Guy Debord’s belief that life is mediated by images is more true than ever with the rise of ‘Instagrammable’ exhibitions as curatorial focus takes note of the importance of social media and the need for artwork to be capturable by the audience. As the presence of art on social media and the need to capture an artwork or exhibition becomes overwhelming, this influx of documentation causes fatigue in a society which is often involved in the passive consumption of art.

The themes in Debord’s Society of the Spectacle (1967) are gaining momentum as artworks, catalogues and exhibitions are becoming almost entirely accessible online. While accessibility and inclusion are fundamental in the progression of the art world, we begin to worry that the sole reliance on documentation will leave us trapped within the spectacle. The image is becoming the artwork. An exhibition viewed primarily through a screen is now no more than a 2d display of pixels instead of a vibrant sensory and cultural experience.

“Something spontaneous, something that just happens to happen”. – Allan Kaprow

Even as Debord expressed his concerns over the rise of spectacle and decline of active experiences artists were engaging with the issue. Allan Kaprow for example echoed this sentiment throughout the 50s and 60s. Kaprow devised the term ‘happenings’ in the 50s. Many considered his first official happening to be his 18 happenings in 6 parts, which relied on audience participation and sensory experiences. A happening refers to a form of performance art, typically occurring in spaces outside of galleries and intentionally breaking down the boundaries between audience and artist. Even as this concept took root in the art scene, advertisement and pop culture, Kaprow began to remove himself from the term. Kaprow came to believe happenings no longer reflected the original sentiment of resistance to spectacle as it became a means of consumerism and marketing. Within our current resurgence of the art scene, we have an opportunity to reinvent a new type of happening that draws from Kaprow’s original vision.

While Kaprow moved away from the term ‘happening’, curators like Walter Hopps were reimagining the concept in exhibitions such as 36 Hours (1978). Hopps’ idea was that any artist could bring one artwork that would be hung for 36 hours if it could fit through the door. This was a form of open curation, a rejection of censorship and the imposed hierarchy between artists and art. Hopps gave a voice to contemporary artists and through his action he himself became an active participant as a curator. This was a reenvisioning of Kaprow’s happenings, although object based, the exhibition itself becomes the performance. The curator becomes a host to this non-hierarchical and momentary exhibition.

“Hopps also sees the curator as something like a conductor striving to establish harmony between individual musicians”- Hans-Ulrich Obrist

Hopps’ curational choices continue to inspire and guide contemporary curators with the model of open curation becoming revived through exhibitions that value inclusivity and experimentation. After Walter Hopps at Platform Arts (2024) took direct inspiration from Hopps’ 36 Hours show. Like Hopps, they allowed any artist to hang any art in the gallery that could fit through the door. The London Open Live which is currently ongoing at the Whitechapel Gallery, also embraces this open-call style of curation. The exhibition explores a variety of performance art attempting to express new ideas and experiences, bringing together both emerging and established artists. These shows illustrate the shift that Hopps was working towards, embracing curation styles that turn away from traditional practices and foster experimentation and emerging voices. In revitalizing Hopps’ curatorial vision, we see through these exhibitions that open and experimental curation is essential to contemporary practice.

We need Hopps’ approach more than ever in this current climate of social media and PR-driven writing. We are in a time where many art critics are feeling pressure to maintain favor from large institutions that offer paid promotional material and exposure. Often critics present a biased view of exhibitions, which is unsurprising if they feel the need to respond in a certain way to ensure their future in writing. With our experience of exhibitions becoming tailored for documentation, the audience is becoming a consumer of a product instead of an active participant. Hopps’ 36 Hours provided a space for genuine criticism and inclusion, something that we now lack. His open-door policy allowed newer and less established artists to exhibit their work, bypassing institutional gatekeeping in a dramatic contrast to today’s shows that are influenced by factors like popularity and money. Without institutional pressures or a need to appeal to consumerism, exhibitions like 36 Hours gave critics the ability to express their beliefs openly.

These curatorial ideas cannot be separated from the spaces that they play out in. The physical gallery has a fundamental role in our interaction with art. Brian O’Doherty’s Inside the White Cube (1986) challenges the neutrality of the gallery space. Instead O’Doherty argues that the gallery is a space charged with control and the desire to reach aesthetic perfection. Many gallery spaces are both political and institutional. Hopps and Kaprow believe that the gallery space is something bigger than itself. The gallery space shapes interpretation and often reinforces hierarchies of authority and exclusivity. This is why the concept of happenings is key to reshaping the concept of the space of the gallery and shows like 36 Hours challenge the preexisting model of the gallery. They do this through embracing inclusiveness and encouraging active engagement with art beyond mere consumption. Utilizing the significance of the gallery space, artists like Hopps reimagined the gallery as a space for experimentation and cultural exchange.

Past theories and curatorial choices are critical pieces in the way forward for the contemporary art world as we look to the future. In many exhibitions the spectacle of art is increasingly prevalent, so we must remain cautious about exhibitions being reduced to hierarchical and image-driven experiences. Exhibitions like 36 Hours curated by Walter Hopps remind us that the curator should act as a host for experience, a performance of culture and participation. By looking back to Kaprow’s happenings and incorporating them into current exhibitions we create a gallery space that turns away from Debord’s spectacle and looks towards a space of collaboration and active viewing. We must continue to question how we can support the development of art criticism and audience engagement. While the art scene leans towards passive consumption, taking inspiration from curators like Walter Hopps is the way towards creating an inclusive and engaging gallery space.