Brown and Cunningham, and Rauschenberg, too, were similarly connected by a commitment to exploring the present, the fleeting nature of life and of time. “Set and Reset,” like much of Brown's work, came out of improvisations, Cunningham's work with chance procedures accentuated an ever-changing reality, and Rauschenberg, whose pieces often incorporated objects from everyday life, said that he viewed his art as a way of “reporting the present state of things.”
What does it mean, then, to restage works that are inherently connected to the present, now that their presents are past? Especially given our tumultuous “present state of things” here in the US, I began to wonder what the artists would have thought about their own work being performed in 2026.
There is plenty that is enduring about “Set and Reset” and “Travelogue,” notably clarity of style, a complexity of relationship both to the space and between the dancers, and sheer ingenuity. These elements are lacking in much of contemporary choreography today.
And yet, I wonder what Brown, Cunningham, and Rauschenberg might think about performing these works in this particular moment—a moment defined by violence, volatility, and a United States government that practices an obsessive and perverted nostalgia?
Undoubtedly, if any of the three artists were still living, they would change some things around.
How can the integrity of the artists' original works be upheld, while furthering the artists' unwavering commitment to change? This is the lasting question for any legacy organization, and one that the three artists' foundations have certainly considered. Given today's unprecedented times in the US, it is a question that begs renewal.
comments