Posted on 01/14/2017 9:45:23 AM PST by OddLane
I don't think there's a slight bit of hyperbole or exaggeration involved when I say that Hamilton, the awful musical that millionaire New Yorkers are required by law to throw away thousands watching, represents everything that was wrong with America in 2016. Allow me to make the case.
First, there's the music. I'm admittedly not much of a hip-hop aficionado, but I know shit from Shinola. From my perspective the art form has more or less been going downhill since Strictly Business (the EPMD record, not the Tommy Davidson vehicle), but there have been some highlights worth mentioning, mostly thanks to Ice Cube and an army of Wu bangers.
The point I'm trying to make is that, even to untrained ears such as mine, Hamilton is particularly bad. On first take, I thought it sounded a bit like a University of Iowa freshman—the kind who only listens to "real hip-hop"—attempting his first mixtape. One of my Twitter followers corrected me, however. It's closer to a Braintree elementary school making a rap song for parents' night. The latter description hints not merely at the simple, formulaic quality of the material, but also the cloying, bourgeois quality of it all. From the reference to "ten-dollar Founding Father without a father" to "when the British taxed our tea we got frisky," the whole affair sounds more like something made by precocious children than a professional composer...
(Excerpt) Read more at reason.com ...
People who take art seriously take it personally when someone pisses on their leg and tells them it’s raining. No one’s insisting that you care, but please understand that the culture is important to some of us.
It's the nature of live New York professional theater that most ordinary people can't afford it, so that complaint fits any Broadway or Off-Broadway musical.
And if you hear plays or musicals praised it's usually by liberals in the media, that's pretty much a given for any work.
There's a contradiction or disconnect in the article: the play is bad, the lyrics are bad, but somehow it's aimed at an elite.
If it's that bad maybe the story is aimed at a particularly low, unintelligent, and undemanding audience but only rich New Yorkers, most of whom have liberal views, can afford to see it.
I'd say, judge the thing on its own merits or lack thereof, not because you identify it with some opposing political camp
And really, did anybody say it was an eternal masterpiece, or did they just enjoy a night out that they could justify with the pretense that they'd learned something?
My wife and I also went to see Cats in October 1986 on our first trip to NYC. We left at the first intermission it was so stupid and boring and went back to the hotel to watch Game 6 of the World Series. It was so much better being in Manhattan when the Mets won that game in extra innings than seeing a ridiculous show like Cats. Never would have forgiven myself if we had stayed for the whole show and missed historic Game Six.
If the music is any indication, it actually is pretty bad. I’ll just point out that aesthetic sense among the left has totally evaporated. Case in point, the eight year love affair with Michelle Obama’s fashion sense. They’ve finally succeeded in degrading western art to the point that they can’t even distinguish good from bad themselves anymore.
Google Nicholas Pell and see if you think he’s somebody who cares about culture.
Cats is an interesting example, because I couldn't tell from the article when the author refers to "the music," does he mean the instrumentation or the lyrics?
From the example provided ( "ten-dollar Founding Father without a father" and "when the British taxed our tea we got frisky,") it seems that the author is referring to the hip-hop rap. If so, then comparing it to Cats is comparing Lin-Manuel Miranda to T. S. Eliot.
The author never delves into the orchestrations, the staging, the choreography, or anything else. With Cats, the staging intended to put the audience into the perspective of a cat, with oversized junkyard objects. The costuming and make-up gave each character a unique style. And then there is the composing of Andrew Lloyd Weber. None of these aspects is discussed in the article.
What people complained about with Cat was the seeming lack of plot, leaving people unsure of what they just saw. It is better thought of as a revue. I was familiar with T. S. Eliot's collection of cat poems Old Possum's Book of Practical Cats, so I knew what to expect, and was delighted to hear these poems put to music.
Just so I understand, when you say that you didn't like Cats, did you mean that T. S. Eliot "sucks" as a poet?
-PJ
That would not be that outrageous since he apparently bleached himself to death.
That would not be that outrageous since he apparently bleached himself to death.
You don’t make billion with crap on Broadway. It’s time to move on to another issue.
Then it would seem you have something in common with him.
I have just decided that I will begin saying “this is NOT Shinola!” when the other word would be unwelcome.
Although this is about the Broadway musical, this line caught my attention.
Hamilton was, if anything, the most aristocratic of the Founding Fathers, the closest thing to a Colonial Tory. You know that electoral college you've been gnashing your teeth over for the last couple months? Guess whose idea that was?
They didn't give out the Nobel Prize for "The Rum Tum Tugger."
Some people just don't like musicals.
And some musicals are better constructed than others.
_________________
What I object to in the article is turning the musical into some political cause célèbre. I can understand somebody saying it's an enjoyable show that teaches you something. I can understand somebody saying its bad music and worse history. But I don't think either view is necessarily tied to any particular ideology. Most of the people who've said they like Hamilton live in the deep blue states, but that's true of most of the people who say anything about Broadway shows.
No, but T. S. Eliot was posthumously awarded the Tony award for Best Book and Best Score for Cats. His second wife accepted the award on his behalf.
-PJ
More likely a white woman.
“Could it be that “Hamilton” is a case of nobody wanting to say the emperor has no clothes??”
Pretty much it and 90% of the ‘culture’ scene. The fact that it’s bad actually makes the case for it in certain minds even stronger. “Well, you LIKED it, right? Not like THOSE people!”
I wonder if there is some truth to that.
In 2002, the musical Urinetown won the Tony Award for Best Book, Best Score, and Best Direction.
-PJ
Oklahoma. The Music Man...real theater, real music, real entertainment. Hamilton...?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.