Posted: 1/14/16 at 8:07am
FindingNamo said: ""Hate when people change history to suit their show."
Wow.
"
what is so shcoking about what I said
Posted: 1/14/16 at 10:45am
JM226 said: "FindingNamo said: ""Hate when people change history to suit their show."
Wow.
"
what is so shcoking about what I said
"
It wasn't shocking, it was foolish. It isn't possible to dramatize any historical event without altering facts, condensing action, etc. Who would sit through a 72-hour production of 1776, watching men dressed in peri-wigs argue about the minutia of the Declaration of Independence?
Any historical drama is merely one view of the essential, often invisible truth of history. Whether any production achieves that essential truth can be debated, of course. But those debating will have to make a case for what is true and what is essential.
Your statement that you hate historical fiction that misrepresents facts is just silly. They ALL do!
Updated On: 1/14/16 at 10:45 AM
Posted: 1/14/16 at 10:54am
But again, the problem is that many people believe that what they're seeing IS history. Several people have surprised me by saying, after seeing Hamilton, that they were pleased a Latino actor got to play this Latino character - merely because Hamilton was born in the Caribbean. His father was a Scot and his mother was entirely French; the real Hamilton was as lily-white as they come. But somehow, the power of this production convinced them of a fact that didn't exist. (That doesn't change the fact that it's an entertaining show. That's not at doubt.)
On a similar note, someone who I know to be exceptionally smart assumed that he had been pronouncing a certain word incorrectly all his life, merely because Miranda has set that word with incorrect stresses in the show. This is the power of theatre - it can convince us that something that's wrong is right (and vice versa).
Updated On: 1/14/16 at 10:54 AM
Posted: 1/14/16 at 7:26pm
Is it really the power of theater or simply stupidity? The world may never know.
Posted: 1/14/16 at 8:47pm
Historical fiction--in the form of prose, poetry, drama or film--has been around as long as theater has existed in Western culture. As Aristotle reports, ALL Greek tragedy was based on what the Greeks believed to be history (we call it "mythology"
. No doubt Sophocles confused a few people, too.
That is why the adapter of historical material has an ethical obligation to present what I am calling the essential truth. But the viewer has responsibility here, too. NEWINTOWN, If you want to publish a blog listing the historical liberties taken in HAMILTON, have at it. The purpose of education should be to teach each student that every work--fiction or nonfiction--must be viewed critically and not taken as Gospel.
Posted: 1/14/16 at 9:16pm
I don't know if it's the power of theater so much as the power of official presentation - people think Amadeus was poisoned by a jealous Salieri, people think everything in JFK was real, people think Fargo actually happened. Most people don't know much about Alexander Hamilton, so it's easy to treat the show as a kind of expanded School House Rock, particularly since it's based, notably, on an extremely in-depth and well-received biography (which itself has been accused of hagiography). Everyone wants to be an expert.
Posted: 1/15/16 at 12:04am
newintown said: On a similar note, someone who I know to be exceptionally smart assumed that he had been pronouncing a certain word incorrectly all his life, merely because Miranda has set that word with incorrect stresses in the show. This is the power of theatre - it can convince us that something that's wrong is right (and vice versa).
what was the word? And it's really up to the viewer of any "true story" to research afterwards. The John Adams miniseries is full of errors,all bio films, etc have bad info. Either you can accept it or you can investigate. It's not the power of the theater, it's the power of laziness.
Posted: 1/15/16 at 9:21am
"NEWINTOWN, If you want to publish a blog listing the historical liberties taken in HAMILTON, have at it."
I was afraid that the usual defensive misunderstandings would rear their heads. Let me reiterate that I don't state that the show is the problem; the show is an entertaining work of fiction. The problem is (as has been stated by others) the stupidity and laziness of our species, most of whom believe that anything they're told is a fact (if that fact appeals to them). As proof, just observe the current state of Republican candidates for the Presidency.
If Hamilton and other shows "based on true events" have any problem at all, it would be not including a large page preceding the title page in the Playbill, making it expressly clear to the foggiest mind that "This show is only TENUOUSLY BASED UPON real people and events; it is IN NO WAY intended to be seen as a factual representation of anyone or thing living or dead." (And, of course, no one expects THAT to happen. But then, no one expects audiences to get any smarter, either.)
Posted: 1/15/16 at 9:32am
I would blame a lack of intellectual curiosity on the person without it, and not on a piece of historical drama. If all it took for the smartest person I know to believe he was mispronouncing a word his whole life was one line in a musical, I'd rethink my rankings.
Updated On: 1/15/16 at 09:32 AM
Posted: 1/15/16 at 9:40am
Posted: 1/15/16 at 10:46am
In other news Elizabeth Tudor and Mary Stuart never met, Nicky Arnstein was Fanny Brice's second husband, and Charlemagne only died once
(actually Gaveston I am still in the middle of Mother Courage.... never want it to end).
