Tumgik
#Ron Chernow
almaprincess66 · 3 days
Text
So I'm planning on doing my English homework about Hamilton and the American Financial System. My source is Ron Chernow's biography. There is one problem.
I have like 4 days to put the thing together and this book is massive! I can't read 800 pages!
And the tabels of content do not help AT ALL! Like what are these titles?
If somebody read it please help?!
17 notes · View notes
themintiris · 18 days
Text
how does one read the ron chernow hamilton biography and go “hmm, yes. a rap/hiphop musical would be perfect for this guy”
64 notes · View notes
pub-lius · 3 months
Note
Hiiii, I don't know if you have answered this before (sorry if you did) but what's your opinion about the book "hamilton by row chernow", I saw that you don't like it but I don't know why haha (sorry bad english)
Thanksssss
STOP APOLOGIZING I LOVE YOU THERES NOTHING WRONG WITH REPEAT ASKS AND YOUR ENGLISH IS AMAZING IM SO PROUD OF YOU
anyway
yeah i fucking hate that book. for starters, it’s excessively long because chernow is really bad with staying on topic and only including relevant information. this is evident in chapter one when he starts explaining how the island st kitts and nevis was formed. like i dont give a rats ass
also one very big literary and historical skill is the use of quotations, and chernow is HORRIBLE at this. very often he will say something and then include a quote that says almost the exact same thing, or vice versa, and it causes the book to be a very tedious read.
my biggest problem with the book is the fact that chernow is constantly contradicting himself and his own logic. for example, he says that based on the letters exchanged between angelica church and alexander hamilton, there is obvious romantic feelings there and they possibly even had sex. however, he includes the same amount of evidence for angelica church and thomas jefferson’s relationship, which is arguably more (if not the same amount) flirtatious, but says this was not AT ALL romantic and they definitely DIDNT have sex. this is a larger example of something that happens more often in small historical reasoning examples within the book.
so overall, the simplest answer to your question is that ron just isn’t a good historical writer and he contradicts himself which gives his theories less credibility. it’s definitely a difficult read because of the length and complexity of the issues discussed in the book, and ron does a poor job of executing this, whereas other authors, who keep things more simple, have greater success.
absolutely feel free to ask for clarification on any points if you need it, or if you have a hard time understanding my language, i know i can be a bit wordy. but thank you for the ask!!!
24 notes · View notes
ironmandeficiency · 9 months
Text
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
my mom just gave back what was my most prized possession for most of my high school career. all 232 tabs are labeled and in as good condition as they were when i last saw the book
33 notes · View notes
therealadothamilton · 16 days
Text
Tumblr media
Google Search What The...
11 notes · View notes
songbirdscribe · 20 days
Text
Shoutout to Ron Chernow’s Hamilton biography for introducing me to the eloquent yet absolutely savage verbal sparing of 18th century politics:
“Wrangling over the Jay Treaty cost Madison his friendship with Washington… Federalist pamphleteer William Cobbett gloated of Madison, ‘As a politician he is no more. He is absolutely deceased, cold, stiff and buried in oblivion for ever and ever.’”
