marjorierose: The other day I read Aja Romanos article on Vox about Hamilton as fanfic. Then I…
The other day I read Aja Romano’s article on Vox about Hamilton as fanfic. Then I read the response from Slate, and then I finally made myself read the New York Times article that Romano was responding to. I’d been avoiding it, I guess because I still feel such a shocked, delighted reaction to the show itself that I have been reluctant to wade into the criticism. But I finally read it, and it was just a handful of comments about historical accuracy. I’m actually amazed that such a brief fact-check has triggered such defensiveness. Not that I don’t understand the impulse! I feel defensive of the show too; I adore it and would like to preserve the impression I had when first leaving the theater that it was the best thing I had ever seen, a rare, genuinely life-changing work of art.
But you know, I just don’t get to live in that moment forever. A work doesn’t get to change your life if you just see it and let it be, if you hallow its memory and shush any doubt. A work can only change your life if it’s part of your life.
There’s a lot that I find deeply odd about the Vox piece in particular, enough that I’m going to stick it behind a Read More.
Reposted from http://ift.tt/1SXyHP8.
Tags: yes!, it's like, hamilton, the thing I find kind of funny/interesting, is when someone who gets paid to write about things, gets a little huffy that people who do it for free are doing it, and pushes back a little, and gets destroyed, presumably without even being really aware of it, you paid-to-write person are very good at writing about things, which is why you get paid to do it, but the idea that you occupy a position above any given person, who does not get paid to do it, that your analysis is always going to necessarily be superior, to theirs, is not a position that can survive scrutiny, the thing about the internet, including internet-enabled-fandom, is that it is technology that reduces to zero the distance between any two people, so you are in effect, in the room where it happens, with everyone, your analysis may be very clever and insightful, but given a sufficiently large room, you are not going to be the most clever, or the most insightful.
