# data[].attributes.body
Sunday in the Park with George (1986 Original Cast at the Booth Theatre)

In relevance to the point of the play, the painting being the backdrop of play brings integrity to the purpose of this production. On top of that, I believe it will still resonate with today’s audience as though this set is technically designed in the 1800s (based on the Art piece), it is not something out of the norm. Parks and lakes as seen in the set are not rare nor is it exactly out of style. It may even relate to the audience in a form of a childhood memory.

Adding on, the play progresses and the scene changes, the set changes to have a more minimalistic look, with only a vanity table and chair on the right with George standing upstage with his painting set up infront of him. This again I believe is not too far off, and that audience today would still be able to comprehend what was happening as it is pretty straightforward. The illusion of which the audience is standing behind the painting, with George facing audience’s direction I believe is a smart and creative way to keep the audience engaged as well.

These are just some aspects I feel the company can retain, however, they may want to take on a bit more of a realistic approach as well. As much as the set depicts a painting, it does feel flat on a certain level as the play progresses and with that, I think it could be further designed such that there is further depth. For instance, though it is a painting, the trees could be built to be more 3D or rounded cause to me right now it looks like a big cut out of a tree instead. I believe implementing some sort of current real life elements may also help in reeling the audience further in.

# data[].attributes.headline
Reviews for Sunday in the park with George

# data[].attributes.subject
Reviews for Sunday in the park with George

# data[].attributes.body
After watching the performance, I feel that not all of the original scenography works in the modern context as different people in different era have their own way of showing “Sunday in the park with George” as today audiences wouldn’t not understand the play if it is shown again using the 1980s styles of portraying in the play. Some of the word that is spoken by the actors in the 1986 play definitely have to change to suit modern context

I suggested in order for the performance to resonated with today audience, we have to change some part of the scenography from the 1986 play. Like for example lighting in the play have to change to make in brighten in order for the audience to see clearly on what the actors is doing on stage. The way the actor speaks have to make the audience understand what they are talking about and without the slang if the company is planning on
using Singaporean actor to perform the piece.

The company can keep the aspect on how they set up the stage for the beginning part of the play where the family went to the park. It gives out a different feel to it and break the mold of a traditional Theatre box setting by having 3D effect when watching from far. The stage can have minimum props in the background due to having projection on the screen and actors could use some modern props like Mopiko so that it can resonated with older audiences after watching that scene.

Overall, I feel that the company can keep some of the aspect of the original scenography form the 1986 play like the multiple layers on the stage to make it like 3D yet changing some part like having a modern props to resonate with today audiences

# data[].attributes.body
I feel that the original scenography would still be relevant in today’s world and it would still be able to gain the attention of the audience. This is because, even though this was staged and painted in the 1980s, it is not old fashioned.

The scenography was simple yet able to convey the thought process behind the painting of the scenography and what the scene is trying to convey. It is also interesting that the designer took the effort to paint out the scenography using design composition of balance, light and harmony and at the same time kept the transition of scenes clear.

However, with technology being way more advanced than the 1980s and the audiences expectations are also much more than we would expect in the 1980s, I feel that it can be better improved by adding textures to the paintings so that it will look more realistic and audience will also be able to interpret and able to relate it more with our daily lives. For example, they can add more obvious wood grain textures to the trees. They can also make it three dimensional instead of just making it a flat piece so that audience from any angle would be able to see the full set of it, given the size of the a theatre venue now, it is important to consider all views from the audience seat. Colours can also be brighter to make the show more lively and appealing to the audience eyes.

Despite these changes, the theme and the idea of the scenography should still remain the same as I felt that the original scenography is still something interesting and special, very different from what we usually see nowadays. The transitions of scenes can still remain as I felt that they have already done very well in the original scenography - making every single scene change obvious to the audience. Also, what caught my eyes was the scene that they combined 2 photo frames together to make up the next scene. I find that this will be something that would be appealing to the audience nowadays and would be able to impress the audience therefore should not be taken away if there is a new version of the scenography of Sunday in the Park with George.

