Could it be that “Hamilton” is a case of nobody wanting to say the emperor has no clothes??
Meaning, that it’s become accepted wisdom in the liberal and arts communities, that “Hamilton” is a priceless work of art, a classic masterpiece of the theater arts.
And, liberals being the way they are, are afraid to voice dissenting opinions, for fear of being ostracized by their “tolerant” liberal friends, if they voice a dissenting opinion about “Hamilton”.
So, nobody is willing to come out and say that “Hamilton” is not a good play, that their “Poetic license” having only members of minority groups cast as white people doesn’t work, that the “rap” soundtrack doesn’t set well with them, etc.
In short, to be a good liberal in good standing, you have to say that you loved “Hamilton”, and parrot back the opinion that it is indeed a national treasure and a classic play.
Sometimes a play is just a play, i.e. entertainment.
“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...?
A good number of artistically informed conservatives/Christians consider Hamilton to be among the greatest musicals produced in years.
Please withhold judgment until you’ve at least seen it in its entirety, or listened through the entire show several times.
Meaning, that it’s become accepted wisdom in the liberal and arts communities, that “Hamilton” is a priceless work of art, a classic masterpiece of the theater arts.
And, liberals being the way they are, are afraid to voice dissenting opinions, for fear of being ostracized by their “tolerant” liberal friends, if they voice a dissenting opinion about “Hamilton”.
So, nobody is willing to come out and say that “Hamilton” is not a good play, that their “Poetic license” having only members of minority groups cast as white people doesn’t work, that the “rap” soundtrack doesn’t set well with them, etc.
In short, to be a good liberal in good standing, you have to say that you loved “Hamilton”, and parrot back the opinion that it is indeed a national treasure and a classic play.
Excellent analysis. Liberals don't say anything bad about Hamilton for the same reason they voted for Barack Obama. To suggest that black people are anything but super duper awesomely stupendous is simply contrary to a major tenet of their super anti-racism philosophy.
They aren't allowed to recognize flaws in any minority because they are so virulently anti-racist that to admit a flaw in a minority is d@mn near committing a hate crime. At least it is in the opinion of the kook hive mind of the liberal social circles.
I believe someone once described this mindset as the "soft bigotry of low expectations.
They don't judge people as individuals, they judge them as groups, and certain groups are beyond reproach.
This is why they joyfully and fervently supported an unqualified, inexperienced idiot who had never accomplished a noteworthy thing in his life for President. He was just super duper awesome because he was black, but could speak with what sounded like a reasonably intelligent voice.
That he was a no-nothing imbecile didn't matter to them, he sounded good and he checked a very important box on their list. He made them feel so very very anti-racist for supporting him.
And they won't say a word about his series of blunders (or how bad "Hamilton" is) because to do so might imply in the minds of their friends that they are "racist."