I think you are right that it is somewhat troublesome to replace a currently flawed distribution system, where the artist is financially manhandled to one where they control distribution and now receive no compensation.
However it seems to me these galleries will mostly exist as a fringe activity or secondary platform for established players to utilize. Simply put the people making work and distributing it need to make a living and the way these online galleries currently exist they will certainly require some other type of income, whether it be showing traditional work and selling it, or working at Starbucks.
The platform is great and I think JOGGING's Positive Feedback is really unique approach to the creation of work, but these online galleries will have to truly be Dual-Galleries to survive or at least find a way to package themselves with another source of income to support not the creation of the work (JOGGINGs pieces don't seem like they require much investment to create if any at all) but the people behind the work.
The new format of presenting the work is quite novel, and JOGGING has even made the dissemination of their work more interesting with the institution of the Positive Feedback policy, yet the work presented still seems laking.
If there is anything at all interesting about the work, it is the ephemeral nature of the pieces. They seem to be created and documented in almost a spur of the moment fashion, to exist only in that moment. However, I can't find much beyond this to be either visually or conceptually stimulating. Most of the images, 'sculptures' (if you can call them that), performances and installations simply seem lazy, with the facade that this is the intended aesthetic, which I simply don't buy (or enjoy).
The platform for distribution and their use of it is quite promising, I simply don't believe the work being distributed is very note worthy.
© 2013 The L Magazine
Website powered by Foundation