# data[].attributes.headline
Scenography Review of Sunday in The Park with George(1986)

# data[].attributes.subject
Scenography Review of Sunday in The Park with George(1986)

# data[].attributes.body
Considering the type of audience a remount of this will attract, I think the original scenography will still be as big a hit as it was decades ago. Purists or those who don't like change would not want the play to be tempered with scenic-wise, lest it loses its original meaning and feeling. The scenography is the essence of the play and is essential to the story, that is, bringing to life George Seurat's vision and artwork, as well as the lives of those who inhabited the time period and park. The simple set pieces like the trees, the dog and surroundings need to remain the same or at least changed a bit. Projections or abstract recreations of the set pieces lose the effect the original show had, which is immersing the audience in the painting the play is based off of. This is not a play one can needs to relate or resonate with-the play's purpose is to bring life to the painting and George's life. Even if audience members who are new to the play were to watch a "futuristic" version, they would feel there was something missing. That feeling of being in a park in the 1880s, of love, conflict, community and camaraderie is thoughtfully presented to the audience. This is supported by the brilliant set pieces that mimics George's art style of pointillism, with the muted colours that are in a natural sort of tone. Projections or pictures of these simply would not do. They have to be physically presented and set on stage.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that the original scenography will resonate with today's audience. i feel that although it is a play set in the 1980s, te set has a relatively simple and minimal design. the image of the park set as the background of the set transcends the time period. i feel that the set is still able to resonate with the audience today as the parks still looks the same.
however the set design has a cartoonish art style to it, and does not look realistic. thus that may be improved by creating a more realistic looking trees so that the audience today can resonate better with it. (they can be more immersed in the play)

# data[].attributes.headline
Scenography Review of Sunday in The Park With George (1986)

# data[].attributes.subject
Scenography Review of Sunday in The Park With George (1986)

# data[].attributes.body
When I watched the play, I was quite surprised and intrigued by the scenography as I did not expect some aspects of the scenography to be creatable in that time (1980s). Hence, I think that some parts of the scenography would resonate with the audience of today as there are still surprising elements of the scenography.

I loved the ideas of the changing landscape in terms of the moving trees and painting frames. I think the idea of a moving painting frame that was utilised differently in different scenes really emphasised on the story's plot about a painter and the specific painting. I did not expect some of these scene changes made with the moving frames, so I think others would share the same sentiment as me. However, I do think that while the idea of moving trees should retain, it could be further improved on to make little scene changes more captivating to today's audience.
Instead of having stiff moving trees on boards, they can be shaped into moving 3D stage props or even have multiple layers of draping cloths, with the trees projected by gobos/screen projections, to move from one cloth of another.

While the scenography looked very stale and unrealistic, I think it would still be interesting to today's audience as the scenography perpetuate an idea as if the play is happening inside the actual painting it revolves around.

Perhaps, the most fascinating 2 elements of the play would be Dot's costume when she was modelling for George and George's painting at the studio/home which he was determined to complete.

It was beguiling to find out that Dot's light plum dress could open and free her, while still holding itself upright, yet move along with Dot like a normal dress when she dons it back on and walks. Just when you think that it is the end of her startling costume change, the dress proved that it had another use - twisting the rear of the bottom part of the dress in front to form Dot's pregnancy bump!
Dot's versatile costume added elements of surprise to the play's scenography and provided a comic relief in the play to the audience. I'm sure it'll still be as intriguing for today's audience to watch Dot's costume changes just like back then.

Furthermore, George's translucent giant painting was a wonder to the audience then, as well as myself. It left me curious as to how the translucent giant painting was created, for George to be able to get in front and behind it while still being seen quite clearly. To pique my curiosity further, the translucent giant painting was quite clear too and did not looked like a conventional projection or as if there's a cloth it's on. It looked more like a glass painting!

Overall, I feel that the scenography of the play would appeal to today's audience but some aspects of it may require modernised twists to it.

# data[].attributes.body
I feel that it doesn't resonate with today's generation as people nowadays do not really take backgrounds like this too seriously. Unless the designer wanted a vintage-y feel to the play, then I think that it will be ideal to make it as close to the original as possible. However if not, then it might be a bad idea to use the original scenes as it feels too outdated and today's audience usually appreciate the meaning and hidden messages of the show more than the background especially since it looks unrealistic and kind of childish. Even though it is minimal, the way they paint the background also needs to allow the audience to better relate to the play more. Using props and sets away from the background is an idea we can keep in mind for the remake since it helps the audience better visualize the play.

