The Tindaya Mountain, in Fuerteventura, is a sanctuary of pre-Hispanic carvings and a unique geological monument. Weighing upon it is one of the most controversial artistic utopias of the 20th century: the project of sculptor Eduardo Chillida, who planned to hollow out its interior to create a perfect cube 50 meters on each side, illuminated solely by a skylight in the ceiling. After decades of litigation, doubts about the stability of the volcanic rock, and environmentalist opposition, the work has been frozen in administrative limbo. However, 3D technology now allows us to visualize that impossible space and understand the magnitude of the conflict.
Virtual reconstruction: the cube of light as a technical model 🏗️
From a technical point of view, the virtual recreation of the Tindaya project requires a complex workflow. First, a digital terrain model of the mountain must be obtained using drone photogrammetry or public LIDAR data. On that base mesh, the interior excavation is modeled: a 50x50x50 meter cube, oriented exactly according to the solar axes that Chillida specified in his sketches. Global illumination software (such as Blender Cycles or Unreal Engine) allows simulating the beam of natural light that would enter through the upper opening, projecting a cone of light that would change with the hours of the day. The main technical challenge is calculating the structural stability of the excavation, a datum that real engineers never certified. The recreation must include a visualization mode that shows simulated geological stresses, graphically representing the risk of collapse that the opposition cites as a key argument.
The model as a tool for digital activism 🖥️
The 3D representation of this phantom work becomes a powerful instrument for dissemination. By comparing the current state of the mountain (intact, but sealed by bureaucracy) with the vision of the rendered cube of light, the viewer understands the dilemma: is art a right that justifies the intervention of a sacred space. An interactive web viewer, accessible from any device, would allow navigating the virtual interior, activating or deactivating layers of ecological information, and reading the texts of technical reports. This immersive experience transforms the abstract debate into a tangible reality, forcing the public to take a position between the protection of natural heritage and the realization of an artistic dream. The 3D model does not resolve the litigation, but it illuminates the conflict with the same light that Chillida wanted to bring into the mountain.
As a digital activist, what role does ethics play when modeling in 3D Chillida's impossible cube, knowing that his real project in Tindaya was rejected due to environmental and cultural impact?
(PS: at Foro3D we believe that all art is political, especially when the computer freezes)