contrary, 81% of the population lives in municipalities where the use of Euskera is less than 20%, and only 31% of the population occurs in them. In recent years it has been said that the profile of the Basques has changed and that the most common profile of the Basque is that of Bilbao. That is true. But the division of the Basque produced is not that. If the respiratory areas are lost with little joke, the process of Euskaldunization can thrive. We are in a large minority, much closer to 0% use than 100% or 50%. Attention to possible loss of respiratory areas. Is it possible to recover the Basque without breathing? I am not going to say that it is not possible – what has happened with the Hebrew shows us that almost everything can be possible – but surely things will become very complicated if we follow current trends and run out of breath.

If you look at the languages below our level of use abroad, you see Ireland, Brittany, Occitania -- they have a common feature: there are no breaths in those territories. There is no space that naturally generates a dense set of speakers. That's over. And if we look at countries that are healthier than us, in Catalonia, most of the territory is the respiratory center. the provinces of Girona and Lleida in their entirety, and the provinces of Barcelona and Tarragona in almost all. They also have cities in which Catalan predominates: Lleida and Girona, Manresa, Reus… We have only over 10,000 inhabitants Azpeitia. Relatively populated villages that previously had respiratory conditions have lost this condition in the last decades… that is a disaster. If a recovery process is to take place, spaces and spaces will be gained, not only in individuals. Euskaldunization will also require the administration of a respiratory space. In the medium term, we should aim to make the territory as continuous and compact a breathing space as possible.

It also proposes a new vision of linguistic evolution.

Yes. Speakers may experience changes in life, ability and use. I can be born in an erdaldun house, live in Spanish during the first years and then in Basque; or vice versa. It is a classic variable in Demolinguistics, used both in Canada, Québec and Catalonia. This has been done in a very special way so far: gains and losses in terms. Since 1991, the Socio-linguistic Survey and the censuses have compared the number of Basque speakers with those who have forgotten the Basque country. That is why a positive reading is made: more people have learned Basque than those who have forgotten it. But we do not take into account the number of Euskaldunes who study Spanish and the number of Castellanoparlantes who forget Spanish. And with that you lose all your sight.

Considering all the movements, the accounts are different. 6% of those who had the Basque language as their first language have forgotten it, but not among those who had Spanish as their first language. More than half of those who had Euskera as the first language, 55%, lost their dominion, no longer developing more easily in Basque than in Spanish. Among those who had Spanish as their first language, the majority lost 2%. Despite the calculations made with the use, instead of focusing on capacity, we came to the conclusion that “the group of speakers who were Euskaldun from home is “moving” much more than the Castilian group. This phenomenon can be summarized with a rather painful nexus: living in the Basque Country today has a Spanish average.

How many speakers have lost Basque lately? What about Spanish?

Specifically in the South, and according to data from the 2011 census, the Basque Country has lost 88,356 speakers compared to current and childhood use. Spanish, for its part, has won 134,025 speakers, attracted by Basque origin and originally from other languages. The Spanish keeps the original speakers better, the Basque language worse; the Spanish attracts more strongly those who did not originate in that language, and the Basque language shows less force of attraction. The Basque community bleeds like this.

In this, of course, the context has a lot of strength and the data are different in the respiratory zones: living there, on average, Euskalduniza.

The Spanish stream is very strong.

This has to do directly with the demolinguistic structure, the weakness of linguistic competence and the predominance of Spanish in most of the territory. If a State were to be achieved tomorrow and the policy you want, that would not change overnight. The general trend generated by the demolinguistics base would continue to be favorable to Spanish. But this situation of vulnerability is also fed by the current legal, political, economic and social conditions. Of course, the policies for the Basque people and the actions of the Basque people also have their influence, and less so. But, at a more general level, that Castilian and French are necessary, that the Basque is not necessary for almost nothing, the world of work, the media, legal frameworks, the positive discrimination that is made from there and from here de facto in favor of Castilian…, almost everything incites to perpetuate and increase the situation of subordination of the Basque.

In their work there are significant demographic changes related to migration and the number of births. What are its effects on language?