10 notes · View notes
pythiaswine · 1 year
Text
CAN I JUST TALK ABOUT HOW BAD I WANTED LMM TO LEGITIMIZE LAMS but i kept being let down over and over again like ughhhh. first he gives the Angelica relationship a whole song and subplot and yes it was great, the whole musical's a lyrical, compositional, choreographed masterpiece BUT WE AREN'T HERE TO DISCUSS THAT. we are here to talk about how his source material was biased because Chernow gave breath to the Angelica thing, as improbable as it was (especially compared to the probability of the Laurens/Hamilton relationship? homophobia.) but then picture it, I'm a young, naïve teenager, I'm very fixated on lams and history, I loved the Hamilton musical, was a Hamilton teen and that part of me is irreparably burned into my brain. then LMM drops this sneaky little tidbit like the beacon of wisdom his fans see him as bc he wrote a historical self-insert fanfic for broadway, he says the Laurens/Hamilton relationship was real. great! but he didn't actually put it in the musical and that disappointed me. And damn, okay, he had a few lines here and there in the off-broadway version that were cut but maybe that wasn't his fault or maybe he planned on fleshing it out more and had to cut it down to make it more palatable for the people sponsoring his ride to broadway, a pathetic excuse but it could make sense. For all that, I could have forgiven, forgotten, etc etc... but I will NEVER forget naïvely believing during the year the Hamildrops were released that we'd finally get a Laurens/Hamilton song. In April it didn't happen, I thought okay, maybe pride month. Didn't happen in pride month. Didn't even happen in September or October, or as a last-minute gay reveal in December. It just didn't happen at all. We even got some covers of songs that already existed without notable variations on the lyrics and it's like... bro couldn't have done the bare minimum and had a Laurens cover of Satisfied? That's the moment I was let down for real. I had truly BELIEVED that because he said himself that the Laurens/Hamilton relationship was real, he'd actually follow through on something that could be digested by the fans more than a forgotten tweet. but damn it hurt. absolutely no queer representation in a musical about Alexander Hamilton. bro. to play devil's advocate, there is no way to "prove" hamilton wasn't straight (eye-roll) but it's not like Hamilton: An American Musical is historically accurate in the least. It's embellished, fun, glamorous. It paints people in their best (unless you're charles lee lol) considering it's about a bunch of people who definitely were not kickass abolitionist BIPOC, but because LMM found it important to represent America today, he made the cast very inclusive to cultures and ethnicities of those these historical figures oppressed. so why can't he fictionalize the story a bit more? it's not even FICTION BRO it's literally more provable (and less problematic and more interesting) than the Angelica/Hamilton affair so WHYYYY. all i mean to say is, i was very let down and i can't appreciate the musical or LMM the same as I did when i was younger because now it gives me the straight-man ick. the "yeah they were gay!" for ++ points with the lgbtq+ fans but a severe lack of action. i hate that shit. real allies would say "fuck your homophobia, i'm publishing my art as it is even if i face backlash and censorship," because that's how shit gets done. it really really let me down, that's all, good night.
97 notes · View notes
rt8815 · 3 months
Text
I should buy Ron Chernow's biography of Alexander Hamilton, because
1) I know Lin-Manuel Miranda took several artistic libraries (which is fine cuz it's a musical) and I want to get the facts all straight.
and
2) Specifically, I legitimately must know if Hamilton actually sent Burr an itemized list of 30 years of disagreements (sweet Jesus! 😆) because honestly, badass move.
14 notes · View notes
yr-obedt-cicero · 1 year
Note
What is your opinion of the Ron Chernow book on Hamilton? I'm reading it now and it's informative but I don't know how I feel about it yet and we're already almost at Hamilton's wedding. Thoughts?
Oh boy, that book...
Honestly, I hate it but I also quite appreciate it. It's one of the only Hamilton biographies that goes so in-depth about Hamilton's life, and almost covers everything. Like, it's the size of a Bible for a reason and I really did enjoy the background checks on all the figures that were brought up (Like especially Faucette, or Maria). But also it's entirely bias, and filled with inaccuracies. I haven't read the book in a year, and no longer have it in my possession but here are a few things I remember that I hated about it;
Rambling — oh God, does Chernow have a tendency to go on and on and on. He often repeats the same thing several times throughout the book, especially in regards to praising figures in the book, but I'll talk about that and his glorification a bit later. I completely understand the habit to ramble on, but there is the opportunity to edit over your work. I swear after Hamilton did anything, Chernow would copy and paste the same sentence about how “hAMilTOn WAs JUst sUch aN InsPiRaTiOn wIth hIS iRrepresSiBLe pAsSiON aS An ImMiGrANt” I get it. I know. I would go on about how rising from your poor status wasn't anything new or unheard of, but I'll spare that for today.
Glorification — Chernow has a terrible case of glorifying the historical figures mentioned in the book, mainly Hamilton - as he is the protagonist, I suppose - but also Washington. He paints everyone else that is featured as these evil, big, bad villains that are just out to ruin poor, innocent Hamilton's life. And that if Hamilton did anything wrong; it was obviously all their faults and they somehow influenced him into this terrible decision. Chernow glosses over so many times Hamilton ruined other's lives, and throughout it portrays him as this inspiring hero.
