Hamilton is a revolutionary work of Art: It Should Be Encouraged Not Criticized.
Everything that comes new, often encounters criticism. Some critique flashes out its fallacies, pointing out its room for improvement. On the contrary, some are just motivated to demean the significance of others. A recently released musical Hamilton holds true to this. It succeeded to amass prolific attention - Never seen before in American music history, it, however, also received criticisms from all over the world (Onion). The review given by Lyra D. Monterio that went viral, where she talked how Hamilton is racially biased and contains false information, gained popularity among scholars and readers, however, I disagree with her claim.
Monterio , in her article, " Race-Conscious Casting and the Erasure of the Black Past in Lin-Manuel …show more content…
Musical serves as the means of entertainment, which blends different aspects of human life. It is piece of art not academic history book.
Monterio’s focuses on to demean the musical, for she implies that it manipulates the public by downplaying roles of black people in revolution. However, she has overlooked the fact that every character in Miranda's musical is played by people of color. From my perspective, Hamilton encourages inclusiveness and establishes harmony, bringing people together. It is the best you could hope for a Historical musical to do, not to mention its beauty and artistry.
Monterio further blames that Miranda's Hamilton espouses "Founders chic." This is a term specifically given to the style of writing of history, where the writer usually glosses negative impression of founding fathers (Brands). Monterio is mistaken here again. Hamilton is a work of art and creativity, the last thing its writer would want to do is create controversy by mentioning conjectures and theories of how founding fathers were and what wrong they've
Everything that comes new, often encounters criticism. Some critique flashes out its fallacies, pointing out its room for improvement. On the contrary, some are just motivated to demean the significance of others. A recently released musical Hamilton holds true to this. It succeeded to amass prolific attention - Never seen before in American music history, it, however, also received criticisms from all over the world (Onion). The review given by Lyra D. Monterio that went viral, where she talked how Hamilton is racially biased and contains false information, gained popularity among scholars and readers, however, I disagree with her claim.
Monterio , in her article, " Race-Conscious Casting and the Erasure of the Black Past in Lin-Manuel …show more content…
Musical serves as the means of entertainment, which blends different aspects of human life. It is piece of art not academic history book.
Monterio’s focuses on to demean the musical, for she implies that it manipulates the public by downplaying roles of black people in revolution. However, she has overlooked the fact that every character in Miranda's musical is played by people of color. From my perspective, Hamilton encourages inclusiveness and establishes harmony, bringing people together. It is the best you could hope for a Historical musical to do, not to mention its beauty and artistry.
Monterio further blames that Miranda's Hamilton espouses "Founders chic." This is a term specifically given to the style of writing of history, where the writer usually glosses negative impression of founding fathers (Brands). Monterio is mistaken here again. Hamilton is a work of art and creativity, the last thing its writer would want to do is create controversy by mentioning conjectures and theories of how founding fathers were and what wrong they've