Alexander Hamilton/Macbeth - Reading
29 Apr 2019
I am aware that my comparison will be devoid of historical truth given that it is all based upon fictional works. Also, this is some 8-century difference of an AU. And it is based upon only one reference that makes them similar, and pathetic. My tendency to make middle aged men nearing death my muse is making me tired.
The following points of similarities that I have observed between Lin-Manuel Miranda’s Hamilton and Shakespeare’s Macbeth after having watched an animatic edit of the former and read an annotated libretto of the latter.
But, bear-like, I must fight the course”
(‘“Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day”’ in another version)
I trust you’ll understand the reference to
Another Scottish tragedy without my having to cite the source
Yes, I’m Macbeth, and ambition is my folly
I’m a polymath, a pain in the ass, a massive pain
Madison is Banquo, Jefferson’s Macduff
And Birnam Wood is Congress on its way to Dunsinane
"Screw your courage to the sticking place-"
This reference is also the reason I decided to read Macbeth after watching Hamilton because its pretty interesting.
And following the death of his wife is the petty pace part, where I interpreted it to be meaning Macbeth thinks that time is passing very very slowly, as in some kinda depression and schizophrenia and maybe a loss of will to live. He personally stabs only three people in the play. Macdonwald, Banquo, and Young Siward, if I am not mistaken. But he has killed so many people by proxy. And after his second murder, he starts hallucinating and getting paranoid.
Which is pretty sad, because, think about it, he could have lived a long time as king if he just stopped suspecting Banquo. So, this guy has no sons. Of course, he shall not have kings. If he did not kill anymore, people may not be so suspicious. Ok, Macduff and Malcolm and the lot were already suspicious. But going around and seeing Banquo’s ghost and hallucinating and being a crazy prick is going to make more people suspicious.
And though Birnam Wood did eventually reach Dunsinane, why did Macbeth still want to go to Dunsinane, does he really think that he can win a fight when none of the lords are on his side, and they make that obvious! And supposedly Dunsinane was indeed a safe place as I read somewhere. But because of all the fear of losing and all that he decides to go out and fight and exposes himself to caesarean born Macduff.
Trouble, make it double. And I can’t help but think that this entire thing is brought on by the witches spouting nonsense. And in doing so they have planted the seeds of envy and caused bloodshed. This is a self-fulfilling prophecy which Macbeth and Banquo were in receipt of. Indeed, as Macbeth wondered at the start, if being a king were really his destiny, then it will happen no matter what. Probably not, because Malcolm was already chosen as the heir to the throne.
But even without being king, Macbeth would have lived a very nice and cushy life with a dual-lordship as Thane of both Glamis and Cawdor. Instead he had to try and reach for what is not his, and die an untimely death, which is supposedly not even a year after he is coronated. This seems to me, really very sad. The loss of such a life!
It is likely the witches never saw any kind of future. Precognition over a cauldron? Women were burnt at the stake for witchery, but I don’t believe that those three weird sisters really saw Macbeth’s future. Rather, they have a keen sense of understanding of current affairs and human psychology, and choose to create a future for Macbeth, by telling him what he will do, and it really happens because fate is a bitch like that. And they know that whoever is told his fate will do whatever it takes to make it beautiful because of GREED.
(This reminds me, I need to write about the lack of or presence of free will, which will likely be a review-ish thing of War and Peace.)
Now drawing similarity to Hamilton, he too could have lived much longer if he stopped caring so much about his image and trying to portray a sense of dignity. The Reynolds Pamphlet killed him because he chose to care about his image as an incorruptible Treasury Secretary, and destroyed (emotionally) Elizabeth. Next, he encourages his son to go ahead with the duel because what, manly pride??? And he himself does so too. And he destroys Elizabeth even more by forcing her to lose both her Son and her Husband within like, five songs.
True, it would have been a loss of dignity to be accused of speculating with Reynold. But is being a slut any more prideful? It is a form of political legacy which men seek, and which causes them to disregard their morals, disregard the feelings of their women. While women too are supposedly strong and should deal with their man’s misdemeanours arising from political ambition, in this case the men have wronged, destroying their personal lives and the lives of their families.
Hence, I think that the stories of Hamilton and Macbeth have one essential similarity, which is that they are very sad. It could have easily been prevented, and they could have lived much happier lives with their nuclear families. If only they did not covert as such. Which is why I believe in a humble and simple life. Hedonism is fine. Just…why do people want so much luxury? I don’t understand the mindset of the people who play rich.
And another realisation is that Shakespeare is nice to read. I think I will try to pick up more screenplays.
I am aware that my comparison will be devoid of historical truth given that it is all based upon fictional works. Also, this is some 8-century difference of an AU. And it is based upon only one reference that makes them similar, and pathetic. My tendency to make middle aged men nearing death my muse is making me tired.
The following points of similarities that I have observed between Lin-Manuel Miranda’s Hamilton and Shakespeare’s Macbeth after having watched an animatic edit of the former and read an annotated libretto of the latter.
