Location, Location, Location

Dearest Edie,
I was thinking, while I was doing the ironing (in dying prematurely, sweetheart, I’m guessing you avoided entrapment in this particular activity) but, mindless enough task as it is, I find it affords a bit of thinking space and I haven’t burnt a hole in anything…yet…
Anyway, I was thinking about your comment and wondering how do we say: There’s this amazing online kind of Cabaret Voltaire/Factory/Salon experimental artist-led space. Really! Yes! You should come! without making it sound like another arts sales-pitch.
And I was also wondering if, in fact, this matters so much at all.
This is not a discussion about funding-by(through)-numbers but a question of location and visibility. I had an interesting conversation, with a friend, about this kind of thing in relation to two galleries located in adjacent neighbourhoods in a city. The first gallery was, in the eyes of many, the Arts flagship of the city, its central location ensuring it a much higher footfall than the second. The second gallery, though only 5 minutes walk from the first, involved departing the centre of town, crossing a major arterial road and navigating a car-park before arriving on its doorstep. In other words, the location of the second gallery demanded that the visitor make a conscious choice to visit it.
This gallery perceives its location not as disadvantageous but as a good thing. The people who go there do so because they want to.
I think there’s something similar going on here with .re/act…
What do you reckon?