In this edition of “Design Dialogues,” Fublis is honored to feature Dr. phil. Juan Almarza Anwandter, an architect, theorist, and academic whose work bridges the realms of design, philosophy, and architectural theory. His research and projects challenge conventional boundaries, seeking to restore the lost connection between architectural practice and theoretical discourse.

Dr. Almarza’s work is deeply informed by philosophical inquiry, particularly his exploration of Nietzsche’s concept of Grand Style in architecture. His projects, such as the Two Seaside Villas in Chile and the Tower in Puerto Saavedra, reflect a commitment to clarity, order, and tectonic consistency—principles that he sees as essential for meaningful architectural expression. Through his designs, he crafts spaces that serve as frames for life’s unfolding moments, emphasizing contemplation, spatial experience, and the delicate interplay between necessity and excess.

In this in-depth conversation, Dr. Almarza shares his perspectives on the role of theory in contemporary architectural practice, the symbolic power of the built environment, and his approach to materiality and structural clarity. He also discusses his upcoming book, “Nietzsche for Architects,” which seeks to translate philosophical concepts into practical design strategies.

Join us as we delve into his unique vision, where architecture becomes not just a functional necessity but a profound and expressive medium that shapes human experience.

Your work spans architecture, theory, and academia, blending hands-on design with deep philosophical inquiry. How do you see architectural theory influencing practical design decisions in today’s built environment?

Juan Almarza Anwandter: From the Renaissance up until the Modern Movement, architectural theory and practice were strongly interconnected, forming two sides of the same coin, so to speak. This is because, on the one hand, the most influential architectural theorists were also practitioners (from Alberti to Semper, Le Corbusier, Rossi, etc.), and on the other hand, architectural theory primarily focused on the systematic definition of design principles rooted in deep conceptual and philosophical standpoints. In our current postmodern context, however, this relationship between theory and practice has been lost. Architectural theory has evolved into a highly specialized and autonomous field of knowledge production, with little to no connection to the practical decision-making processes shaping the built environment. Typically pursued by academics with no experience in the art of building, it is largely centered on archival research and historical analysis, following a highly documentalist approach to narrowly defined subjects. While their findings may hold scientific rigor, they are mostly worthless in practical terms. The classical bridge between architectural theory and practice is broken—and it must be restored.

Two Seaside Villas design in Chile is inspired by the form of ships, incorporating elements like decks, watchtowers, and observation platforms. What drew you to this nautical typology, and how does it shape the way the inhabitants engage with the coastal landscape?

Juan Almarza Anwandter: The choice of a nautical language for these experimental projects is congruent with their proposed seaside context. But for me, this is not just about this contextual relationship. The sea has strong symbolic connotations. It is an expression of our desire for amplitude, extension, depth, and freedom. Can architecture provide such an experience? Yes. An architecture of wide, deep perspectives, of clear lines projected into infinity, of sharp edges and clean contours. An architecture that can create a sense of expansion and plenitude, analogous to that experienced while sailing the open wide seas. In this sense, the coastal landscape just reinforces and amplifies something that is embedded in the form of these projects. The use of decks, watchtowers and observation platforms creates a sort of apotheosis for contemplation, both within the buildings and towards the surrounding context.

You describe the architecture as a “frame for the canvas of life,” where daily movements become performative acts. How do you see spatial design influencing the way people experience and interact with their environment on a subconscious level?

Juan Almarza Anwandter: I have chosen this pictorial metaphor to clarify my interpretation of what good architecture means. When contemplating a painting, what truly matters is the content—the frame merely provides a sense of limits, proportion, and orientation. This, fundamentally, is the role of architecture: to enhance life, to reveal it in its dynamic and ephemeral delicacy. To fulfil this purpose, architecture should maintain a degree of clarity, neutrality, and sobriety. If the frame becomes too expressive, it begins to interfere with the painting’s content. Likewise, distorted, overly expressive architecture—characterized by loud gestures and striking effects—tends to impose itself on the experience of inhabiting, in a tyrannical manner. Many deconstructivist projects from the 1980s and 1990s fall into this category, as do some more recent works, particularly those driven by parametricism and biomimicry. Architecture should not imitate or represent the complexities of life; it should simply allow life to manifest in its fullness.

Your research delves into Nietzsche’s concept of Grand Style. How do you interpret this idea in contemporary architecture, and in what ways can it inform the way we design today?

Juan Almarza Anwandter: This was the subject of my doctoral thesis. Nietzsche formulated the concept of Grand Style as a means of translating his notion of Will to Power into the domain of aesthetics. Roughly speaking, it corresponds to the classical style but stripped of its classicist-historicist connotations. Nietzsche affirms Grand Style as a superior form of aesthetic expression, in contrast to the baroque or any form of romantic-Wagnerian expressionism, which he regarded as symptoms of decadence. One of the few architectural examples given by the philosopher as a concrete embodiment of Grand Style was the Palazzo Pitti in Florence. Would it be possible to recognize this concept in other case studies and eventually implement it as a design strategy? This was my research question. To find an answer, I analyzed the aphorisms written by Nietzsche on the subject, attempting to decode the language of Grand Style into a set of formal-aesthetic attributes. Among these are order, clarity, distinction, hierarchy, tectonic consistency, and perfection—free of masks, tricks, or concealed efforts. This is the language of Grand Style, and it is timeless. Among the masterpieces of the Modern Movement, Mies van der Rohe’s Neue Nationalgalerie in Berlin stands as a strong example. I believe our cities and their inhabitants would greatly benefit from the implementation of projects that adhere to these principles. It would have a dignifying and spiritually-healing effect at a large scale. Therefore, I am currently writing a book, based on my doctoral research, whose provisional title is “Nietzsche for architects”. It systematically explains these principles through a series of case studies, in a clear and straightforward manner.

