"Why am I taking notes?" "What am I going to write?" "If I write something, who on earth will read it? I'm not an art scholar!" Your inner dialogue can either land you in the psychiatric ward or inspire you to actually try something worthwhile. I decided on the latter. Actually, I had no choice. I became overwhelmed by this need to write about art from my own personal experience. I've always loved art and wanted to share my enthusiasm for it, so I began writing. "Hmm, that seems decent," I thought after writing my first essay. So, I started contacting various art websites about carrying my writing. I think that it has become a win-win situation. People get insight into a collector's viewpoint (free of charge) and I get outlets for my extra-curricular creative urges.

I kept writing and collecting and visiting galleries and museums and talking to artists and writing, writing, writing. The next thing I knew, I had a book. Not a novel, but an illustrated book about art. Non-fiction. It's called, "ART IN KING SIZE BEDS: A COLLECTOR'S JOURNAL" (AuthorHouse.com). It's a print-on-demand book that's now available (insert shameless plug here). It features warm, witty and enlightening (if I do say so myself) essays about the experience of art, along with illustrations highlighting the works of some great emerging artists all over the world. I've really busted my ass on this project. It has cost me money and been so much work, but it has been totally worth it ... for the artists.

For many years, I've visited galleries and bookstores and I've probably flipped through hundreds of artbooks. I own MANY. They're almost as beautiful as art itself. Although contemporary art is my first choice, I enjoy all sorts of artbooks. At the end of the day, it's all art and it's all contemporary, unless it's cave wall drawings.

Yet, for all of that flipping and viewing and oohing and aahing, something was always missing for me.

Most of the artbooks out there are written by curators, scholars or critics. Let's face it. They don't ooze warmth. They're scholarly and very intellectual tomes about the history of art. They teach us a lot and I love them, but at the end of a long day of work, does anyone really want to tackle a textbook? So much of the time, I come away feeling that scholars ultimately write these books to impress one another. It's like a competition thing. Who REALLY knows the secrets behind Michelangelo? Who REALLY knows about Picasso and where he fits in the art continuum? It's all so mysterious. Sometimes, these books actually seem to speak in code on purpose. Thank God for the illustrations!

However, I will say Edward Lucie-Smith is the man. He's the king of art writers in my book. I have a few of his books and they are indeed great works. Artbooks are fantastic! However, in the September 2006 issue of "Art In America," Christopher Lyon has written a riveting piece about troubling circumstances for the genre. Sad. Yet, I also have my own ideas about why artbooks are in decline.

I don't mean to be critical of the authors of these books. Negative or positive, really. I'm sure they love art, but where is the love? Don't art lovers want to open artbooks and actually feel that the author has a passion for his or her topic? I remember when I was in middle school (they called it junior high back then) I had this social studies (now called history) teacher. All of the students loved him and wanted to be in his class. Believe me, it wasn't because we loved social studies, but rather because it was so clear to us, even at that early age, that this guy loved to teach! It's odd because I don't remember his name, which I should, but I do remember him standing in front of our class, shoulders back and he would teach away! Actually, I don't think we even had to be in the classroom. I think he just loved explaining things ... whether he had a crowd or not. You could hear the enthusiasm in his voice and see it in his posture. Is there anything better than an enthusiastic teacher who loves to teach?

Anyway, artbooks and teachers are really the same thing. They exist for the same purpose, obviously, to enlighten and hopefully inspire. Yet, there can be no fire unless there's a spark. Enthusiasm! Where there's enthusiasm, enlightenment and engagement can't be far behind. I think alot of people don't choose to be outwardly passionate about things they love because they don't want to come off looking silly or weird. They want to be taken seriously. You can sense this same drole spirit in the writing found in many artbooks. Sad. Show me some passion, some warmth, some, dare I say, personality. These things are HUMAN traits and that's what art is ultimately about ... humanity, expression and connection. I'm NOT saying that we should "dumb down" artbooks or even change the current approach taken by many writers. However, I am saying that perhaps a fresher, more accessible approach may help the entire genre. Your reader is a person who can be engaged. Talk WITH them, not AT them. Treating people like empty vessels into which you pour mere information works completely against the whole purpose of artbooks. I don't know. What do I know? I'm not an artbook publisher. I'm also not an intellectual snob.

Also, do we really need yet another new book that says nothing new about Claude Monet or Vincent Van Gogh or Pablo Picasso or whomever? (Lyon mentions this in his article.) I love their work, but I mean, really. Certainly if these gentlemen were alive, they themselves would probably say, "Enough already! Give somebody else a chance!" It's like they're being stalked by the publishing paparazzi. The well is well dry! At least the paparazzi eventually move on and seek out new blood to suck (for a buck).

At any rate, I'm going to spend the next few columns here talking about ... not just "Art In King Size Beds: A Collector's Journal," but other personal publishing issues and why I think SUPPORTING LIVING ARTISTS is such a worthy cause. My book may only sell one copy (artist Scott Andrew Nedrelow bought the first one)! Whatever. I have a demanding, full-time career that allows me to do this in my little spare time, so art is not my livelihood, it's my passion. Granted, I'm no Edward Lucie-Smith or Christopher Lyon. I'm not trying to be. I'm also not trying to be an artist, curator, art scholar, critic or even docent, but I do believe that I have something to add to the art dialogue. In fact, most people have something to add to the art dialogue, but they just don't realize it! Also, when it comes to art, we don't have to agree. Isn't that the whole point? The last thing that I want to do is debate about art. Who needs the added stress? If I do that, the joy will be lost and I won't be able to write from a true place. In short, it would no longer be fun. My writing is my contribution to the dialogue. People are entitled to their opinions. Trying to get other people to agree with me is not my game. If I'm off base, I'm sure I'll hear about it, but at least I'm pounding the keyboard for a cause that doesn't get enough support. ART.