Hamilton on Disney: No Room For Slave Owners

[Fragile Bird]

My Facebook feed and the news shows I watch can't stop posting and talking about the Hamilton movie that Disney just put on their channel for the 4th of July weekend. I understand it's fabulous. Hamilton was coming to us in Toronto later this year, but that was BC time (Before Covid). I was planning on seeing it live. I don't subscribe to Disney, maybe I'll add it, but I assume the movie will show up at Costco sooner or later.

However, all of a sudden I'm seeing stories dissing the play and the movie version as being unworthy of all it's praise and that it shouldn't be shown on Disney, because it's glorifying someone who seriously profitted from the slave trade. Hamilton's wife's family were major slave traders and Hamilton ran the business for them.

Here we are back again at the interesection of life and art. Tear down that statue! Don't play Wagner! Cancel Hamilton?

The play is so cool because PoC are playing parts that would have gone to white actors because the characters were real people and they were white, and for the use of rap. Does this play just gloss over a story about a bunch of despicable slave owners and slave traders?

[Kalbear]

It doesnt focus on it much at all, one way or another. It dissed Jeffersons hypocrisy, and mentions that Hamilton supported Laurens and his goal of freeing more slaves, but otherwise everyone is pretty silent on it. Miranda mentioned this- they talk about it in the play as the original sin of America, and everyone just kind of glosses over it and remains complicit, and that is intentionally done - even the people who say they care basically do nothing but talk.

[HoodedCrow]

I think it’s better to have art that is explained in historical terms rather than shunned. The slave trade was legal then, and it should still be condemned.

The show was well staged, perky, innovative, and thank goodness I don’t have to memorize any of it! Wow, it is an Olympian show of words with a beat.

[Winterfell is Burning]

I don't know why people expect a musical that features several historical figures rapping and played by people of different ethnicities than they were to be extremely historically accurate.

[Mexal]

29 minutes ago, Winterfell is Burning said:

I don't know why people expect a musical that features several historical figures rapping and played by people of different ethnicities than they were to be extremely historically accurate.

This. The point of something like this is to get you interested in the period and to do research yourselves to see what's real and what's not. Miranda made a show that was entertaining in a way that was accessible for all. It's not supposed to be the full, true story of Hamilton and the Founding Fathers.

And really, I'm a bit tired of all of this stuff. America has a shitty history, one that took us a long time to sort out and one that is still ongoing. All countries do. At the time these people lived, the world was a different place and they were dealing with issues beyond anything we're dealing with today (like fighting for independence and creating a system of government for a new, lasting country). Feel free to point out the warts but giving them equal weight or having them outweigh / diminish the actual achievements which were monumental because they acted in accordance with the time just frustrates me. 

ETA: in positive news, as I mentioned in the watching post, this is an incredible production and not at all diminished by seeing it on the TV rather than in the theater.

[Fragile Bird]

That's the essence of the problem, isn't it? Slavery is just glossed over. Give me history without the ugly details. Hamilton did great things for the young republic, that outweighs running a slave trade business. And owning slaves.

As I said, I haven't seen it, I don't know what references are made to the slave trade. Maybe the good outweighs the bad, but isn't the topic basically ignored altogether? I think that's what bugs the critics, slavery is just taken for granted. A song about some self-doubt might have been helpful, even a short song? I am working in the dark here.

[HoodedCrow]

It’s a musical, not a documentary:) Yet, we get current reactions, so pointing out not enough was made about slavery. It’s such a huge topic and there was a lot of justifying and minimizing it at the time and even today. There is a bit about women not getting the vote that time also.

For those of you who have studied it, was Thomas Jefferson such a jerk, or is that for dramatic purposes?

 

[Fragile Bird]

Well, I'm still going to see it. I don't know how fair the criticism is, but I have seen lots of angry interviews since the death of George Floyd about Americans not acknowledging that American historical figures do not get a pass on slavery because "that was then".

[Mexal]

27 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

That's the essence of the problem, isn't it? Slavery is just glossed over. Give me history without the ugly details. Hamilton did great things for the young republic, that outweighs running a slave trade business. And owning slaves.

As I said, I haven't seen it, I don't know what references are made to the slave trade. Maybe the good outweighs the bad, but isn't the topic basically ignored altogether? I think that's what bugs the critics, slavery is just taken for granted. A song about some self-doubt might have been helpful, even a short song? I am working in the dark here.

As Kal said, it's mentioned a few times. But again, it's not supposed to be a documentary on Hamilton. It focused on major events and it dramatized them in musical ways. It took significant liberties with the truth to tell a compelling story and keep everyone's interest. The fact that his father-in-law had slaves isn't a defining feature of his life (almost all southerners did and a lot of northerners too), especially in a time when the slave trade was legal and there were bigger issues going on (independence, building a completely novel, brand new government and treasury). Just not seeing anything that would be additive to the musical in respect to slavery, even in light of the new wokeness of our country (that wasn't this way over the past 10-13 years when it was being written).

[Mexal]

3 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

Well, I'm still going to see it. I don't know how fair the criticism is, but I have seen lots of angry interviews since the death of George Floyd about Americans not acknowledging that American historical figures do not get a pass on slavery because "that was then".

They're going to have to deal with it. If it was a musical on the Civil War, fair enough. But 1776? They can write a book about it if they feel that strongly rather than criticizing someone else's musical and dramatic take on a story that's little told, especially since they wouldn't have criticized it 5 years ago when it debuted.