# data[].attributes.headline
Scenography Review of Sunday in the park with George [1986]

# data[].attributes.subject
Scenography Review of Sunday in the park with George [1986]

# data[].attributes.body
The scenography of this play was very beautiful, intriguing and simple at the year 1986. I am relatively surprise of the scene changes of the set design effortlessly. Furthermore, the movement of set/ prop was very smooth in transition. I could see from the set design that it gives a hand drawn vibe/effect. It gives out a 2D effect instead of a realistic effect of the park, trees and pond.

Another aspect I like would be the set of the play in 1986 places emphasis in the space on how the actors are performing with the space given. For instance, the actors can move around, between and behind the trees. This gives the emphasis that the park is big, and people can move around freely.

The texture of the trees is not very realistic as the real trees because the set design of the tree gives out a smooth surface of the tree. Moreover, there is no depth and thickness of the tree. It portrays out as a stick tree and it shows that it is hand made.

The lighting plays a crucial part in the play to set the mood and the time of the play. I like the use of lighting and gobos to give the effect of a night starry sky on a blank set design of the play and the sunny day during the park. The use of primary lighting colours were used very well in the set-in appropriate timing and scene

The costume was well designed that caters the time period and environment of the play. I love the lead actress’ skirt design as it shows the fashion trend of what time period it was. During the end period of the play, it shows another time period and how the actors are wearing the costume, its style and trend were clearly seen. The colour choices of costume used in each actor gives an insight of the actor’s characteristics.

The National Guardian can resonate certain aspects of the scenography of the play to the modern audience by implementing the transition of the different set design during scene changes, the lighting and the costume as it still has the essence of the 1986 play style at the same time gives out the vintage theatrical style.

The National Guardian can change the set design of 2D effect to a realistic effect such as instead of stick on boards of trees, individual trees can be built using plywood and tree stencils can be used to instill the tree effect on the plywood. While scrim can be used for the weather of the park such as the cloudy and sunny day and the full moon in the night

Another implementation can be used would be the background music. The background music is used so that audience would know that it is a park with the sounds of the pond, wind, tree rustling etc.

With this implementation, The National Guardian still resonates with the 1986 theatrical style and technics with a little elevation of set design and background music.

# data[].attributes.body
The set is relatively simple and the scenography looks like it was inspired by drawings. I think that is very apt for the play as the play is about artists and their struggles.

The scenography also shows depth of the landscape. It has a foreground and a background of some sort. The scene transitions are also clear to see because the scene changes even if it is just an addition of the dog.

The trees on stage can also move and it makes more space for more actors to be on stage at a time. The use of a backdrop is very efficient in a location change during the play. From the park to the painting studio. It is a very clever to use a thinner, see through material to show George's painting but at the same time the audience is able to see George through the "painting" as well. The addition of a different room and the props in the room helps with picturing two different rooms.

I feel like this play can still be appreciated by audiences today. Because more and more people have developed a deeper appreciation for the arts. Since the set design of the play is all very simple, audiences will be captivated by the story and the actors. However that does not mean that the set does not have a role to play. The set is easy on the eyes but it also has details that the audiences will take note of.

# data[].attributes.headline
Scenography Review - Sunday in the Park with George 

# data[].attributes.subject
Scenography Review - Sunday in the Park with George 

# data[].attributes.body
The scenography of the performance is very creative and straightforward. Creative because the background used was inspired by an oil painting which I think it is something unique. Straightforward because the oil painting is clear enough for the audience will get the message of where the scene is being held at in a glance. I also feel that the scene transition is very clear as well. For example, there is a part when they changed the scene from the oil painting to the house. In this scene transition it is obvious to the audience that the actors are in 2 different venue. I also like the fact where the tree could slide their way out of the stage with no crew going up to the stage to push it away. This will be an additional points as no sudden interruption of crew pushing the tree away will occur and the with this, if the audience did not see it carefully they will not notice that the tree is out of the performing space. This can also help to create more space for the actors to act so that it will not be too cramp together on stage and block the other actor’s action when performing.

