Hamilton and Slavery - Unrevivable? — Page 2

Ke3 said: "Zeppie2022 said: "Ke3 said: "OMG never mind!

No one is trying to cancel Hamilton I was merely asking if people thought the increased scholarship around his connection to slavery would impact the future of the work. God forbid we discuss the work on a board devoted to theatre."

"Hamilton" will probably run another 10-20 years and a revival of it would be at least quarter of a century from now. We have no idea if the issue you brought up will matter to theater goers many years from now.

"

I very well understand that, but let's not act as if this board does not frequently discuss the history and hypothetical future of different works. The only reason I'm getting such a vitriolic response is because I mentioned race. My mistake!"

You didn't get a vitriolic response. Most of the people who responded pointed out that the show presents Hamilton as a flawed man to begin with, and don't think there's any way to know what the show's future will be. If Trump succeeds in taking over the arts beyond the Kennedy Center, Hamilton may be "canceled" for reasons nowhere hinted at in your original post. You might even find yourself sorry for that.

We can only guess.

Updated On: 1/15/26 at 08:18 PM

Jonathan Cohen said: "Without getting into a semi-academic discussion about what's been proven about Hamilton and slaves and what's speculation, [...]"

Yeah... I'm goin' for it anyway.

It would have been helpful if the OP had cited the “very good video” that prompted them to start this thread. That way, any of us who wanted to could view it and also see the information that shaped their opinion. (BTW, the OP neglected to include any of that opinion-shaping information in their post.)

I believe that raising the specific question, “Hamilton and Slavery - Unrevivable?” mistakenly (and unfairly) trains the focus on a singular subject of slavery and away from why the show is so brilliant, and why it should always be revived, should the circumstances ever arise.

from: https://wordscr.com/why-did-lin-manuel-miranda-write-hamilton/
“Hamilton is more than just a historical musical – it’s a[n] exploration of themes and ideas that are still relevant today. The show tackles issues like immigration, ambition, and the power of storytelling, using Alexander Hamilton’s life as a lens to examine the American experience. Miranda’s lyrics are dense with historical references and allusions, but they also contain powerful messages about perseverance, creativity, and the importance of leaving a lasting legacy.”

Why and what source material inspired him to write the show?
from: https://broadwaydirect.com/hamilton-helped-found-a-nation/

per Miranda:
“I was looking for a book to read on the beach during a vacation in Mexico and happened to pick up this amazing biography about Alexander Hamilton by Ron Chernow. I had written a paper in high school about the duel in 1804 between Hamilton and Vice President Aaron Burr, but that was all I knew about the man. I had thought that maybe I could get a funny rap song about the duel out of it, but this book just grabbed me. By the end of the second chapter, I was like, “How can anyone not have made this story into a musical?”

“It’s a rags-to-riches story — an American story — and it’s also the hip-hop story. All of Hamilton’s successes and all of his failures were due to his verbosity, his ability to argue and debate and use his words. That’s what hip-hop at the end of the day is. It’s the culture that’s built out of people pulling themselves out of their circumstances by the way they put words together. And these weren’t battles over who was the best rapper: These were battles over what kind of country this should be. What could be more interesting to rap about than that? We take it as a given then that hip-hop music is the music of revolution, but I think the score is a love letter to both hip-hop and musical theater.”

On Hamilton’s views regarding: slavery:
• The “Everybody’s Doing It” defense is usually not an effective one. Still, it holds strong relevance if anyone wants to attempt to understand Hamilton’s historical and personal relationship with slavery and slave trade. Imagine for yourself what you think that relationship might be had Hamilton lived in a culture where slavery was an outlier, and not a general practice.
• Also consider that while he bought and sold enslaved people, including for his own household, he opposed the institution and was involved in efforts to limit it. His ambitions often led him to compromise his anti-slavery sentiments, reflecting the contradictions of his time. Think, somewhat similarly (and with a VERY LARGE grain of salt) about Marjorie Taylor Green’s recent actions.

IMO, the brilliance of Lin-Manuel Miranda’s work in creating this show far outweighs any question of whether/not Hamilton’s historically accurate views and practices re: slavery (taken in context with the historical culture of the time) should give anyone pause regarding a revival.

Updated On: 1/16/26 at 07:54 AM

SeanD2 said: "It's not on theater to be historically accurate. It's on schools to teach facts and not pretend like Hamilton is an educational text. I think that's the bigger problem with how Hamilton has positioned itself in the zeitgeist. The number of students who legitimately think that the show is historically accurate is alarming."

Yes, but has "the show", or any of its creative/legal representatives, really "positioned itself in the zeitgeist" in that way? Or did that reputation come from other sources?

I don't feel any sense of alarm re: the number of people (students, or otherwise) who acknowledge the large number of historical accuracies contained in "Hamilton". There are many.

Kad said: "The show as a whole sidesteps much discussion of slavery in order to keep its focus elsewhere. [...] The show is not the lionization of a Simon Legree type."

Agreed.

For me, sidestepping the discussion of slavery (a discussion that can be had, discovered, or recalled through an equally available academic source) was a choice that better serves Miranda's intent for the show. Artists always have to make those kinds of choices/sacrifices regarding what best serves the art.

If an audience comes to a show based on historical events having no prior knowledge of the subject (or at least the curiosity to explore the event[s] at a later time), should the artist or the show be held accountable for the audience's deficit? (In the case of this discussion, by suggesting the option of labeling the show, "unrevivable".)

Can anyone suggest an argument that the show (based on Miranda's artistic intent) would be made better by pointing up, or even simply including the historical facts re: Hamilton's relationship with slavery/slave trade via dialogue or song? Especially since, if we didn't know them before (and we probably should have), we certainly do now.

The show "1776" included, "Molasses to Rum", but Edward/Stone were interested in specifically presenting HISTORY. Miranda's intent is much more layered (see post above). To include commentary re: the historical facts of slavery would muddy the waters re: thematic intent. Does, or would the knowledge of those facts change what actually IS presented?

IMO, that is not an example of "whitewashing", or deliberate/intentional exclusion, however. If you saw, or even just listened to the OBC recording of "1776" (which has been around much longer than "Hamilton"), it's information that is (or should) already be known.

SeanD2 said: "I haven't reviewed the materials that are provided with EduHam to see if it fully acknowledges the show's historical inaccuracies, but you can't deny the show has presented itself as a teaching tool."

The "historical inaccuracies" would be... ?

As a retired K-8 school teacher and a theater-lover, I feel like I can "deny the show has presented itself as a teaching tool."

The marketing team(s) for many shows, regardless of their subject matter, offer educational packets (study guides) to schools as promotional tools to encourage group sales. PBS does (or did before their funding was cut) the same thing for their TV shows.

That's not presenting, or even representing the show as a "teaching tool", though. The EduHam materials are marketing tools to encourage ticket sales.

I do know that the cast album has been used in classrooms as a teaching tool, as engaging students through music assists in factual recall. The same is true for the Disney+ video of the show. In both scenarios, those tools can be used under the supervision/guidance of a qualified educator with the opportunity to separate fact/fiction/creative license with their students. The show does not market, or promote itself as being 100% historical fact as far as I'm aware. I don't believe that as a product of Miranda's imagination and creativity (although based on fact) it should be.

I would be very interested to see what's included in those marketing packets, too. Do you happen to know if the EduHam materials are available for download? (some are. usually free.)

I'm also really curious about what you believe to be the "historical inaccuracies" in the show.

Updated On: 1/16/26 at 05:13 PM