Subscribe RSS

Posts Tagged ‘comments’

How Social Your Media Account is an Online Home with Guests

October 29th, 2014 by Admin | No Comments | Filed in Social Media & Media

A Facebook Wall or Fan page and a Twitter or Google+ stream is a kind of online home page, in ways that basic online homepage can only approach by including apps to social media.

Usually interacting on social media is fun and interesting. Twitter, Facebook, Twitter and other sites have coding that allows for responses that can develop into fascinating conversations to contribute in or simply quietly lurk.

I lurk a lot because I enjoy learning. There are wonderfully learned, creative and eager to share expertise and knowledge. Some of these people are world famous who share their lives and best advice, while others are relatively unknown but successful people who have expertise in their field, such as a mom who tweets about a new toy that is helping her child one master a skill. Other non-commercial people on social media find and share off the beaten path news and information from reputable sources. And then there are the other people I follow who simply share their humanity and friendship, showing images of their lives, including cell phone photos of glorious sunsets. Of course there are commercial or business only members on social media, including off-line media such as TV, radio and print magazines and newspapers, which also usually freely share information and links to fuller stories.

If I post on your Facebook wall or if you follow my account so my messages show up in your Twitter or Google+ stream I do this only as your guest. No one owes me the right to make them read my tweets or post to their Facebook wall. My posts are always those of a guest.

In social media and in life, guests who are polite, interesting and even kind are invited back. On social media I am “invited back” every time someone continues to follow or friend me.

As a fine artist, a painter who also used her hand made images to create new digital images by combining images into new original works (sometimes my process is referred to as tradigital art), I have many, many original images that I can and do share online. Yet, I do not share my own unique original images on other people’s Facebook walls (although the ones on my wall and page can or have been shared by other people on their own walls). I watch as other artists share images of their own works on the pages and walls of other artists, art critics or advisers. And yet, I will not do it. I will not even share a link to one of my blogs on someone’s wall or page. Why? For the same reason that I do not walk into a friend’s dinner party and without invitation open up a portfolio of my work. It is just so glaringly, aggressive and even bullying.

Talk television shows are generally set up to resemble a kind of living or dining room with plus seating and even tables where the guests and host(s) gather. However the guests on these shows are specifically invited onto the show with the clear understanding that the guest will be “plugging” a new movie, book, TV show or event. I have certainly been invited onto blogs, pod-casts, and had my works shared on social media, and sure I too plugged my work or event within the context of the subject of the show. Yet, I was invited to do this. I am almost always happy to allow one of my art works to be used to illustrate or decorate others’ blogs or magazines, as long as I am credited as the artist, the name of the work is shown and there is a link to my website. I often tweet and post links myself to online sites where my works are shown with permission, but, again, in each case, the work appears by invitation.

A Facebook wall or Twitter or Google+ stream can also be understood as one’s own channel, much like a TV or radio channel out to the world. Finding great stuff to share or RT is a boon – I see this as programming I get for free.

However, even with disclaimers people (including myself) tend to see a RT or share as a kind of endorsement, so I am careful as to who my sources are for the “free” programming materials. On Twitter, I RT a lot, especially about art (I am kind of known for this), and people thank me publicly. Yet, I always think that the thanks should go the other way because that source freely gave me valuable programming to share!

On my own Facebook wall and also in the comments posted to my blogs, I take responsibility for what occurs just the way I do in my own home as to what goes on in my home or studio. People who try to use my wall to sell their products find that their post is removed and they are no longer friended by me (unless they were previously asked to share their event or work, which has happened) While comments and discussions are enjoyed, negative name calling or bullying is not, and those comments are deleted, although comments that indicate disagreement, and hopefully even have or link to outside source facts are greatly welcomed.

Finally, a kind of pet peeve that often gives me a chuckle. It is not that is seems impossible to me that people can be so selfish and dumb, especially if they believe they have a real and good cause or idea. At least several times a week people aim a tweet at me that asks me to ReTweet their tweet that promotes their cause or product. The tweet invariably goes something like “@judyrey Check out the benefits of XYZ now on sale at http:link Please RT”. In other words, I am being asked to use my channel to give this person free advertising for something I know nothing about. Yet, that alone is not what peeves me, or rather astounds me. The kicker is that almost always, conservatively 98% of the time, the tweeter asking for the favor has never had any interaction with me, does not follow me on Twitter or anywhere else. Often they follow almost no one, but have a stream of initiated tweets that are identical to the one I receive aimed at other Twitter members. I can only assume these tweeters are aiming to win the Darwin award for spamming.