- They die at almost the same age, Macbeth at the age of 52, and Hamilton at the disputed age of either 47 or 49.
- They were in positions of political power. I mean, duh, if not we wouldn’t even have heard of them. Macbeth was a king and Hamilton a Secretary of Treasury.
- While they were in the height of their leadership, they were hated by those around them. Hamilton was hated for having Washington’s support and being a loud-mouth, and Macbeth was hated for assumed regicide and being overly ambitious.
- This quote in Hamilton, Take A Break, which references Macbeth:
But, bear-like, I must fight the course”
(‘“Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day”’ in another version)
I trust you’ll understand the reference to
Another Scottish tragedy without my having to cite the source
Yes, I’m Macbeth, and ambition is my folly
I’m a polymath, a pain in the ass, a massive pain
Madison is Banquo, Jefferson’s Macduff
And Birnam Wood is Congress on its way to Dunsinane
"Screw your courage to the sticking place-"
This reference is also the reason I decided to read Macbeth after watching Hamilton because its pretty interesting.
- Both pieces are written as stage-plays or musicals. Which to me are pretty similar. Granted Shakespeare is Poetry as to Lin-Manuel Miranda is to Hip-Hop. And I may not usually like hip-hop, but Lin’s song writing is heart-wrenchingly sad and the lyrics are genius. Shakespeare is writing new words whereas Lin is using inspiration form prior events and works to reference them in a new way.
And following the death of his wife is the petty pace part, where I interpreted it to be meaning Macbeth thinks that time is passing very very slowly, as in some kinda depression and schizophrenia and maybe a loss of will to live. He personally stabs only three people in the play. Macdonwald, Banquo, and Young Siward, if I am not mistaken. But he has killed so many people by proxy. And after his second murder, he starts hallucinating and getting paranoid.
Which is pretty sad, because, think about it, he could have lived a long time as king if he just stopped suspecting Banquo. So, this guy has no sons. Of course, he shall not have kings. If he did not kill anymore, people may not be so suspicious. Ok, Macduff and Malcolm and the lot were already suspicious. But going around and seeing Banquo’s ghost and hallucinating and being a crazy prick is going to make more people suspicious.
And though Birnam Wood did eventually reach Dunsinane, why did Macbeth still want to go to Dunsinane, does he really think that he can win a fight when none of the lords are on his side, and they make that obvious! And supposedly Dunsinane was indeed a safe place as I read somewhere. But because of all the fear of losing and all that he decides to go out and fight and exposes himself to caesarean born Macduff.
Trouble, make it double. And I can’t help but think that this entire thing is brought on by the witches spouting nonsense. And in doing so they have planted the seeds of envy and caused bloodshed. This is a self-fulfilling prophecy which Macbeth and Banquo were in receipt of. Indeed, as Macbeth wondered at the start, if being a king were really his destiny, then it will happen no matter what. Probably not, because Malcolm was already chosen as the heir to the throne.
But even without being king, Macbeth would have lived a very nice and cushy life with a dual-lordship as Thane of both Glamis and Cawdor. Instead he had to try and reach for what is not his, and die an untimely death, which is supposedly not even a year after he is coronated. This seems to me, really very sad. The loss of such a life!
It is likely the witches never saw any kind of future. Precognition over a cauldron? Women were burnt at the stake for witchery, but I don’t believe that those three weird sisters really saw Macbeth’s future. Rather, they have a keen sense of understanding of current affairs and human psychology, and choose to create a future for Macbeth, by telling him what he will do, and it really happens because fate is a bitch like that. And they know that whoever is told his fate will do whatever it takes to make it beautiful because of GREED.
(This reminds me, I need to write about the lack of or presence of free will, which will likely be a review-ish thing of War and Peace.)
Now drawing similarity to Hamilton, he too could have lived much longer if he stopped caring so much about his image and trying to portray a sense of dignity. The Reynolds Pamphlet killed him because he chose to care about his image as an incorruptible Treasury Secretary, and destroyed (emotionally) Elizabeth. Next, he encourages his son to go ahead with the duel because what, manly pride??? And he himself does so too. And he destroys Elizabeth even more by forcing her to lose both her Son and her Husband within like, five songs.
True, it would have been a loss of dignity to be accused of speculating with Reynold. But is being a slut any more prideful? It is a form of political legacy which men seek, and which causes them to disregard their morals, disregard the feelings of their women. While women too are supposedly strong and should deal with their man’s misdemeanours arising from political ambition, in this case the men have wronged, destroying their personal lives and the lives of their families.
Hence, I think that the stories of Hamilton and Macbeth have one essential similarity, which is that they are very sad. It could have easily been prevented, and they could have lived much happier lives with their nuclear families. If only they did not covert as such. Which is why I believe in a humble and simple life. Hedonism is fine. Just…why do people want so much luxury? I don’t understand the mindset of the people who play rich.
And another realisation is that Shakespeare is nice to read. I think I will try to pick up more screenplays.
Comments
Post a Comment