Misogyny — you'll notice pretty quickly on; Chernow portrays all the women in the book as pathetic, (Or evil if they ever wronged Hamilton). He does a great injustice to Maria Reynolds, and makes out the affair to be all her and her husband's malicious influence. Because poor Hammy Ham, and not the oppressed woman getting abused by her husband, right? He even has the audacity to frame Elizabeth as a villain throughput a lot of it as well, claiming she wasn't doing her “wifely duties” and drove him to commit the affair (Jesus Christ). It's worse than the portrayal of these women in the musical.
Homophobia — Chernow quite often dismisses the homoerotic undertones throughout Hamilton's life. I'm not saying he has to do an essay on the plausablity of Troup and Hamilton having something more than friendship, but man, you could at least say anything but “lol but they were very no homo”. But the case that pisses me off the most is the complete dismissive attitude towards Laurens's and Hamilton's relationship. Chernow only scaps the surface of their relationship by quoting the April 1779 letter, and then shrugs it off and says that men just had those flowery - platonic apparently - sext letters during those days. Oh, but don't worry, he can dedicate half a chapter in regards to how true the debunked Angelica+Hamilton love affair was.
Inaccuracies — I don't know what I was expecting from a guy who has a very questionable education, but Chernow makes many inaccuracies throughout the book. I can't name them all off the top of my head but; he claims Jefferson said nothing on Hamilton's death when he did, he got Hamilton's children baptism dates wrong, made the same stupid mistake of calling William's portrait as actually Philip's, and misinterpretades many letters. If you want more on the subject, @runawayforthesummer literally has a tag called “Chernow was wrong”. And speaking of villianizing, I urge you to read about Burr outside of Chernow because that is the worst portrayal you'll read him as. Chernow made up this whole betrayal backstory for Burr and Hamilton, when they were actually never friends, or anything beyond acquaintances or political rivals.
Chernow isn't a historian — he's a journalist and a biographer. But biographer doesn't necessarily mean he has taken any studying in regards to being a historian. I'm not staying if you didn't go to college for a four year institution, that you're immediately unqualified to write a biography. But. You should take some initiative to get some education in that matter. Because we have things like this where Chernow makes glaring mistakes.
Phew, okay, that's a rundown of everything I found wrong with it. I'm sure I'm missing other things, but these were the major issues in my opinion. I mean, if you've gotten that far in the book, might as well finish it. Just remember to do your own research, and fact check before you take someone else's claim on something. Once again, Chernow's biography has some good aspects, like how detailed it is. Just remember his major flaws with it too.
118 notes · View notes
46ten · 1 year
Text
List of errors in Chernow’s Alexander Hamilton
Here’s my review of Tilar Mazzeo’s work, problems with Flexner, crazy statements in AH biographies, and part 2, in case anyone thinks I’m only critical of Chernow’s AH biography.
Chernow isn’t ONLY wrong about the things I’m listing below - his narrative of AH’s childhood is, by recent historical scholarship, proven wrong; and the longstanding rivalry with Aaron Burr is junk. As is Chernow’s determination to build the tragic hero’s arc, which leaves him no space for critical evaluation/interpretation of AH’s (or Federalist) policies. And even though Gordon S. Wood has written volumes, Chernow still doesn’t grasp the Founders’ political philosophies. 
There has been a whole book published on Chernow’s (and Lin-Manuel Miranda’s) errors - Historians on Hamilton. I’m just compiling some of the easier tidbits to digest. 
Chernow is wrong, sticking to facts/word choice - I’ll add to this list as a remember more things or go look things up:
1. AH was not an abolitionist. He may have held pro-manumission sentiments. But he was certainly not the most fervent abolitionist or even manumissionist of the Founding Fathers. 
