I'm sitting and writing in judgement, knowing the slings and arrows are headed my way. But ... here we go.

I love Impressionism (see, I gave it a capital "I") as much as the next person. I really do. I love Degas and Renoir and Pissarro and Monet and all of the greats who followed. Of course, the Impressionists played a huge role in art history and greatly influenced the way we view art today. I find it incredible that they initially had to fight so hard for acceptance. Don't we all?

Recently, I walked into the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art and there it was ... the "Matisse & Beyond" Exhibition. It was lovely and I'm glad that I saw it, but you know, mentally, I was rolling my eyes and thinking, "Oh great, yet more Impressionism." This was also the case as I toured a nearby art gallery. The dealer showed me the works of one of his current artists. "Oh great," I said. "More Impressionism!" The dealer smiled, raised his shoulders and put his hands up in the air.

Any major art museum with a reputation to maintain is going to have some representation of Impressionism. And of course, they should. Yet, no disrespect intended, but how much is too much? I've visited many art museums this year alone and it's just inescapable. Impressionism has almost become a conspiracy. I was talking with an artist who said when it comes to art, all people really know about is Impressionism. (Sadly, they barely know that!) When I told the artist that I was going to quote them on this, he/she (I'm being safe here) quickly back-tracked. No one wants to seem as if they're trashing the most beloved or significant movement in the history of art! Many people who know little about art can name at least one Impressionist. Surely, that's a good thing.

Yet, I'm going to propose something ... not because I hate Impressionism, but rather because I really like it. I think that all major art museums should observe a one-year moratorium on Impressionism. Just for one year. I think that this would give people an opportunity to see and appreciate other movements as well. During my trip in San Francisco, I was so impressed by some of the pieces from the San Francisco colorists' school.

More art museums should have representations of this bold, beautiful work. Now of course, I'm NOT saying that any movement or "blip" in art history should replace Impressionism. I just think that people need to see other things. Perhaps I feel this way because I visit art museums fairly frequently.

Also, it's not a matter of taste, it's a matter of space. Impressionist exhibitions take up so much room ... YEAR ROUND. Can't we show something else? Taking a year off would allow us all to return to Impressionism with fresh eyes. Fortunately, I don't have a reputation to maintain, so I can speak these words (ignorance is bliss?).

Of course, what I've proposed will NEVER happen. Maybe it shouldn't. People visit art museums expecting to see Impressionist pieces. Art museums must display an important time during art history. It's their function. I don't know. I guess I'm just thinking out loud. I just think that in many people's minds, Impressionism has become synonymous with "Art." Art encompasses so much more. People know this, but I don't think that they fully appreciate it.

I know, I know. Heads are spinning. Eyes are rolling. The Art Gods aren't happy. Forgive me Lord, for I know not what I do. Ignorance is no excuse, but there, I've had my say. I can feel my fingers tingling and beginning to cramp up. What's happening to me?

I'm signing off now. Quick! I'm hearing the clap of thunder.