The tower in Puerto Saavedra, Chile project is described as an “experimental design” and a “utopian vision” directed solely by creative will. How does designing for yourself, without external constraints, differ from designing for a client? Did this process reveal anything unexpected about your own architectural sensibilities?

Juan Almarza Anwandter: Well, architects can be clients too! Many relevant case studies from the history of architecture prove the point. I think of Melnikov´s house in Moscow, for example. He was lucky to build it. Will I ever be able to build my tower? I don´t know…so, for now, it remains a utopian vision. I think it perfectly reflects myself, like a mirror of my soul. I conceived it to be located in a spot I used to visit with my parents when I was a child. Puerto Saavedra, a remote location in the Chilean coast. I was deeply impressed by the huge cliffs, the vast Pacific Ocean, the wind, the solitude. A true experience of the Sublime, in a Kantian sense. How should an architecture insert in such powerful context? I thought of watchtowers and lighthouses. These are technical objects, but in a deeper sense they are metaphors of the Self. Magnificent in their self-sufficient autonomy. A tower is the essential, archetypical form that underlays such typologies. What specific spatial and programmatic features should it have? All I knew was that it had to convey the spartan and austere character typical from such coastal typologies.

Minimalism plays a central role in the project, providing only the essential facilities for creative work and contemplation. How do you define the threshold between necessity and excess when designing spaces meant for deep focus and reflection?

Juan Almarza Anwandter: The threshold between necessity and excess is elegance. Maximum performance with minimum means, as it is defined in hard sciences like physics and mathematics. In architecture, this can be expressed first and foremost through the structure of a building, which should be defined following strict rules solely determined by the law of gravity. Gravity should not be challenged by architect´s selfish artistic-formalist intentions that usually become a nightmare for structural engineers. Logic, clarity, tectonics, this is what matters. My tower was conceived by following these principles. Four huge columns, wider at the base, slenderer at the top, that hold a series of four slabs of equal size. Materiality is reinforced concrete finished with white stucco. The intention of the latter is to showcase processes of ageing driven by the slow and inevitable passage of time. Marks of rust on the walls, some humidity here and there, all these are welcome – not denied. I really dislike some “forever young” forms of minimalism, those seamless aseptic white surfaces, with no joints…they basically constitute a denial of life in its beautifully tragic dimension. An escape from reality through soulless and sterile abstractions. A naïve wish for a world devoid of any form of negativity and resistance, as Byung Chul-Han says.

Nietzsche’s philosophy, particularly the idea of “grand style in action” and the “will to power,” is mentioned as an inspiration. How do you see these philosophical concepts translating into architectural form, materiality, or spatial experience?

Juan Almarza Anwandter: If, as I mentioned before, Grand Style means order, clarity, distinction, hierarchy, tectonic consistency, and perfection—free of masks, tricks, or concealed efforts…then this tower is a good example of its effective implementation. In the end, this has an existential purpose. To reveal the essence of reality as an eternal interplay of formative and destructive forces, in an unconcealed, direct, and transparent way. I wish I will be able some day to stand at the top terrace of this tower, enjoying a glass of good Chilean wine and a cigar, contemplating the sunset at the distant sea horizon…thinking and writing about these things, as a testimony for future generations to come.

You describe architecture as a “frame for the canvas of life,” providing a sober and silent background for daily actions. How did this philosophy guide your material choices and spatial configurations in Aguas Claras House?

Juan Almarza Anwandter: For this project, the requirements were relatively simple. A vacation house located in the Chilean coast, in a site of 5000 m2 with large domain of the sea horizon and distant views. The clients had a high sense of aesthetic sensibility and certain availability of financial resources. Simplicity and clarity in the formal resolution were their primary requirements. The program should include separate areas for adults and children. I chose a radical symmetric scheme, structured around two axes, one longitudinal, north-south, spanning the width of the site along 45 mts, and one cross-slope, formed by the main entrance. This axis corresponds to the public areas of the house, which divide the program into both poles required for adults and children. The west façade opens onto a large terrace that extends throughout the entire volume, constituting a sort of “fashion runway”. The intention is to underline the presence of the inhabitant´s bodies, which wander and walk along this horizontal plane, silhouetted against the horizon of the sea. Resting in deckchairs, slowly entering the pool…or perhaps indicating a vanishing point on the horizon. A ship, a cloud, a bird that migrates. The neutral clarity of the spatial configuration allows these simple gestures to be recognized in their ephemeral delicateness. This is what I understand as a “frame for the canvas of life”, and I think that the project succeeded in its implementation. Most importantly, the clients are quite happy with the result and share this view.

Jean Prouvé’s philosophy of clarity and legibility in architecture resonates with your approach in this project. How do you balance the need for structural and formal simplicity while maintaining warmth, comfort, and a sense of belonging in a home?

Juan Almarza Anwandter: Jean Prouvé´s quote, which was a strong inspiration for this project, reads: “The excitement comes from architecture when it is simple, readable; the spirits need things to be legible. And an architecture that reveals its constitution, just as a human being reveals its constitution, reveals its goals, all without camouflage and, above all, without artifice (…)”. I think that there is no contradiction between this will of simplicity and the fulfillment of the basic needs for life. On the contrary, such simplicity may enhance and facilitate the achievement of a vacation house´s main task, which is to provide warmth, comfort and a sense of belonging, as you rightly indicate.

As an architect who navigates between theory, practice, and artistic expression, what is the one fundamental question you believe every architect should continuously ask themselves throughout their career to ensure their work remains meaningful, innovative, and deeply connected to human experience?

Juan Almarza Anwandter: “Does my project affirm, or does it deny life?” A philosophical question that can have an affirmative architectural answer, as long as we are sensible and respectful enough to understand life´s beautiful complexity.