“Hamilton” and The Danger of Mistaking Criticism for Critique

Why critics and academics should think carefully about how they engage with cultural phenomena.

Unless you’ve been living under a rock for the past several years, you’ve no doubt heard of Hamilton, the blockbuster musical about the famous Founding Father, a man who, before this phenomenon, was famous for exactly two things: being the man on the 10 dollar bill, and getting shot in a duel with Aaron Burr. In the hands of the brilliant Lin-Manuel Miranda, this Founder finally got the credit he was due. More than that, the play showed the ways in which immigrants — both slave and free — were foundational to this nation and its aspirations. It is, in a way, Miranda’s love letter to his country, that “great unfinished symphony” that still struggles to live up to its foundational promises.

When I first listened to the cast recording four years ago, I was blown away not just by the infectiousness of its music, but also by its subtlety, the way that the lyrics contained sly jabs at the myths that surround the Founding Fathers and their accomplishments. And, of course, there was the fact that it was performed by some of the most talented stage actors and actresses of their generation.