2. Elizabeth Hamilton was not so upset about the Reynolds Pamphlet (published August 25, 1797) that she left New York and gave birth to William S. Hamilton (born August 4, 1797) in Albany. Just the idea of a heavily pregnant woman taking the trip by boat (took anywhere from 24 to 30+ hours) should have made this conjecture seem unlikely. But it’s in the genealogical records that William S. was born in NYC. There’s also a letter from William Jackson to AH dated 5Aug 1797 in which he states: “Accept my congratulations on the birth of your Son,” noting he had received a letter from AH that morning, obviously announcing the birth of William S. I’m not even sure any prior narrative claimed EH gave birth to WSH in Albany.
3. He mis-dates the “Icarus” letter because he depended on only part of the copied text and never read the entire letter, that specifically has Angelica asking her sister if William (obviously already born) enjoyed the trip. There’s really no question for me that this letter was written 3Jun1798, which was a Sunday (the reference to going to church), and places it matching AH’s letter to EH of the same date. 
4. The garter/shoe bow story, which was a failure to find the original source.
5. He gets the baptisms of the 4 oldest Hamilton kids wrong. 
6. He gets Eliza Hamilton’s birthdate wrong. 
7. He gets the Talleyrand letter wrong because he never checked the original source. 
8. I have no idea where Philip as “sad rake” comes from, and obviously neither does Chernow. 
9. Factual errors and using letters out of context related to AH’s resignation from Washington’s cabinet. 
10. He gets the importance of the various aides-de-camp wrong, including lots of errors in who was where when. 
11. Speculation about Rachel Faucett presented as fact, like this. 
12. The orphan boy story. 
13. Washington as AH’s “immaculate Daddy,” when the actual source makes clear it’s Philip Schuyler. 
14. Identifying Phocion of 1796 as Hamilton, instead of William Loughton Smith.
Word choice that is very suspect: 
1. EH “abandoned” AH when she went to Albany to visit her parents, and AH was so tightly wound. As @runawayforthesummer tracked down, EH and AH had just gone on a vacation together, see here. 
2. That AH directed his wife to be charitable, ignoring that charity was probably first inspired by her mother, widely known for her charitable endeavors.  
3. He doesn’t know what a double-adulterer is.
4. This is how he handled Latrobe (and I still don’t know the source of the quote he used). 
5. Connected to (4), no sourcing for the claims, prior to the Reynolds Pamphlet, that AH had a reputation as an adulterer. 
11 notes · View notes
kfc-bucketman · 1 year
Text
Lin Manuel Miranda x Ron Chernow 2
Tumblr media
(THIS IS A CRACK FIC DONT TAKE IT SERIOUS IM BEGGING WEIRD STUFF AHEAD YOU BEEN WARNED:)
It’s been a few days since the interviewer questioned Lin where he revealed a secret affair between him and Ron Chernow, they were not going to let this go, they had to find out more. Taking acting classes and going under the most original name they could think of ‘Alex’ Alex was now part of the cast because of story magic and talking with Daveed backstage.
“So you walked in on them?”
“Yeah…um- I don’t wanna talk about it- can we change topics ?”
“Fine. Did anyone else see?”
The immediate response was a no and so there was a dead end. The only way now was to catch them in the act, Alex prepared a camera and was determined to get a photo. Listening in they heard two people talking “Lin isn’t gonna make it tonight we have to get his understudy” the two looked around and spotted Alex “you. You’ll do. Get over in the dressing room we have twenty minutes” Alex was extremely confused but did so to not blow their cover and got ready for the show, they didn’t even know the lyrics that great.
“Don’t forget from whence you came and the world is gonna know your name! What’s your name man!?”
The spotlight was put on Alex as they slowly and nervously walked to the front and mumbled “Alexander Hamilton- my name is Alexander Hamilton and there’s some things that I forgot to do but just you wait, just you wait” the show moved forward and Alex did his best to keep up almost tripping a few times. But as the show continued they got more comfortable and were able to keep a well enough performance…until the final song.
“LOOK EM IN THE EYE AIM NO HIGHER SUMMON ALL THE COURAGE THEN COUNT!”
123456789 NUMBER 10 PACES FIRE!
“I imagine death so much it feels more like a memory
Is this where it gets me, on my feet, several feet ahead of me? I see it coming, do I run or fire my gun or let it be? There is no beat, no melody Burr, my first friend, my enemy Maybe the last face I ever see If I throw away my shot, is this how you'll remember me? What if this bullet is my legacy?” And at that moment they looked into the audience clearly and saw Lin and Ron sitting there holding hands, they locked eyes for a moment, immediately Alex lost track of the song. “Hurry up!” Someone whispered to them.
