The comparison to Shakespeare and Sophocles misses the mark. Both of these playwrights wrote for the common man. Hamilton is a rarified bit of pietistic foppery intended for the liberal/progressive elite.
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?
“Hamilton is a rarified bit of pietistic foppery intended for the liberal/progressive elite.”
Did you see it in New York, or in Chicago? If neither, then you would be wise to withhold such a strong opinion.
Maybe you’re trashing it for the same reason many liberals praise it, because it’s what liberals/conservatives do. Maybe wait until you’ve experienced it before expressing such a strong opinion.