I think it's key to be able to acknowledge the benefits of media and criticize it. For example:
Hamilton has done great things for BIPOC in theater and stage, and the cast and crew are fantastic.
Hamilton is the new Hetalia and I mean that in the most scathing way possible.

Because tweet limit I'll link to several more extensive articles on why Hamilton is bad history. When I say that, it has nothing to do with having a diverse cast or said cast spitting bars. Hamilton either ignores aspects of history that could or should be told, or doesn't go-

far enough. Take that women sing in only 14/46 songs. Or that it glosses over Hamiltons history with slavery and ignores actual historical POC.

I'm not saying you can't or shouldn't enjoy Hamilton for what it is. I just want to provide an extra lens and it's doubtful many people are going to see these tweets anyway lmao. Historical fiction, regardless of intent will still be perceived through a lens that lends itself to-

the actual history. And Hamilton, despite its cast, provides a very whitewashed look at early American history that has had that impact on how we view the truth, and despite being so diverse it does more to mask the reality of Hamilton's sordid history than any biopic by some old

white Ivy League historian. As Dr. Lyra Monterio said the play obscures the "White supremacist origins of our country." I think this is important to consider especially now, and more so that Hamilton is getting it's release on Disney+ and thus becoming even more accsessible

https://apnews.com/db3c9d7573334b55a651d7ceba4dc66b

https://slate.com/culture/2016/04/a-hamilton-critic-on-why-the-musical-isnt-so-revolutionary.html

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/issue-table-hamilton-good-history-180969192/ https://theconversation.com/hamilton-the-diverse-musical-with-representation-problems-141473