“I'm running out of time, I'm running, and my time's up Wise up, eyes up I catch a glimpse of the other side” Lin started walking out with Chernow backstage.
“Laurens leads a soldiers' chorus on the other side My son is on the other side He's with my mother on the other side Washington is watching from the other side Teach me how to say goodbye Rise up, rise up, rise up, Eliza!”
Alex watched them and tried to finish quickly “RAISE A GLASS TO FREEEDOM!”
“HE AIMS HIS PISTOL AT THE SKY!”
Alex shouted at the same time as Leslie as they immediately jumped off the stage to chase after them
“WAIT!”
Alex was running down the hall with his camera and in costume, they immediately kicked down the door to Lin and Ron in the middle of a private moment to each other and
📸!FLASH! 📸
Lin and Ron’s eyes were immediately shocked like dears in headlights, Alex started running for the exit holding the camera pushing people past them as they practically fell through the door to the outside while hearing fast footsteps following behind. Alex stood and ran until their legs burned and hiding behind a dumpster made sure they had the photo and sighed in relief. Later making it to their apartment putting their things down and uploading the picture to their computer sending it to a J. Callander. At that moment when it was fully sent a loud knock came at Alex’s door and a voice spoke through it.
“Did you think I wouldn’t find you?”
8 notes · View notes
Text
chernow laying on his stomach on his bed, kicking his legs like a giddy highschool girl, with his glittery gel pen that has hot pink feathers on the end- as he writes about daddy Washington of the country
4 notes · View notes
Text
Alexander Hamilton was at least bisexual. The letters he wrote to his friend John Laurens were like love letters. It's a bummer that guy was killed in the Revolution, because Hamilton lost his boyfriend and had to marry a woman.
Even the author of this book has hinted that Hamilton may have been gay. I'm leaning towards gay.
Tumblr media
2 notes · View notes
redbirdwings · 1 year
Text
And to think, we got this great work because a playwright went on a beach vacation and needed a book to read. And a recently published biography on Alexander Hamilton was visible when he went looking.
Some things have incredible backstories.
Also, Aaron Burr's life after the duel is quite ... something.
1 note · View note
Text
Uhkahahsghhs I read so much today and it was so fun:)
1 note · View note
spectres-fulcrum · 3 months
Text
Okay I borrowed the Ron Chernow's Hamilton biography from my library's Libby system and it's already so much better than the musical.
Like I LOVE the music from the musical but I'm not crazy about the story. Like they fit so much into it that it was all so surface level(I really wish Act 1 was the entire thing so we got more time with Laurens and Layafette ngl)
While this book I'm like actually learning and highlighting and writing little notes like "Oh so he was the illegitimated son of the younger son of Scottish almost nobility" and "Oh so he had his own version of Ronan" and "Hamilton: The mom friend" And it's a much better experience. And smiling softly at the image of him studying after midnight curled up in a blanket. Like idk the cozy college kid vibe existed even back then(ACD vibes ACD vibes ACD vibes is truly why I love the image)
I'm very sad how much the musical drove in bastard, son of a whore given that his mom was a child bride who fled an abusive marriage and when her significantly older husband filed divorce he was allowed to remarry, she was told remarriage was not allowed to her. It paints the entirely wrong picture of his mother and the life of his parents prior to his father up and leaving(Common law married, they all went by the same last name)
I get that that's how the people at the time saw him but also. It's so rough on the child bride who fought and fled for freedom to have an entire generation so long after think that she was just a whore who never married.
I'm also not a big fan of mixing too much modernity with historical fiction which Hamilton errs on just on the side of. I mean, I grew up with American Girl and even a bit of Liberty Kids but something about the format of Hamilton just throws me off. I have a lot of theories(Being almost all singing, how fast paced it is, historical inaccuracies, other stuff that cannot be properly worded).
Idk. Three chapters in and I'm very soft on young Hammie.
0 notes