Posted: 1/15/16 at 10:50am
And the worst thing is that once someone sees one of these musicals, they are forever barred from founding out anything else about the subject on their own!
Posted: 1/15/16 at 11:07am
This is a specious argument.
Fiction is, by definition, fictitious. It has a beginning, a middle, and an end. History neither begins nor ends. It is ALL middle.
Posted: 1/15/16 at 11:07am
This is a specious argument.
Fiction is, by definition, fictitious. It has a beginning, a middle, and an end. History neither begins nor ends. It is ALL middle.
Posted: 1/15/16 at 11:18am
Before Hamilton: I am largely unaware about who he is or his life.
During Hamilton: I'm greatly enlightened as to his history, and it piques interest.
After Hamilton: Because I'm a fan of the show and do things like read Genius annotations or Google information, I learn MORE about the real Hamilton and learn where creative license was taken.
End result: I end up knowing LOTS of factual information about Hamilton, and a little creative license done for the context of the show. None of which would probably have been gained if the show hadn't been made in the first place. Win/win for all involved, IMHO.
Posted: 1/15/16 at 11:47am
Nicely put, Gymfan15!
My "After Hamilton" will at some point include reading the book upon which it is based.
1776 and The Scarlet Pimpernel both added to my fascination with their respective time periods/wars, too.
Posted: 1/15/16 at 11:59am
Posted: 1/15/16 at 1:28pm
“On a similar note, someone who I know to be exceptionally smart assumed that he had been pronouncing a certain word incorrectly all his life, merely because Miranda has set that word with incorrect stresses in the show. This is the power of theatre - it can convince us that something that's wrong is right (and vice versa).”
Firstly, thank you for the compliment, newintown, and the rest of you for the insults. In my defense, I did research (albeit cursorily) before I posted that as a Facebook status (the primary intention of which was to be humorous) and the audio files I sampled online seemed to confirm Lin’s stressing. My real-life job heavily involves research and has conditioned me to source things. So it’s inaccurate to say I assumed Lin was correct without double-checking.
The subsequent Facebook comments conversation suggested that the word ( “inimitable” ) might lend itself to fluidity of pronunciation, depending on how one notates its stresses and syllables. I’m not a linguist, but I like language, and the conversation was very fascinating. It did not, however, entirely resolve my questions, and I’m happier that way. Any conversations that aim to pinpoint Truth with a capital T make me uncomfortable. Gray is the ether in which I prefer to float.
Updated On: 1/15/16 at 01:28 PM
Posted: 1/15/16 at 1:31pm
OMG, we so need to make a documentary called "AfterHamilton."
Posted: 1/15/16 at 1:36pm
To be fair, I was intending to insult newintown.
Posted: 1/15/16 at 4:22pm
newintown wrote: But again, the problem is that many people believe that what they're seeing IS history. Several people have surprised me by saying, after seeing Hamilton, that they were pleased a Latino actor got to play this Latino character - merely because Hamilton was born in the Caribbean. His father was a Scot and his mother was entirely French; the real Hamilton was as lily-white as they come. But somehow, the power of this production convinced them of a fact that didn't exist.
Agree, and it's not just a question of whether the facts are right or not but how is history being used in fiction.
I think HAMILTON is layering the American immigrant of color experience onto the history of the Founding Fathers. It's doing it playfully, yearningly but also tragically… Hamilton gets ****ed over by the system he's sacrificed his life to. But the real Hamilton's role in supporting slavery in the South was a huge part of the economic engine that allowed the US to survive its break from England. That role gets erased from the musical and the gushy articles written about it. Even though the historical Hamilton expressed Northern anti-slavery sentiments, he was really an enabler of the system that traded human property on Wall Street. That's a pretty serious bit of history to erase from a character who is being used as double-duty for the immigrant of color experience in America.
Updated On: 1/15/16 at 04:22 PM
Posted: 1/15/16 at 11:47pm
^^^^ The complicity of those who professed anti-slavery sentiments is something 1776 handles quite well, I think.
***
So how are we to pronounce "Inimitable"? I've always heard it with the accent on the second syllable.
***
NEWINTOWN, I didn't mean to be defensive or combative. I meant what I said literally: there are other opportunities for one to correct the "errors" one finds in HAMILTON.
Posted: 1/16/16 at 7:38am
i-NIM-it-a-ble
Burr (to my ear) sings
I am i-ni-MIT-a-ble
I am an original
The lyric doesn't scan properly the first way. The language project Emma Saying backs up Burr's pronunciation https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8b0Dpr4E80 Merriam-Webster Unabridged's online audio feature backs up the first pronunciation.