However, I feel that this type of scenography will not resonate with today’s audience. This is because the original scenography is unrealistic in a way as it is an oil painting. Firstly, Audience today will be more interested in a much more realistic play when they can relate to and not looking at an oil painting. For example instead of showing an oil painting, we can show the the actual photo of the river putting it at the backdrop or have a set design that is inspired by the actual surrounding with real texture of it. The example given will help to allow the set to feel more realistic which can help to attract the audience attention. Secondly, the original scenogaphy is boring as it seems to be flat and depending on where the audience seats as some audience could not see the layering of the set due to the angel of it which allow them to feel that it is just a piece of background at the back which serve no purpose. One can also argue that audience do not bother with the background or even they do not pay much attention to the set but i feel even if there are not a lot of people will appreciate the background etc, but it gives out an unspoken important factor to allow the audience to either feel excited and have better understanding of the play or totally not interested in the play. With an oil painting as a background the audience might therefore find it boring which lead to my point where the original scenography will not resonate with today’s audience.

# data[].attributes.headline
Scenography Review of Sunday in the Park with George(1986)      DIAN

# data[].attributes.subject
Scenography Review of Sunday in the Park with George(1986)      DIAN

# data[].attributes.body
With a simple and straightforward scenography through out the acts, they allow the audience to understand its surroundings quickly. However, the scenography lacks a wide variety of colours, and colours used are dull and plain, and not exactly realistic. Despite the scenography being simple and minimal, the backgrounds and various props are standing individually, which creates layers on set, and ultimately, creating a depth and distance between people and objects. The scenography does take the audience back in time with the set and props used to represent the time period. Even though it is minimal, the audience would be intrigued and focus actors and the story itself.

In my opinion, i believe the original scenography may not resonate with today's audience. These days, one of people's expectations when attending plays would be experiencing and be awed by a beautiful and aesthetically pleasing scenography, which may include colourful and appropraite use of colours, lights and props, and sometimes have deeper or hidden meanings. The original scenography seems unrealistic due to the 2D appearance and lack of colours and shades of the props, the audience may find it bland and uninteresting, which may negatively affect their overall experience of the play. Some of the today's audience may find the scenography too outdated and boring to their liking, which may lead them to be uninterested in the entire show.

# data[].attributes.body
The original scenography may not appeal to the current century, as we watch theatre with non-conventional sets and props that are on stage with a significant purpose/symbolism.

However, because it is unlike the scenography we see. It will be unique thus attracting attention of potential patrons of this century. This will allow patrons to learn and try to understand what the purpose of the original set and the difference between the scenography now and then.

# data[].attributes.headline
Scenography Review - Sunday in the Park with George

# data[].attributes.subject
Scenography Review - Sunday in the Park with George

# data[].attributes.body
When I first watched the play, I thought it was going to be boring as it was from the year 1986. I think that it will not resonate with today’s audience as the current audience are looking for more modern and impactful plays. The play from 1986 had not much technology but they used fly bars to move sets in and off stage. They did not have projections and lighting fixtures that can have different effects. At least they did not just have one backdrop and used that backdrop for the whole show which might be boring. They had depths as the wings of the stage are also used and not just a black piece of wing. Thus, it will not resonate with the current audience.

I think that some elements of the play can resonate such as using fly bars and using the wings as part of the set. You can add more things that will attract current audiences by using modern technologies such as projection, better lighting and audio, etc. I feel that if the story is too in depth or complex, only theatregoers will understand the storyline but if a normal audience watches the play, they will not understand as much hence, they will find it boring.

Overall, I feel that plays like this can resonate with the audience by using relevant elements that will resonate them unlike plays that have too many symbolic/indirect messages which only theatregoers might understand and get the message.

# data[].attributes.body
Scenography Review - Sunday in the Park with George

Initially, I was not very interested in the watching the play as the set  was very dull and I was confused about the set being more cartoonish and the lighting in the video was quite dim. In fact, I was very confused as the set had a more cartoonish vibe while the costume the actors are wearing evokes a more realistic vibe. Thus, I could not really see any particular elements that stood out. However, I found that the sound element of the scenography made up for the fairly bland and plain aspect of the the lighting, costume and set. The sound element of the scenography which included elements of a musical and song-like aspect made the play very refreshing and interesting for the audience. Even I find myself replay the video repeatedly as I found the lyrics quite catchy and funny.

