Anyone OVER 'Hamilton' without even seeing it?- Page 4
Anyone OVER 'Hamilton' without even seeing it?
#75Anyone OVER 'Hamilton' without even seeing it?
Posted: 1/19/16 at 12:31pm
Si. No desire to see this one....
Clint. The pic = Dan's chair for final number in Next to Normal.
#76Anyone OVER 'Hamilton' without even seeing it?
Posted: 1/19/16 at 12:36pmGreat, you guys are over it or as not into it or were not impressed or don't wanna see it. I'll mint up the "I'm Unique" medals for you.
"...everyone finally shut up, and the audience could enjoy the beginning of the Anatevka Pogram in peace."
Broadway_Boy
Broadway Star Joined: 10/22/05
#77Anyone OVER 'Hamilton' without even seeing it?
Posted: 1/19/16 at 12:48pm
I have seen it three times and can't wait to hit the lotto a fourth time. Does anyone know how that is working now?
Check out the app Todaytix if you haven't already for theatre tickets around the world. My referral code is DGHVR
#78Anyone OVER 'Hamilton' without even seeing it?
Posted: 1/19/16 at 12:53pm
Broadway_Boy said: "I have seen it three times and can't wait to hit the lotto a fourth time. Does anyone know how that is working now? "
In person.
#79Anyone OVER 'Hamilton' without even seeing it?
Posted: 1/19/16 at 2:34pm
A whole bunch of whining from people who haven't even seen it.
Classy.
Mr Roxy
Broadway Legend Joined: 5/17/03
#80Anyone OVER 'Hamilton' without even seeing it?
Posted: 1/19/16 at 2:37pm
Who is whining? We are not seeing it because we do not want to. If you do fine. If you want to see it 10 times fine. Who cares. All this thread was about was being assailed every 3 minutes with a new thread about it. It is overkill. The show is probably great. Ok time to move on .
Poster Emeritus
#81Anyone OVER 'Hamilton' without even seeing it?
Posted: 1/19/16 at 2:41pm
I find it interesting that some comments in this thread link to the earlier discussion about creative license - that is, those who are calling Hamilton "educational," despite the fact that there's no reliable history being presented in the show, based as it is on a pop-bio that was heralded in the Times by a far-right non-historian who loves capitalism, credit, debt, and a small central government that does nothing to impede banks and large corporations, the poor be damned. However, Willard Sterne Randall (an actual [gasp!] historian), writing for the Boston Globe, pointed out the "bad history" used by Chernow, who, in his defense, was probably writing for a larger, less-intellectual audience, one more interested in hot storytelling than accuracy.
All this has nothing to do with the entertainment value of Hamilton; many seem to think it's a better and more significant piece of theatre than Oklahoma!, West Side Story, My Fair Lady, Fiddler On The Roof, Hello Dolly!, Hair, Company, Follies, Cats, Les Miserables, and The Phantom of the Opera combined. I may not share quite that level of enthusiasm, but can see that Hamilton definitely has its entertainment value. But "educational?" Definitely not - it's as much a fairy tale as Once Upon A Mattress.
UrNotAMachine
Stand-by Joined: 2/17/15
#82Anyone OVER 'Hamilton' without even seeing it?
Posted: 1/19/16 at 2:55pm
newintown said: "I find it interesting that some comments in this thread link to the earlier discussion about creative license - that is, those who are calling Hamilton "educational," despite the fact that there's no reliable history being presented in the show, based as it is on a pop-bio that was heralded in the Times by a far-right non-historian who loves capitalism, credit, debt, and a small central government that does nothing to impede banks and large corporations, the poor be damned. However, Willard Sterne Randall (an actual [gasp!] historian), writing for the Boston Globe, pointed out the "bad history" used by Chernow, who, in his defense, was probably writing for a larger, less-intellectual audience, one more interested in hot storytelling than accuracy.
All this has nothing to do with the entertainment value of Hamilton; many seem to think it's a better and more significant piece of theatre than Oklahoma!, West Side Story, My Fair Lady, Fiddler On The Roof, Hello Dolly!, Hair, Company, Follies, Cats, Les Miserables, and The Phantom of the Opera combined. I may not share quite that level of enthusiasm, but can see that Hamilton definitely has its entertainment value. But "educational?" Definitely not - it's as much a fairy tale as Once Upon A Mattress."
While I agree that Hamilton isn't always historically accurate, I think the educational value of it comes from putting history into modern context. The show is able to create an appreciation for history and an understanding of it that has not existed before. The events of the 18th century don't seem as distant to audiences of hamilton and that in turn promotes history education as a new generation of kids find themselves caring about the stories of people who have been dead for hundreds of years. In that respect, the show promotes education in a way that few other shows have.
Updated On: 1/19/16 at 02:55 PM
#83Anyone OVER 'Hamilton' without even seeing it?
