Year End Art Exhibit Rush (Montreal) 4: Steve Heimbecker "Pod".

"There are two ways of spreading light: to be the candle or the mirror that reflects it."

Edith Wharton







Until this day in my "entire life", it was always crispy clear
in my mind which art shows I attended and which I didn't.
Isn't it obvious? I could name you any shows on earth and you
could tell if you were there or not. End of the question. NEXT!



This is what leads me to the Heimbecker problematic,
maybe a new art syndrome I invented for myself.

I had heard about and saw (from a distance) Heimbecker's
installation of his Wind Array Cascade Machine (WACM) on the Ex-Centris roof (which I suppose is still standing as I speak) a little while ago.


Early last week, when I went to the Oboro gallery, where Heimbecker's show "Pod" had been slated, they were pulling everything down. "Oh geez....Wh..What...Where am I? What happened?", I asked the coordinator breath-takingly. "Ohhhhhh You've missed it! It ended Sunday". I had to face my fate: apparently I had written down my schedule from a misleading press listing. Ah whatever... I saw parcels of it. I saw the poles (many were already on the floor), but of course the room was in full light and nothing was functioning. Than later, I saw footages of the installation, that included a video projection of the Ex-Centris roof in the entrance hall.


Now...I'm left to decide.

"Did I see this show or not??"


I'll presume that I've seen it, merely because I've seen the "objects" (the poles)
that structured the Oboro space, and enough "moving images" to give me a slight idea of what it looked like in the dark.


Basically, this installation invites you to sway into a bed of light. The poles are adorned with leds beams that shift in colors gradually as the wind outside send signals to the "dreamcatchers" standing on the Ex-Centris roof. This was the main interpretation that wouldn't leave my thoughts: that this work was related to ancient myths that the wind is a container of souls, such as in the beliefs of native american or ancestral asian religions, who used to consider wind chimes as transmittors of the chanting of spirits (there was no sound for this installation, but I'm told that the next exhibit using this system will be a sound art piece (HOPEFULLY with a visual element, hmm?)). Does the work of Heimbecker captures spirits and transform them into beams of light?

I'm projecting all this. I'm sure Heimbecker links his art much closer to the work
of minimal environmentalists like Walter De Maria. Aesthetically, it does look like
Dan Flavin on speed. Or maybe, a gigantic promotional room design sponsored by Pimp Watch?

Seriously, it's really an impressive work visually. Equal or even better to
the installation of light bulbs by Artificiel at Musée D'Art Contemporain that cheered
a bunch of people a couple of years back. Why are they no museums buying this stuff? I swear it's worth nearly half of Dia Beacon, as visual impact.


Ahh....those 90's artists.... How hard aren't we tapping on them.
Back in the 70's, artists "were allowed" or rather, allowed themselves
to sculpt beams of light for their pure fun. In the 2000's, artists (especially in Canada) are obliged to start from concept, would it be only to make certain they receive
grants. I'm not sure you could succeed nowaday in Canada if you weren't the
slightliest of a conceptual artist. Given these considerations, Heimbecker chose to render visible the naturally invisible force of wind. The question is: does this "translate"? Isn't the work a little too dependant on a set of relations that I need to intellectualize before entering a world that is mostly attractive to my senses? I'm pondering.

It's a chance that there is a projection at the Oboro entrance of the WACM capters (a 40 minute document, not a real-time capture, but I think this is irrelevant), because it is the only way that the neophyte audience could possibly link the installation with another structure.

I'm poised, basically. I think the project of creating art with a natural matter
such as wind is not only legitimate, but a beautiful idea. Don't we all love to create kites? In a sense, the Heimbecker installation is such a kite.
A kite made of light. So, being that kites are mostly decorative objects, why would I reproach Heimbecker's work to propose me (or not) a theoretically abstract liaison?
What is all that can be written about wind ?

Here, maybe I'm worried that with the post-conceptual art of today, we refute to
accept things for what they are. Every sound and visual aspects of every works must be analyzed and explained thoroughly. But Heimbecker's work is actually so
contemplative!? You could admire it regardless of your knowledge of how it functions. Are you missing the work if you do?


This is the major issue that this artist (an excellent sound artist might I add) and others, will need to confront.



Cheers,


Cedric Caspesyan
centiment@hotmail.com


Steve Heimbecker "Pod"
November 12 - December 11, 2004
Oboro
4001 Berri