Great question Dave! 

Personally I feel that if an artist’s practice doesn’t fit into the space, approach, and agenda of most galleries and museums, then their work must be either behind or ahead of its time. I fear that too many artists feel pressured to tailor their work thematically and formally to exhibition calls, which doesn’t really lend itself to originality, unless the gallery itself is a trailblazer. 

From: <netbehaviour-bounces@netbehaviour.org> on behalf of dave miller <dave.miller.uk@gmail.com>
Reply-To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity <netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org>
Date: Thursday, December 3, 2015 at 10:34 AM
To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity <netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org>
Subject: [NetBehaviour] Galleries and digital work

"What if an artist’s work doesn’t fit - architecturally, conceptually, traditionally - within a gallery’s programme? Increasing numbers of artists working in socially engaged practice - where communities and individual people, often unrelated to the arts, form the material and outcome of a practice. Many are involved in this work as a reaction to the elite audiences who still mostly attend art galleries in the UK. Performance and moving image have long been difficult to place in galleries - from audience low engagement to alienating and uncomfortable display methods - with digital work almost entirely ignored...."

http://www.artquest.org.uk/articles/view/the_gallery_problem_or_what_artists_can_do_when_their_work_doesnt_fit_in_ga
_______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour