Have you ever wondered how Broadway writers make decisions? If you've seen Hamilton, how and why Lin-Manuel Miranda chose to cast Leslie Odom Jr as Aaron Burr or write 46 songs? Found in Volume 12 of the peer-reviewed journal Studies in Musical Theatre, “Lin-Manuel Miranda and the metamyth of a nation’s founding” is an article written by Helen Whall that considers the choices Miranda made when developing the musical Hamilton. Ultimately, these choices reconstructed America’s founding history to redefine the future. Whall’s argument, supporting evidence, and evaluation of the musical combine to create a persuasive narrative of the reasoning behind Miranda’s decisions, including reimagining and rewriting history through creative storytelling. 

       In the article, Helen Whall introduces her argument by underscoring the social impact of Hamilton through both its popularity and its criticism. A selection of critics with backgrounds ranging from history to feminism are referenced, highlighting debates sparked from the musical's glorification of Hamilton as a character, including the exaggeration of his anti-slavery stance, conventional representation of women, and purposeful casting choices regarding race (Whall 242). Whall uses these pieces of criticism as a starting point and vehicle to break down why Lin-Manuel Miranda chose to deconstruct and reconstruct a myth with respect to the founding of America. By explaining the history and linguistics of myths, folktales, and legends as well as their religious associations, the reader can understand how Hamilton’s elements of historical exaggeration contribute to a new meaning of the musical: that “telling a founding myth that privileges the underprivileged of now” and “reassert[ing] the nation’s original values by dramatizing them” can “redirect the future” (244-245). In other words, Hamilton reinstates core American values such as freedom and liberty into today’s world by rewriting the story of America’s founding. This revision is completed through purposeful decisions to portray historical events and people using dramatization, musicality, and casting choices. After presenting detailed information on foundation myths, Whall dives into the songs, lyrics, and characters of Hamilton. Specifically focusing on Thomas Jefferson, Aaron Burr, George Washington, the Schuyler sisters, and Eliza allows the one-by-one investigation and reconsideration of the criticisms mentioned above concerning the topics of feminism, race, and historical accuracy. Whall’s argument is relevant and valuable to review because it sheds light on a new way of viewing history that can alter how people move forward with progressing society and culture. She displays Hamilton as an example of incorporating elements of the past with creativity to have this cultural impact.  

      There are several compelling facets of the article that provide a basis for further discussion. One is the examination of specific characters in the musical, how they are portrayed through lyrics and stage presence, their casting choice, and relationship to other characters. Whall takes the time and effort to complete this process intentionally and individually, which differentiates each character while giving meaning to how they come together. For example, when Whall analyzes the choices made surrounding George Washington, she differentiates his character and meaning from King George III: Miranda’s “George III is the epitome of European empire building and colonization. He is not attractive. By contrast, America’s ‘true’ founding fathers are revolutionaries who are representative of, associated with and performed by ‘people of colour’” (247). She furthers her analysis of Washington by stating that “through the power of artistic representation and acting skill, audience members should realize the metaphoric truth: not only can a black man play an historically white Washington, a black man could become an historical president. And did” (247). This initial comparison of two characters and then deep reflection into Washington reveals the level of thought that went into making decisions about the musical. It also ties into reconstructing the founding myth, making the overall argument cohesive and detailed. 

      Another aspect of the article that can be critiqued is Whall’s utilization of several implicit arguments. While this can be necessary in writing an argument, especially when incorporating opinion, too many statements without proper backing could make it difficult for the reader to follow along or even be damaging to credibility. However, Whall strikes a reasonable balance between inserting opinion and evidence to advance her argument. For example, Miranda’s Aaron Burr is said to be “depicted as an ambitious man who would not make commitments” and later “presented throughout as a weak and jealous man” (246). While there is no explicit evidence to support these claims written directly in the article, it is assumed that the readers would be able to draw that conclusion from watching the musical. As support, Whall chooses to mention songs that Aaron Burr sings such as ‘The Room Where It Happened’ and ‘Dear Theodosia’ which add specific points of references to the musical (246). Instead of quoting and breaking down the songs, she makes brief implicit claims to how they provide depth to Burr’s character. Because this is a subsection of the main argument, it is understandable why one character would not be studied further, but there is room to provide more context in further writings.  

      Overall, the article’s exploration of Hamilton sheds light on a new way of viewing the musical as broader than its context and history. Whall achieves this by explaining how Lin-Manuel Miranda developed characters, songs, and casting to introduce a historical story with alternate perspectives. 

Table Of Contents