Well, that's a pretentious title for what I plan to be a short and snappy blog entry. I recently saw the musical Hamilton on Broadway (it lives up to the hype) and I'm thinking about the extent to which a dramatist or fiction writer is expected to portray historic figures in a fair, reasonable light.
To put it in context, I read online that some historians have criticized Hamilton for its treatment of some of Alexander Hamilton's rivals and peers in the early years of the Republic.
Thomas Jefferson particularly is portrayed in a pretty satirical mode, and John Quincy Adams also is portrayed as a kind of phlegmatic caricature. (There seems to be little complaint about the treatment of King George III, who receives the most comical skewering.)
And I say: it's all fair game. Hamilton the musical isn't striving to be a history lesson. It's a dramatization of one of the more interest figures among the founding fathers of the United States. The play examines Alexander Hamilton's motives, his character, his ambition. It puts a spotlight on his enormous role in the formation of the republic. If Lin-Manuel Miranda used humor and caricature to achieve that goal, that's well within his rights as far as I'm concerned.
The show, even after three years on Broadway and several generations removed from its original cast, continues to receive a roaring ovation from the audience.
No comments:
Post a Comment