Posted: 1/19/16 at 3:03pm
@newintown, the essential history is all there and is correct, and Chernow cannot be dismissed as a pop biographer. Like all history, it has a POV-that in fact is one of its existential points. There is a good and bad side to all of history, and unquestionably Hamilton chooses who tells the story. The dangerous works are those that pretend to be unbiased.
#84Anyone OVER 'Hamilton' without even seeing it?
Posted: 1/19/16 at 3:08pm
"...the essential history is all there and is correct, and Chernow cannot be dismissed as a pop biographer."
I'm fine agreeing to disagree on that point. Better historians than you and I have expressed issues with the book, which (to me) justifies skepticism. Other readers are certainly free to take it as they please. A point of view is fine, but an academic work needs more facts than conjecture. Entertainment, however, positively thrives on conjecture.
After Eight
Broadway Legend Joined: 6/5/09
#85Anyone OVER 'Hamilton' without even seeing it?
Posted: 1/19/16 at 3:42pm
"The show is able to create an appreciation for history and an understanding of it that has not existed before."
Utter hogwash. Beyond ridiculous.
#87Anyone OVER 'Hamilton' without even seeing it?
Posted: 1/19/16 at 3:49pm
That is manifestly, unambiguously true for many audience members.
#88Anyone OVER 'Hamilton' without even seeing it?
Posted: 1/19/16 at 3:57pm
Mr Roxy said: "Who is whining? We are not seeing it because we do not want to. If you do fine. If you want to see it 10 times fine. Who cares. All this thread was about was being assailed every 3 minutes with a new thread about it. It is overkill. The show is probably great. Ok time to move on "
Isn't a thread against it still a new thread about it?
Broadway kid 2
Stand-by Joined: 6/7/14
#89Anyone OVER 'Hamilton' without even seeing it?
Posted: 1/19/16 at 4:12pm
taboo123 said: "I feel I am.
There is just WAY TOO MANY articles written on Hamilton.
Hamilton has a lottery show, hamilton does online clip, Hamilton visits a statue of Hamilton, Hamilton is recording a show, Hamilton sings to a teacher, Hamilton tweets about life, hamilton sells fake tickets of Hamilton on Craigslist,... Hamilton farts......
(And this was just this week)
I am tired of having to have another Hamilton related article that has clearly nothing to do with the show, plaguing my theatre websites...
I understand that the Hamilton Machine has a very strong PR team- including creating this fictitious AUDITION FOR HAMILTON on video thing which was so ridiculous considering that they are auditioning equity actors the legit way and just created free buzz for themselves... because who is going to sit through thousands of videos when there's official equity auditions happening....
And let's not even discuss the carefully planned digital Hamilton lottery that everyone freely buzzed about on social media creating it to crash, to then go back to normal again...
There's no such thing as bad publicity,. but when is it TOO MUCH publicity.
I haven't seen the show. But now it's like I don't care to see it.
Listened to the soundtrack a few times- and cannot get into it at all.
It feels like it's 4 songs- (or Beats).. set to different tempos repeating over and over again. Retreading 'in the heights' leftovers that follow the same style . 'My shot' is clearly the title track of 'in the heights' again..
anyone else feeling this, yo?
anyone else thinking this way? or am I just by myself in this world. because it's pretty easy to write a rap to mundane music.
Because the assassination of a president, is resident, in my competent establishment, of understanding the ifs and whens of then and whens- when, it can pretend to be a liar, an honest-rapid fire, of discussion, no concussion, take it to the other notion of promotion. You got yourself a team of fabricators that allow the haters to possess a fascinator wearing shade, throwing blame but I won't play this game of being bombarded by the Hamilton, i'm not gonna throw my Benjamins on this shot, Ramblin', when so many otha shows deserve the same head clot, to rot, inside a vicious drop, the beat and if you ya think i'm gonna get a seat, you're bugging- ya feeling me? (just off the top of my head)
"
#90Anyone OVER 'Hamilton' without even seeing it?
Posted: 1/19/16 at 4:12pm
Those of you who get an odd kick from mocking everything After Eight writes are ignoring the very tangible fact that to say Hamilton has created an appreciation for and an understanding of "history" is quite mind-bogglingly difficult to take seriously.
It's like saying The Sound of Music created an unprecedented appreciation for and understanding of female religious communities and choral singing. Or that You're a Good Man Charlie Brown did the same for children and beagles.
#91Anyone OVER 'Hamilton' without even seeing it?
Posted: 1/19/16 at 4:14pm
newintown said: "
I'm fine agreeing to disagree on that point. Better historians than you and I have expressed issues with the book, which (to me) justifies skepticism. Other readers are certainly free to take it as they please. A point of view is fine, but an academic work needs more facts than conjecture. Entertainment, however, positively thrives on conjecture."
There is no good biography that does not engender issues from other historians with a different POV. If you think Chernow's book is conjecture-based, then I fear you have not read it as I have. But facts are spun in one of many directions, in EVERY history, including those of the folks you think are better than you are. I restate that there is no essential history in Hamilton that is inaccurate. But a scholarly work that does not take a position is not very scholarly. I urge you not to take what you've read in a couple of newspaper articles as some gospel.
