It's a date: My social media engagements

One of many things I appreciate about social media is the opportunity to engage in opinion and conversation with people who share similar interests with me.

Over the past few months, I've discovered a couple of online forums that are both engaging and enjoyable, and they're worth making time for each week:  "Tate Debate" via Facebook on Thursdays and the Washington Post's "TV Column Live with Lisa de Moraes" chat via the newspaper's website, washingtonpost.com, on Fridays.  The former is thought provoking while the latter is lively and entertaining.  Together, they make up my social media engagements.

Tate Debate / Thought provoking

On "Tate Debate,"  moderated by the staff of the London-based Tate Museums (which includes the Tate Britain and the Tate Modern), a topic or question is posted each week on its Facebook page for art enthusiasts to digest and share feedback.  Recent debate topics have included: Digital technology ("How could it change the arts?) and artistic concept versus artistic creativity ("Which is more important?"). With a new exhibition, "Watercolour" opening tomorrow at the Tate Britain, last week's debate focused on painting in watercolour.  The question: "What do you think of watercolour ~ a traditional method, or a visionary, abstract medium?" brought out some very interesting and thoughtful answers. Here's a sample:

"Watercolour is unforgiving and the sharpest insight to an artist," opined a middle-aged male artist from Utah.  "It reveals the actual thought process of its creation."

Another contributor, a twenty-something woman from England, added: "Whether a medium is traditional or not highly depends on the person handling it."

Because of the eight-hour time difference between London and the Bay Area, by the time I log in to Facebook on Thursday mornings, anywhere from 25-50 comments or more have already been posted to the Tate Debate.  Still, I find it's a great opportunity to see what's on the minds of other art lovers ~ especially since most of the comments are posted by Europeans ~ and, I have found, it's a unique opportunity to put in my two-cents worth from across the pond.  I've even received a couple of e-mails via Facebook commenting on my responses or thanking me for "Liking" their comments.

By the way, here's my response to the last week's "Watercolour" debate topic: "Watercolour is popular and universal.  While I normally think of watercolour as traditional landscapes painted in pastels, it's obvious that watercolour can be an abstract concept painted in bolds, too.  Each in its own way is beautiful ~ and powerful, too.  There's no right way, no wrong way to paint watercolour."  My comment even drew a couple of "Likes".

The TV Column Live /
Lively and entertaining

Meanwhile, the Washington Post's "TV Column Live with Lisa de Moraes" chat (Fridays at 1 p.m. ET/10 a.m. PT) usually runs for about an hour.  De Moraes, the Post's witty TV columnist who also writes a TV blog for the Post, answers questions about "the drama, comedy and heartbreak of television ~ both on screen and behind-the-scenes." Through my own observation, I've discovered she loves 30 Rock, but hates ~ hates ~ American Idol's Ryan Seacrest (she calls him Seabiscuit), and she fawns over most PBS Masterpiece Classic "crunchy-gravel dramas" (a term she coined to describe a lot of English period dramas whose mansions include a crunchy, gravel driveway) like the recently aired "Downton Abbey."

Last week, de Moraes started off with a bang and came with a topical agenda: "Super Bowl ads ~ best ever of The Big Snooze? Idolette telling Ryan Seacrest he's all washed up emotionally from 10 years hosting show ~ best TV moment of the season? Will Keith Olbermann get you to watch Current TV? So much to talk about this week.  Let's get started. ..."

I should note: I credit my wife for introducing me to the "TV Column Live" chat and, after regularly participating, not only do I find it to be entertaining, but also an interesting perspective on the TV industry from a media insider and that ~ bottom line ~ it's a very much a business based on ratings points.  In a typical week, de Moraes (whose nickname is Pookie) responds to between 35-50 questions.

Here's a couple from last week's chat:

From Bored with My TV Shows: "So, Pookie, I watch the following: Blue Bloods, White Collar, Modern Family, Castle, Hawaii Five-O. I am sorta bored with them, except for Modern Family, which is always top-notch.  Castle is amusing at least. What should I start watching?  Lisa's response: "Episodes on Showtime because it's the best comedy on TV, Mr. Sunshine on ABC (just to see Allison Janney play crazy), The Good Wife because Alan Cummings is fab, new season of American Idol because Steven Tyler is a revelation. ... I could go on and on ..."

From 30 Rock: "Why doesn't NBC cut costs and get rid of the rest of the cast on 30 Rock and devote the half hour to Alec Baldwin and Tina Fey?"  Lisa's response: "Wait a minute! You want to get rid of Kenneth the page? And Tracy Jordan? And Jenna?  I admit Liz's writing staff could go, but I draw the line at Kenneth, Tracy and Jenna ..."

Occasionally, I've submitted a question and sometimes, like last week, I got lucky to have mine used during the chat:

From Countdown to Current TV: "Hey, Pookie: I'm looking forward to seeing Keith Olbermann's literary wit and acerbic commentary resurface on Current TV. Do you think he made a good career decision joining a fledgling cable network and should MSNBC be worried?  Lisa's response: MSNBC seems to be hanging in there without Keith.  And, as to the career move, it depends on his equity stake, I think. ... I always enjoy watching Keith move from network to network. ... And I'm anxious to see what other shows he's going to exec(utive) produce. ..."

Say what you will about social media, being able to contribute to a thoughtful, cultural discussion and sharing in an entertaining dialogue with a media critic are both pretty cool things in my book.  After all, like Madonna, herself an artist and cultural critic, once said: "Listen, everyone is entitled to my opinion."

Photography: Is it an art or a science?

Never underestimate the value of new social media.  I don't. Love it or loathe it, social media, such as Facebook and Twitter, fosters community, connecting us with friends and neighbors near and far ~ and sometimes, it connects us with others sharing a common interest.  At times, it can even be thought provoking.

Each week on Facebook, London's Tate Modern poses thought-provoking questions in its weekly "Thursday Tate Debate." Although most of the community who participate in this weekly forum are from Great Britain, occasionally, international respondents contribute to the discussion, from near and far ~ covering many, if not most, European Union countries as well as across the pond in the United States, closer to home.  I have participated in a couple of these discussions.

As someone who has visited the Tate Modern, Britain's national gallery of international modern art, several times (it's located on the South Bank of the Thames and is connected to central London and St. Paul's Cathedral via the Millennium Bridge), I appreciate their regular use of new social media as a means of fostering a community sharing an appreciation for art.

This week's debate topic centered on photography, a casual hobby of mine: "Do you think photography is more of an art or a science?"

I posted the following response:  "I think today's use modern digital photography raises the bar for art versus science. Certainly, photography is art because of the use of color and emotion.  Yet, the editing process (in digital photography) allows for science to be a part of the process.  It's a great debate."

Afterward, I started to think about my own photography and the great debate question.  As many of you know, I am fond of photographing our home gardens ~ roses, camellias, rhododendrons, fuchsia and calla lilies ~ often, to create greeting cards for family and friends.

Yesterday, I browsed through a variety of photographs I've shot this year ~ and there were many ~ and found a calla lily that in my opinion can be a catalyst in the debate.  When shown in its natural colors, I think of this photograph of a calla lily as art. However, when I digitally edit the photograph to eliminate its natural color, changing it to black and white, my focus shifts toward thinking of this photograph as a product of science at work.

In color: Calla lily, 2010

In black and white: Calla lily, 2010

Photography:  Is is an art or a science?  I welcome your thoughts and comments.