[unJon]

Frankly I don’t think the issue of slavery is ignored. I came away from it thinking Hamilton was an early abolitionist. It’s hit quite a few times (from My Shot to the end with Eliza mentioning in last song). I guess the fair critique would be whitewashing Hamilton’s position. 

 

[Fragile Bird]

Just saw this article about 'what is wrong with Hamilton'. Example.

Quote

The ambivalence of Hamilton in the play is camouflaged by the love story at its center that seems also to be at the core of its appeal. First, his romance with Elizabeth Schuyler distracts our attention from the fact that the Schuylers were one of the largest and most notorious slave-owning families in New York state. The name is so scandalous that last month the mayor of Albany ordered the removal of a statue honoring Phillip Schuyler, Hamilton's father-in-law.

A similar bit of camouflage is carried out in the scene where Hamilton has an extramarital affair with Maria Reynolds. The distracting hand-wringing over his betrayal happens as he is engaged in debates over the ratification of the Constitution. The story focuses on his desire to create a central bank to assume all debts -- at one point he taunts Jefferson by saying "your debts are paid cuz you don't pay for labor... so we get Congress get held hostage by the South." But the drama over Reynolds glosses over his failure to speak out against the three-fifths compromise, which allowed Southern states to count Black people as three-fifths of a person for representation purposes.

More details in the article.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/05/opinions/hamilton-movie-mixed-messages-black-lives-matter-morales/index.html

 

[Mexal]

1 hour ago, Fragile Bird said:

Just saw this article about 'what is wrong with Hamilton'. Example.

More details in the article.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/05/opinions/hamilton-movie-mixed-messages-black-lives-matter-morales/index.html

 

This would make a great history book. But as an entertaining work of art, the best way to diminish the love story that spans the entire show is to denigrate the family that the chief love interests come from and make them unsympathetic.

[unJon]

5 minutes ago, Mexal said:

This would make a great history book. But as an entertaining work of art, the best way to diminish the love story that spans the entire show is to denigrate the family that the chief love interests come from and make them unsympathetic.

I agree with this. On the other hand, there’s a difference between glossing over a topic for the reasons you mention vs explicitly mentioning several times what an abolitionist Hamilton was. 

[kairparavel]

The criticism is more justly aimed at Ron Chernow who wrote the book LMM read on a beach vacation. LMM is neither a historian nor a biographer. It's not unreasonable to say the musical glosses over slavery - it does. But anything beyond that is just silly.

http://www.playbill.com/article/beach-read-to-broadway-how-lin-manuel-miranda-turned-a-history-book-into-hamilton-com-355514

Are we going to go back and critique The Crucible now for it's lack of fidelity to actual history?

 

[dog-days]

Just watched Hamilton now on Disney Plus. Overall I liked it, but it was the love story that least impressed me - the Hamilton/Eliza romance and marriage and forgiveness almost seemed to have been parachuted in from another staler show. So, I don't know, if Miranda had included a bit more history with reference to Hamilton's in-laws, maybe it would have improved things. 

Jefferson/Lafayette (Daveed Diggs) stole every scene he was in. 

[Kalbear]

3 hours ago, unJon said:

Frankly I don’t think the issue of slavery is ignored. I came away from it thinking Hamilton was an early abolitionist. It’s hit quite a few times (from My Shot to the end with Eliza mentioning in last song). I guess the fair critique would be whitewashing Hamilton’s position. 

Except he really wasn't. Or at least not a particularly strong one. He opposed slavery, but not particularly strongly. 

This is a great summation of some of the problems. Basically, like most revolutionary history stories it entirely whitewashes the history and ignores anything that isn't about those great white people. Hamilton doesn't do it any more or less than anything else - but it's still problematic in the same way.

https://slate.com/culture/2016/04/a-hamilton-critic-on-why-the-musical-isnt-so-revolutionary.html

[unJon]

1 minute ago, Kalbear said:

Except he really wasn't. Or at least not a particularly strong one. He opposed slavery, but not particularly strongly. 

This is a great summation of some of the problems. Basically, like most revolutionary history stories it entirely whitewashes the history and ignores anything that isn't about those great white people. Hamilton doesn't do it any more or less than anything else - but it's still problematic in the same way.

https://slate.com/culture/2016/04/a-hamilton-critic-on-why-the-musical-isnt-so-revolutionary.html

Yup. Makes sense. 

[Jaxom 1974]

4 hours ago, Fragile Bird said:

Just saw this article about 'what is wrong with Hamilton'. Example.

More details in the article.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/05/opinions/hamilton-movie-mixed-messages-black-lives-matter-morales/index.html

 

I think I prefer this article's take on the show:

https://www.vox.com/2016/4/14/11418672/hamilton-is-fanfic-not-historically-inaccurate

[Rhom]

I tire of hearing how the three-fifths compromise was a boon to the south... they wanted to count everyone of the slaves for representation purposes.  Why wouldn’t they?!!?  It’s not like anyone planned for the slaves to actually vote.  It was the North that didn’t want to count them and wound up compromising at 3/5 so the South wouldn’t be able to outvote them.

The entire argument is applying today’s beliefs against the society of three hundred years ago.  I’ve not watched Hamilton yet. It came to Louisville a couple years ago and I wanted to go, but I couldn’t justify the price of the hard to find ticket to sit my butt against the back wall of the Kentucky Center.  Same way I felt about the live action Lion King actually.  I do plan to take time to watch on Disney at some point soon.