Although the play does contain original sound scenography elements that make it unique and interesting, I do not believe that this is enough to motivate today’s audience in watching this play. I feel that in order to captivate the audience to watch the play, more vibrant colours can be used for the set or a more realistic approach should be incorporated. As for the lighting element of the scenography, I feel that it would be okay for it to remain as how it is. Because the current lighting does portray the natural sunlight in a park.

# data[].attributes.headline
Scenography review of Sunday in the Park with George

# data[].attributes.subject
Scenography review of Sunday in the Park with George

# data[].attributes.body
Though design is subjective, i do think the scenography displayed in the play was unique and played with a different art style that many can resonate with.
With its cartoonish design, many of us will feel a sense of nostalgia as most generations grew up with cartoons. With 3D props on the set, it gives the set some depth and makes it feel more realistic, almost like they're living in another reality.
Thus, i do feel like the audience will be able to resonate with the set design because it gives off the feeling like you're in a movie, only watching from the outside.

# data[].attributes.body
No, I do not think the original scenography will resonate with the audience of this century.

The secenography looks unrealistic and cartoonish, though I am able to make out what it is representing. The scenography lacks a touch of reality which might put the audience off, which are most likely adult instead of children due to the genre of the performance which is a musical.

The current scenography gives off a sense of mixed reality, which is a combination of comprehensive design of elements such as the trees, the boats, the river etc. yet presented in an unrealistic way. This gives off a sense of the scenography being not here and not there, which might confuse the audience as they try to decipher what is going on in the show. As the performance itself is telling of the story of George, the whole scenography can be modelled in a way which either just subtly hints or represent the elements presenting in the painting, or totally model it realistically after what George could have seen at the park, both of which are popular in the theatres today, also known as conventional style and non-conventional style.

However, I do feel that there are elements in the scenography which are still relevant and can be adapted, such as the multiple layers used to make up the whole scenography, I feel that that is a good idea as it adds a sense of three dimensionality to the scenography and allows it to be modified when required, hence, I feel that that can be reused. The idea of using projection mapping to construct a new scenography was also brilliant, as it has the ability to give existing scenography a new look and has the potential to be ultra realistic as well, which I feel can be retained for use if the performance is to be reenacted again.

# data[].attributes.headline
Scenography review Sunday in the Park with George

# data[].attributes.subject
Scenography review Sunday in the Park with George

# data[].attributes.body
I think that the original scenography elements of Sunday in the Park with George can resonates the audience. The scenography of the set has minimal colours and props so it is able to resonates the audience today. With the understanding of arts today, i think with cartoon scenography can be a unique way to resonates the audience. People still going to the park, with the scenography of the park at the background, it will help to resonates the audience. But without much props on stage, it kind of lack with the original scenography elements as it does not really look like a play. Overall, i think the original scenography elements will resonates the audience.

# data[].attributes.body
I feel that that if the scenography was incorporated to the show’s era,the audidence would be able to resonate with the show .Firstly,the  scenography would give the audience a feel that they are in the current era.Thus their thinking would start to relate with their lives as it is the same era. Also moreover,since no matter what era it is,the people existing were still humans,and mostly had the same logic of thinking as now such as moral values other than culture,it would be effective in making the audience resonate with the play.

Secondly,the scenography would also give the audience to be able to reflect in their lives if the scenography was made as todays era.This is as they would be able to better connect  with the roles in the play,as the scenography would give them a reality daily live feels.With connection to the roles,they are able to reflect on their lives too ,which would be a really good way for the play to impact the lives of the audience.

However,the elements of the 1980s should not be completely reconstructed as that would change the theme of the play ,making it an ineffective way.If it was completely the current era,the audience would not have anything to learn from the play and it would seem boring.Thus the current era being incorporated in the play would be effective if only it was done with the right amount of changes,not too much or not too little either.

# data[].attributes.body
I do not think this scenography will resonate with the audience now. Firstly, because people do not go to the parks anymore. This show was focused on the happenings in the park, familiar scenes they can see hence a full set on a park only. I think the unfamiliarity will be difficult for the audience to resonate with. Also, with the type of art in this show, we rarely see it. It would be more of LEDs, projections. Having a still background is too outdated for the new audience.
People care more about aesthetics nowadays, this set is too plain and unrealistic for them to like it.

First, I loved the scenography because of its pastel themes. The colors of the set never engulf the cast, it compliments them, but it does not stand on its own like how a scene should be.

