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.
"
Very interesting points. Some that I have wondered about as I have waded through the book. I have to disagree that this is a pop bio. (As I would define it). I would think a pop bio would be, at a minumum, shorter and easier to read. The masses are not going enjoy this book. Too much detail.
Also, it is clear that chernow has done incredible amounts of research. (Amazing to me that he seems to have slogged through each of the federalist papers) so I don't think he can be dismissed as easily as you do.
but he sure does have an opinion. I have had the same reaction as you about his views of the financial system that Hamilton created. That's where the discussion needs to be.