Everything in America(n) History could be a musical---adapted from TRP

[Mark Kohut]

Brooks didn't write the musical; he just liked it:

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/02/09/hamiltons

http://deadline.com/2015/02/hamilton-review-lin-manuel-miranda-jeremy-gerard-1201376306/

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-01-22/alexander-hamilton-economic-growth-and-lin-manuel-miranda

In 2004, Chernow wrote Alexander Hamilton. The biography was nominated
for a National Book Critics Circle Award[9] and was named as the
winner of the inaugural George Washington Book Prize for early
American history.[10] It remained on "The New York Times Best Seller
list" for three months. In his review for the Journal of American
History, Stephen B. Presser, who is a member of the faculty of
Northwestern University wrote:

"This book is one of those happy rarities: a popular biography that
should also delight scholars....This is the kind of synthetic
narrative history and biography that is rarely done to such high
standards and is clearly one of the best introductions to the American
formative era available. Moreover, the way Chernow integrates
international affairs, domestic politics, economic and constitutional
theory, and astute psychological analysis is nothing short of
wondrous."[11]

On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 12:07 PM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:
> David Brooks is a smooth (lying) asshole.  I never trust his portrayal of
> any situation.  He blames Al Gore for politicizing Climate Change, and thus
> absolves the deniers, his precious Republicans.
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/19/opinion/brooks-a-sad-green-story.html
>
>
> And in this review he describes the philosophical differences between
> Hamilton and Jefferson thusly:
>
> "Hamilton's greatest foe, Thomas Jefferson, is portrayed brilliantly by the
> actor Daveed Diggs as a supremely gifted aristocrat who knows exactly how
> gifted he is. Hamilton assaulted Jefferson because he did not believe a
> country dominated by oligarchs could be a country in which poor boys and
> girls like him would have space to rise and grow."
>
> Really?  That's about the exact opposite of how most historians have seen as
> their differences:
>
> http://www.palomar.edu/ehp/history/sgrenz/Study%20Guides/JEFFERSON-HAMILTON%20VIEWPOINTS.pdf
>
> On Who Should Govern:
>
> JEFFERSON - Had deep faith in the common people, especially farmers.
> HAMILTON - Believed that the common people often acted foolishly.
>
> JEFFERSON - Distrusted special privilege.
> HAMILTON -  Thought that the rich, educated and wellborn were the people who
> should rule.
>
> JEFFERSON - Wished to lower voting qualifications.
> HAMILTON - Wanted to raise voting qualifications.
>
> From the list above, one of these two sounds like a modern-day Republican.
> Which one would you say that is? And is it any surprise that Brooks wants to
> characterize them as the opposite of their real views?  That is the current
> Republican agenda: Upside-downism and lies.
>
> God, I hate David Brooks.
> David Morris
-
Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l