That's not what Hamilton is about, though? Hamilton is a consciously anachronistic almost alt-history that's about the metatext of how Americans mythologize our founders, with conscious choices like casting the same person as Lafayette and Jefferson, or pointedly casting PoC rather than white men.
A big theme of Hamilton is legacy and who tells history. And it's become unintentionally (?) metatextual because this musical is now his most well-known legacy (he used to be the guy on the $10 bill, now he's the guy in the musical of that name), and it's Chernow and Miranda who tell his story.
Point is, it is incredibly self consciously metatextual, it's not at ALL trying to talk about these real men, but rather about them as ideas, even archetypes, in the specifically American revolutionary and civic religion pantheon. It is extremely clear if you've seen it performed, too!
They are archetypes, but their portrayal is based on real people, they're named after those people, and almost every plot point in the play is something that really happened (at least to Hamilton if not the others). So I think Philby is right that the play gives Alexander Hamilton a new afterlife.
Both interpretations can co-exist, as can their criticisms.
Online Discourse really does not actually do Hamilton justice as a work.
Now, as someone who did love Hamilton, I agree with a lot of what you're saying, and I understand what it's going for. I just also think some of the criticism is a little warranted, and we do have to contend with its material impact; it did give, for a whole new generation, a new afterlife for...
... the Founding Fathers, to the point where everything LMM chose to either omit or sanitize allowed them to divorce these figures from the unbelievably fucked up things they would do *to* Americans in the long run (and indigenous people, especially).
Honestly my most spicy opinion is that the mockery of American civic religion, not excess reverence of it, is a huge part of why we're here. It is probably worth reckoning with the fact that Americans of every ethnicity & generation have found inspiration in these figures, despite their moral flaws
I think mockery and reverence are both at fault here. There's no better example of this than Trump, who by his actions makes a mockery of it, but by his words pretends reverence. He wants to shut down critical museum displays and trample the Constitution at the same time.
What we need is sober warts-and-all appraisal, but that takes work, so we don't get it.
Ehh, I think that's a contextual need. And again, I think a better example of what Philby is talking about is Kingdom of Heaven?
That may be; I haven't seen it! I guess I should. (And for the record, I have seen Hamilton: first the original-cast movie they put on Disney+, and later a live show with a touring cast.)
Which, honestly, yeah- Saladin getting a sexy gothic glow up, to the point of inspiring a whole archetype of the Masked Royal in fantasy and horror (see: Darkest Dungeon), is absolutely a prime example of giving someone an afterlife they arguably don't deserve.
(a thing a lot of folks On Here don't want to think about is how much even oppressed marginalized groups such as indigenous Americans and Black Americans are *still* historically extremely well represented among American heroes & clearly inspired by that civic religion & its pantheon.)
Ehhhh...
Seriously. Black Americans didn't take names like Washington upon being emancipated for no reason.
Not denying that many Americans found them inspirational, I just don't buy that the mockery of the foundational myth of America is why we're.
I have, actually! In Chicago, very much enjoyed it. ... even if there was a linebacker-ass dude in front of me, with shoulders the length and width of a battleship.
(I spent the entire damn show craning my neck around and over this dude like a creep, it was awkward)
Point is, I feel like a lot of Discourse comes purely from folks who are familiar with it as a (roundly mocked) concept bu& maybe have heard the soundtrack but not actually seen it performed, where the air of artifice & anachronism is unavoidable and profound
I think it's worth remembering that there's also Chernow's Hamilton between historical Hamilton and Miranda's Hamilton
Sure but that's not really that abnormal for any historical figure (and in the case of Chernow, something he also did for Grant tbqh)
yeah, just saying that some of the aspects people criticize Miranda for that weren't just a result of transposing the historical figures anachronistically onto PoCs do stem from how Chernow presented the story and which parts he chose to focus on and which to omit
Well also, Hamilton is a historic figure and contrary to the expectations of activists who are looking for a simple narrative one way or the other historiography even of our heroes is almost always complicated & hotly disputed! History is not for simplistic contemporary heroes & villains
My closest connection to Hamilton is that on my mom's side, we're supposedly distantly related to Aaron Burr, the vice president most known for having shot & killed Hamilton in that infamous duel. My mom used to say it was a source of shame to multiple members in her family in that regard.