The set is cartoonish theme with unrealistic drawings. However, I love they used the stage to give depth to the scene. In a scene, the woman is on stage right however the stage ends drawing ends at her. Then the man is in downstage center. With the ending of the painting, it created so much depth, an illusion. I think it was a clever use of space.

I also like how the stage is in layers. Actors are coming in from the different layers which is behind a tree and again an illusion of them hiding or coming from far away is created. Instead of having a plain stage with one painting, one part of a park, they tried to cover a whole park using layers.

# data[].attributes.headline
Scenography Review of Sunday in the Park with George

# data[].attributes.subject
Scenography Review of Sunday in the Park with George

# data[].attributes.body
Sunday in the Park with George has scenography which feels ahead of its time. This is not just because of the technological forms alone. But also because it is 2020, and some of us would think that the 1980s was so long ago there could never be technological devices of any kind back then.

Despite the park's cartoonish style and simple design, it holds a lot of depth. This can be seen by the actors emerging from different stage wings deeper in to the performance area. This gives us a realistic sense of the world, and not just a simple backdrop which gives more of a sense it is in fake and fictional world. Which is true, since Sunday in the Park with George is set in our own universe and possibilities.

It is not to say that parks are not relevant now as they still exist today and resemble a lot like the one in the play. Most parents would have taken their children and family to the park when they were younger just like the ones in the play. This evokes a sense of nostalgia for us who have grown up quite a bit, and takes us back to a time when things seemed easier. This feeling fits the cartoonish style and painting of the park scenery.

This park, which is also a titular setting as seen from the name of this play which also provides great contrast in time and ideology. When the play moves into the setting filled with projections and high rise buildings. It contrasts the previously seen park, an organic versus man-made forms. This switch makes it surprising, as we would have never expected such a great contrast. This appearance however makes the play a little bit more understood by us. As these are technological and man-made forms we see today.

This scenography could be improved and more relatable by tweaking the design of heavy machinery to resemble those that we can recognize well today. Such as perhaps washing machines, pizza ovens. Personally looking at them, I could not tell and understand what the heavy machinery were.

The park could also use some modern objects, such as a car or signage to draw back relevancy and stabilize it into today's world. Painting the park in the style of A Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte retains the purpose of the play's creation, and respects the painting itself. I would not change that in any way, but perhaps make the scenery painted in that style, while specific elements such as the trees are painted more realistically.

Sunday in the Park with George will still resonate with today's audience because these scenic elements and symbols are still present now.

# data[].attributes.headline
Scenography Review of Sunday in the Park with George (1986 Original Cast at the Booth Theatre)

# data[].attributes.subject
Scenography Review of Sunday in the Park with George (1986 Original Cast at the Booth Theatre)

# data[].attributes.body
Personally, I feel that the original scenography will resonate with the audiences of the current century. From the original scenography, I can see that the set design is simple, with cartoon-y design. I feel that this is something brand new and refreshing, which many of the audiences of this century would not have seen before. Especially with the advancement of technology, many shows have been focusing on using electronic devices to vamp up their scenography. To use a scenography like the original Sunday in the Park with George would definitely not have been a possible idea that they thought of.

As we can see in the original scenography, there were heavy machinery which was actually difficult for me to recognise. However, this was definitely something which caught my eye as a younger audience and I believe that it would be same for the other younger audiences who are watching the performance.

For older audiences, I believe that using the original scenography will be a walk down memory lane for them. It might remind them of the cartoons they watched when they were younger as we can see that the set and costume design is based in the 1800s. Especially with the set focusing on places such as lakes and parks, I think that it would definitely be something that both younger and older audiences can resonate with as they are venues that people would often visit with their family and friends when they are free even in the current time period, hence it is extremely relevant.

With the original scenography, as it is something that is unique and not commonly seen, I believe that it will be able to bring the audience into another dimension or reality.

However, some areas that I feel could be improved could probably be to add in more modern elements so that the younger audiences can better relate to it as well. Else, this performance might be difficult to target towards the younger audiences. With modern elements, the audiences in general will be able to better resonate with it as it is something that they are used to in today's time and hence they would be able to better relate to it.

One thing to note though is that it is important to depict the park in the style of A Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte as it retains the purpose of the play's creation, and respects the painting itself.

