Why do reviewers ignore online artists and art sites?

 

These days, galleries and museums are mostly showing their exhibitions online. Of course they have to. At the same time, there are thousands of artists worldwide who have chosen to exhibit their work primarily online, without gallery sanction, because that is how they can reach the widest audience, and because it allows them autonomy and flexibility.

 

Sometimes artists self publish because they are not good enough to get into a gallery or museum, but much of the time their work is on par or even better than that shown in brick and mortar galleries. Just scan through some artists websites and shops and you will be amazed at the quality of the work.

 

The art world, even in its most local variety, still chooses to review only the artwork in galleries and museums, while it ignores the work of what might just be called digital galleries, aka websites and online retail art venues. I left the brick and mortar art world several years ago. At first, there was some kind of stigma about showing and selling online. Not that I cared, but I noticed.

 

But now that the entire art world has moved online I'm waiting for reviewers to pay attention to online artists, not just those with the imprimatur of galleries and museums, but those who have chosen to go rogue, to show their own work, and to sidestep the gallery system. If you write reviews for local, national or international publications or media, I'm urging you to write reviews and to take this branch of the art world seriously, because we are serious.