To everyone who follows me on Twitter or Google+ or Pinterest, is my friend on Facebook or LinkedIn, that you for inviting me into your social media homes, and thank you for sharing your life happenings, ideas, finds, news and comments with me in my social media homes.

Share This Post

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Do We Need Religious Art?

November 10th, 2008 by Admin | 12 Comments | Filed in Inspirational Stuff

Is religious art relevant in Contemporary Art? Do we need it? Does it do more harm than good?

There is a lively discussion on religion and art over at Art News Blog , one of the blog sites I frequent for news of the art world.

Essentially, Carol, the intrepid blogger-journalist went on a self professed rant, more about problems that seem to stem from organized religion, like wars, and questioned whether artists should promote religious views, or moreover dogma.

To be fair, Carol then backtracked as many of the Western World’s greatest artworks are religious.

This was posted on Sunday and by the time I checked in on Monday, the comments were flying back and forth, again more dealing with religion than art.

As far as I know, I am the only founder from the USA with an original theory of religious art, Post Conceptual UnGraven Image . Being uniquely American, although Judeo-Christian based the theory is fully inclusive of most of the world’s religions and paths (see the manifesto). So of course I chimed in with a comment, adding to the original post and the comments up to that point.

It is a topic that deserves many posts, comments and dialogue. A polite discussion is healthy. It may seem corny, but communication really does build understanding, and that includes the special visual communication of art.

One of the problems with any of the current discussions about religion is simply defining the term, “religion”. People who line up against organized religion are more against the abuses that have occurred by leaders and followers who have twisted the message or been two faced for their own gain.

When a person gets an egotistic benefit, such as thinking they are superior to others, by belonging to a group or following a spiritual path that is a perversion of the intended purpose of the path. This kind of abuse, whether it happens on a one-to-one personal level or on a large scale (war), is always a perversion. It is no better than common prejudice or its extreme of ethnic cleansing.

The purpose of a spiritual or religious path is to assist a person to be closer to The Divine (my catch-all acceptable term, please substitute the name you prefer for the One). Being closer to The Divine is transformative as coincidentally this means becoming more of one’s essential self. As just about every religion, certainly the major ones teaches, we are spiritual beings who have physical forms (bodies), thus being more of who we are means being more spiritual.

Proverbs 31 – Woman of Valor Rose Bud

Collect the open edition print Click HERE

See larger and discover more at

When artists portray that spiritual aspect of humankind – or one specific human being, we recognize the work as great art. Many of the Western World’s greatest artists such as Michaelangelo , Rembrandt and Da Vinci were masters of this. These three noted artists also painted religious work but never fully followed the dogma of their time and controversy dogged them for that.

Fine artists were the shaman, the religious leaders of the early tribes and groups. Most great artists have always spiritually led through their work. Towards the end of his life, Andy Warhol began a series somewhat based on Da Vinci’s Last Supper, in which commercial logos were substituted for religious components. For instance, the Dove Soap logo symbolized the Holy Spirit. Having brought art into the supermarket with Campbell ‘s Soup cans and Brillo boxes, Warhol flipped the Pop focus to bring religion into the commercial world, too. The profane becomes holy, the holy profane.

Warhol predated the selling of religion that we have seen through the media. Depending on the message sold and how the power and profits earned are used, as individuals we approve or not. It was an artist to point out the then current links between business as religion and religion as business.

Personally, I would not wish to live in a world without the religious art that has been so meaningful to my own spiritual quest.

Van Gogh, a former preacher who considered himself to be a religious painter, has inspired me with his energy that presents a dance of dichotomies; pain, suffering, fury swirling with joy, lust and glory. What could be more religious?

Rembrandt, whose figures some out of the darkness into golden light to reverently take responsibility for their acts and omissions and seek or accept forgiveness.

Pissarro and Monet, the Jew and the Catholic (among others) who knew they were painting, “Let there be light…” Chagall, with his enchanting mystic villages of simple tradition and love overcoming life’s trials

Dali, who investigates the spirituality of time and quest inspiring unexpected insights.

My list it too long. I have just begun.

But notice that none of the artists were actually promoting one group over another, and that even when a specific theology is presented, such as in Da Vinci’s, Warhol’s and Dali’s Last Supper works, the theology is universally transcended by what the artist conveys.

Psalm 22 Rembrandt by Judy Rey Wassermanm an essence portrait

Psalm 22 (Rembrandt)

Being an artist is a responsibility, as much as a gift. My appreciation of the gift I have been given to be a religious artist is equaled or surpassed by my appreciation of the gifts I have received from seeing the works of those artists previously mentioned along with so many others.

And since we can all learn much from a discussion – please comment!

Dock Less Traveled

Discover more about this work at

Collect the limited edition print and see more Click HERE



Share This Post

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,