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.)
Absolutely see it! But watch the Director's Cut, which is a classic
Is the Director's Cut on Disney+ or...?
Oh hey, which touring cast?
August 2023, which I think means it has to be the Philip Tour. (I can't find any definitive cast names.)
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.
You mean Baldwin? Baldwin was famous long before the film (we actually have no evidence he wore a mask!)
(by all accounts Baldwin was a decent enough king as the crusader royals went, afaik.) Saladin has the other problem - he conquered Jerusalem & as was typical for the area enslaved many of the conquered, but ransomed an unusual number & then freed others, which FOR THE TIME was most magnanimous.
... Oh, God, I'm so embarrassed. I don't know why my brain conflated the two.
and Saladin himself I knew first from Age of Empires 2 actually
(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.
He had it coming