In conclusion, I feel that with some minor improvements, the original scenography can stay to resonate with the audiences of the current century.

# data[].attributes.headline
Scenography Review:     Sunday in the Park with George (1986 Original Cast at the Booth Theatre)               

# data[].attributes.subject
Scenography Review:     Sunday in the Park with George (1986 Original Cast at the Booth Theatre)               

# data[].attributes.body
In my opinion, the original scenography elements would generally resonate with the audience today as what was displayed was unique, but also simple for audiences to understand. The use of layers drew me in watching this performance as its transitions were very creative.

Even though the set was not realistic, it was still obvious that it is in the setting of a park and I am sure that the people today would recognise it since the parks still looks the same or have not changed drastically.

However, I feel that for set pieces like the animals, umbrella and the boats, there could be an alternative way in making it look interesting as it looks rather plain and could disinterest audiences. There also could be confusion about why some objects are in form of props and some in form of flat set pieces. I also do feel the lack of liveliness in the park and use of gobos or projections for example can show birds flying about.

I understand that in the 1980s, there are some limitations due to how technology was slowly advancing. The company can look into improving some elements using the technology today which could resonate with today’s audiences even better.

# data[].attributes.headline
Need to do a bit of research on the production.

# data[].attributes.subject
Need to do a bit of research on the production.

# data[].attributes.body
1) Time Period:
The production's first performance is in 1986, but it is not set in 1986.
The production is set around 1884 - 1886 in the first half and second half fast forward a century to 1984 2)The painting by Georges Seurat - A Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte (1884-1886) Oil on canvas.
3) You cannot change the period and the people in Seurat's world. All you can do is to change the presentation or techniques in scenography presentation and add technology to move the production closer to an audience nowadays.

# data[].attributes.body
When I started off watching the 1986 play of Sunday In The Pak With George, I knew that it might not resonate with today's current audience as the set was plain and there were no use of any projections or anything currently modern that audiences today usually see in plays. However, I find that it's simplicity and cartoonish art to the set and props, has made it relevant to audiences today. With a cartoonish set to depict a park, it would resonate with young kids, however, young kids would not really be the main target audience on this particular play. So maybe a more realistic background would be better to resonate with the older and more mature audience. But, I must say, the simplicity of the set has given the actors a bigger chance to shine as not much focus is on the set behind.
The set also has width, which I personally feel, will most definitely resonate with current audiences as it is more realistic. Actors are seen coming out from different wings of the stage, which gives off a realistic feel of a park.

As the play is set in 1986, the costumes, props etc will help the current audience get a feel of what a play in the 1980s would feel like- without much modern technology - it could create a sense of nostalgia for some people who lived through their teen or adult years in the 1980s. However, I feel like in order for this play to resonate with today's audience, more modern technology must be used to improve the set design, props, etc so that it is relevant to today's time and will be better enjoyed by people of this modern times.

In conclusion, the scenography of this play may appeal to the current audience of today as it is simple and not too "ancient", I mean it is in the 1980's, where technology was rapidly growing. Thus, it still can be relevant to today's audience an can still be widely appreciated if there could be a few modern changes, nothing drastic.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that the scenography will not resonate with today's audience. It might suits the period of time back then. I feel like the scenography looks very dull and plain which is not that that eye-catching especially in today's advanced technology and facilities in making the theatre alive. Productions today have always be planned in detailed in keeping it alive with the bright, outstanding and eye-catching features.

However, I feel like the scenography can still be used today in terms of what context or content the production wants to show. The cartoonish art style actually gives more retro type of vibe which is the trend of style now especially how it was originated back in 1986. Maybe changes like the use of colours or certain details should be enhanced more to make the production in general more interesting so that the audience can be more fascinated or immersed in the play.

# data[].attributes.body
Even though this is considered an old show that played in the 1980s, I believe people these days will still be able to resonate with the show. The set is simple and a little magical at certain scenes, which enagages fairytale lovers, children, families in general. Even with a simple set, the actors are able to be a bigger highlight on stage and really be big with their actions and gestures. The old sets and props used may be something unfamiliar for the youths these days, however, it brings back a sense of nostalgia for the older generations. In conclusion, the scenography may appeal to a certain group of people but it brings the changes due to time and