Like Hamilton is EXTREMELY UP FRONT about how it's a fairy tale & to some degree allegory for American self identity, and pointedly including PoC and immigrants in its story to REJECT the nativist racist view of the Essential Character of America.
I'd actually cite the other example of Kingdom of Heaven as a great example of this, because in its pursuit of its message it unavoidably idealizes a fictionalized version of basically all its cast (ironically ESPECIALLY Saladin, who for all his magnanimity did totally enslave people in Jerusalem!)
(His generosity was in accepting a bunch of ransoms which the Christians paid and then magnanimously deciding to free a bunch of captives who couldn't pay ransoms, which inspired some of his men to do so in turn - but a bunch of Christians were totally enslaved & the Muslim chroniclers proud of it!)
Sure, but it's also how we got–as Pawel put it–"Miku Binder Jefferson," for better or worse.
I'm saying that if you've actually seen the work it's extremely up front about this, & Online Discourse has served it poorly. Hamilton is about the pantheon of the American civic religion, it makes absolutely no claims to historical accuracy & if anything outright says "this is not how it happened"
(I also feel, with absolutely no offense meant, Hamilton is specifically and precisely calibrated for an *AMERICAN* audience, with a special focus on an American *immigrant* or descendants of immigrants audience. I'm not sure how well this aspect translates to folks outside the American mentality)
I mean, I just enjoy it as a fun musical even if it's not calibrated for me as target audience (but I also enjoy Love Never Dies as a musical despite it being a banger of a musical based on abominable Phantom of the Opera fan fiction)
Sure, but it's like how Disco Elysium hits differently with the Eastern European context?
Les Miserables hits different when you're French too (and in French), I'm sure
I've actually seen Les Mis in French, and I can confirm that it does, as a matter of fact.
To be clear, I mean the stage musical, not that I saw the Russell Crowe movie with a French dub.
have you listened to the original concept album/original Paris stage version, though? It has a lot of stuff cut from English and later French versions bsky.app/profile/ausi...
Not at all, but now I'm *intrigued.*
like this song by Gavroche: Je suis tombé par terre, c'est la faute à Voltaire Le nez dans le ruisseau, c'est la faute à Rousseau Je ne suis pas notaire, c'est la faute à Voltaire Je suis petit oiseau, c'est la faute à Rousseau www.youtube.com/watch?v=zE6C...
(tbh I think lyrics from the original French concept album version of Les Miserables, often with more historical references or elements of the novel are often superior vs. the simplified English and also somewhat simplified modern French version)
Lord do I hate Les Mis
the novel or the musical or both
Musical. Love the novel.
Holy God, I haven't thought about Love Never Dies in ages.
I just did a few days ago bsky.app/profile/ausi...
About five years after Hamilton hit big, I was visiting Trinity Church and there was at least one teen fanning over his grave, including telling their parents information that wasn't in the musical. I've always felt it as part of a way to bring people who are usually excluded from stuff like 1776+
Into the story, especially without making Yet Another Story About Slavery
somewhat, but also it being based on Ron Chernow's biography of Hamiltion that *is* about giving him that redemptive spin (while omitting some less convenient parts) which Miranda used as starting point of *his* anachronistic take without really consulting other sources is a factor here
Thank you, Pawel.
I also want to point out, there was even an off-Broadway play satirizing LMM's reverence for Hamilton and the Founding Fathers as mythological figures who can be transplanted onto POC without really contending with their ideology or their actual racism, and it was written by a black playwright.
Sure, because there's no monolithic opinion in any community. The existence of counter-narratives doesn't mean that the narrative doesn't exist
so @philbybear.bsky.social is kinda right, just with Miku Binder Jefferson being two steps removed from that kind of thing, not one