<html><head></head><body><div class="ydpfa03be5ayahoo-style-wrap" style="font-family:Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif;font-size:16px;"><div><div dir="ltr" data-setdir="false">Personally, when it looks that bad, I would assume it was a deliberate aesthetic choice. In fact, I would not have been surprised if I was told that they spent $100,000 to pay the original artist who came up with the idea, and to implement the design on a pristine looking theater. That is the way art seems to work sometimes. If only I could figure out how to convince people to pay me that kind of money.<br></div><div><br></div><div class="ydpfa03be5asignature"><div dir="ltr" style="font-family:Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif;font-size:16px;">-Joe<br></div></div></div>
<div><br></div><div><br></div>
</div><div id="ydp11ea43fyahoo_quoted_0794786681" class="ydp11ea43fyahoo_quoted">
<div style="font-family:'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif;font-size:13px;color:#26282a;">
<div>
On Monday, January 4, 2021, 9:00:24 AM EST, Stephen Litterst via Stagecraft <stagecraft@theatrical.net> wrote:
</div>
<div><br></div>
<div><br></div>
<div><div dir="ltr">Seems to be the prevailing aesthetic in the Mid-Atlantic restorations. The Met in Philly is similar. From an audience standpoint it feels like they’re doing the bare minimum to get a venue up and active again. It doesn’t come across as an artistic choice.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">Steve<br clear="none">—<br clear="none"><br clear="none">Stephen Litterst<br clear="none">ETCP - Certified Entertainment Electrician<br clear="none"><a shape="rect" href="mailto:slitterst@gmail.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">slitterst@gmail.com</a><br clear="none"><br></div></div>
</div>
</div></body></html>