#92Anyone OVER 'Hamilton' without even seeing it?
Posted: 1/19/16 at 4:19pm
You're all in luck! Now every new article on BWW is going to be about a revival of Hello, Dolly! that isn't happening for a year.
#93Anyone OVER 'Hamilton' without even seeing it?
Posted: 1/19/16 at 4:22pm
Yes, I read the Chernow - or rather, I read half of it, then discarded it after encountering too many sentences that began something like "What certainly must have been running through his mind was..." (this is called "conjecture"
. We have what's been recorded, "reliable" or not, and then we have conjecture. Chernow's background is in literature (and journalism), not history, and even as a historian, he seems to tend to be more interested in personality and the support of capitalism. Even his admirers have been known to acknowledge that his forte is character rather than history.
But, as I said earlier, I'm fine with agreeing to disagree. I doubt that we'll convince one another of anything we don't already believe (has that ever happened on a chat board?).
#94Anyone OVER 'Hamilton' without even seeing it?
Posted: 1/19/16 at 4:59pm
newintown conjectures:
(this is called "conjecture". We have what's been recorded, "reliable" or not, and then we have conjecture. Chernow's background is in literature (and journalism), not history, and even as a historian, he seems to tend to be more interested in personality
And yet:
"A brilliant historian has done it again! The thoroughness and integrity of Ron Chernow’s research shines forth on every page of his Alexander Hamilton. He has created a vivid and compelling portrait of a remarkable man—and at the same time he has made a monumental contribution to our understanding of the beginnings of the American Republic.” —Robert A. Caro, author of The Power Broker and The Years of Lyndon Johnson
"Alexander Hamilton was one of the most brilliant men of his brilliant time, and one of the most fascinating figures in all of American history. His rocketing life-story is utterly amazing. His importance to the founding of the new nation, and thus to the whole course of American history, can hardly be overstated. And so Ron Chernow's new Hamilton could not be more welcome. This is grand-scale biography at its best—thorough, insightful, consistently fair, and superbly written. It clears away more than a few shop-worn misconceptions about Hamilton, gives credit where credit is due, and is both clear-eyed and understanding about its very human subject. Its numerous portraits of the complex, often conflicting cast of characters are deft and telling. The whole life and times are here in a genuinely great book." —David McCullough, author of John Adams
"Nobody has captured Hamilton better than Chernow..." —The New York Times Book Review
Broadway Legend Joined: 12/31/69
#95Anyone OVER 'Hamilton' without even seeing it?
Posted: 1/19/16 at 5:41pm
Yes, it's overrated and will inspire awful imitations
Consistency
Understudy Joined: 7/2/13
#96Anyone OVER 'Hamilton' without even seeing it?
Posted: 1/19/16 at 5:53pm
Chernow's book is pretty widely considered one of the definitive accounts of Hamilton's life. But no, you're not going to find a single, widely read work of history that is universally regarded as great by historians.
The book certainly isn't immune to criticism - but it's a bit silly to point to a positive review from a Right-winger and another reviewer calling its historicity into question as proof of anything. Especially when you ignore the many positive reviews from established, respected historians.
As for "Hamilton" the musical - I haven't seen it yet, but I quite like the music. And it HAS, in fact, inspired me to read several books about the founding fathers in the past few months - something I wasn't likely to do a year ago (I do like history, but I'm generally more interested in the early to mid 1900s, as well as Medieval Europe.) Whether other people have been similarly inspired - well, I have no idea.
Based on the score, the show does get many of the major historical details right - but it's always a mistake to assume that a play or musical or film is a 100% accurate re-creation of history.
#97Anyone OVER 'Hamilton' without even seeing it?
Posted: 1/19/16 at 5:58pm
Simmer down now I think Dolly Midler has overtaken the Broadway interwebs. From now until the unforeseeable future you will be inundated with endless threads and articles related to La Divine Miss Dolly. I hope you are all friggin' happy now! 
Consistency
Understudy Joined: 7/2/13
#99Anyone OVER 'Hamilton' without even seeing it?
Posted: 1/19/16 at 6:04pm
"Those of you who get an odd kick from mocking everything After Eight writes"
To be fair, he's been a consistently ridiculous and corrosive element on the board for many, many years - so he's kind of brought it upon himself. He does occasionally make a reasonable point - but those occasions and few and far between.
"are ignoring the very tangible fact that to say Hamiltonhas created an appreciation for and an understanding of "history" is quite mind-bogglingly difficult to take seriously."
It's had that effect on me, and I haven't even seen it yet. I know a lot more about the founding of the United States now than I did a year ago - and that's largely because of this show.. So yes, it has helped create an appreciation for and understanding of history for at least one person.
So yes, After Eight is wrong. In other news, it's a day ending in -y.
Videos