I have not dealt with the issue expressly. In the conclusions I have introduced a couple of data to complete the reflection. If we start to look at why stagnation began in 2001, it has to do with, among other things, newcomers. The demographic mass grows and grows with Castilian speakers. And as for births, our intention of recovery has been based on the Euskaldunization of the new generations. The birth of so few children does not help us at all.

Is it comparable to the migratory process of the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s?

The flow of immigrants of the time was much greater and also came to a greater extent from the territories where Castilian predominated. Moreover, they were movements within the State, at a time when the State was firmly defending that language and against ours. This was more sociolinguistic.

In his work, one by one the agents involved in the socialization of citizenship have been analyzed. What would you highlight for your strength towards Spanish or French?

The world of media and cultural consumption. The data is clear. Audience data indicates that ETB1 has a share of 2%. Use in all other measured areas exceeds 10%. That is, all speakers speak Basque in all areas of life more than 10%, but when watching television 2%. . That is a disaster. The studies of UEMA and Arrue [on the use of language in the students' school environment] also show a great socializing weakness to explain the data. This factor is clearly contrary to Euskera. Moreover, of course, the fact that most children and adolescents live in territories in which Spanish predominates radically conditions the socialization processes.

Is there any agent of socialization that favours the Basque?

Yes, we mentioned the family area earlier. Although there are still many more children who grow in Spanish at home (70%) than those who grow in Basque (17%), in an intergenerational perspective the trend is positive. The weight of the Basque country that the children of today at home receive is considerably greater than that of their parents. The other positive agent is the school. Despite its multiple facets of leadership and consolidation, in general it has promoted the Euskaldunization of the new generations, especially in the CAPV and in the north of Navarra, at least in the first years of children's life.

To round off, then, we could say that the work done to revitalize the Basque country has been enormous, but has not progress been made in the last 20 years?

The work done is tremendous: we have managed to prevent the death of the language that could result from the previous dynamic. Unfortunately, there is no central database for the evolution of other minority languages, but in the last 30 years very few have had our evolution. Most of them go down and down. We have managed to match the speed of the escalator in the opposite direction. In the past, between 1960 and 2000, we managed to climb and advance faster than that staircase. And just match it in recent years. And there we are today.

Kike Amonarriz compared the current situation with the crossing. How do you see possible futures?

I like the image of the crossing. On the one hand we have the path towards languages that are about to die or in a very precarious situation. And we have the standard languages of the small European states: Iceland, Polish, Slovenian… And there we are. I'm going to put some numbers to the metaphor. If we take the usage indicator, and it's not the one that leaves us the worst, 15 percent is the Basque in the Sociolinguistic Survey. The use of irlande does not reach 1%, so the distance on the road is fourteen points. On the other hand, we'll put Iceland in. In Iceland they are concerned about the competition with English, increasingly used for tourism, cultural creation, the digital world… However, in the light of their data, it can be thought that today more than 80% is used. Therefore, we are at the crossroads, OK, but there are 15 points away from death and 65 points of full health language. And not only that, are all the miles equal? No. One path descends on the slope, we can descend effortlessly and the other ascends on the slope. The automatic stairs go down the Irish route, in the opposite direction to that of Iceland, and we will have to fight for the force to rise, particularly in the first few kilometres.

You stress that we need a big leap. Is this a change in the practice of public institutions and the Basque Country?

No doubt. We are keeping this time, but any streak that may come can take us. We are very fragile and very fragile.

Do you see strength to turn the situation around? For another recovery?

In short, the situation of our linguistic community is characterized by a strong weakness in fact (knowledge, use...), but also by a strong motivation, vasquism, attachment to language. In the last century, and also before, this country has proved to be a strong people, who know how to commit deeply to our language and to the desire to be a people. It is true that today we are not in the most intense time, that we are at sunset, that we cannot find the way. But I have no doubt that in the next few years our country will take the strength and the skill to move forward.

What is your conclusion after completing the thesis?

We cannot fall asleep. That we have to analyze the situation as rigorously as possible, and that by taking advantage of the immense experience that exists, and taking advantage of the life desires that inhabit us from within, we have to move forward with imagination and courage.