Throughout America's early history, King George III was a sort of bully that America had to deal which. This monarch heavily taxed America, perhaps unjustly. George used his power in a way that made the American people hate him.
The fact that he was portrayed as he was in this musical made me chuckle at first. One of the biggest villains in the play (besides Jefferson and Burr of course) was shown as anything but an enemy: at least one that could be taken seriously.
Perhaps the child-like nature of King George came about in order to make Jefferson and Burr seem even more villainous. I began to do a little digging on why this might be.
After a bit of searching I stumbled across his biography on History.com and I learned something I didn't know before: The man was loco.
Throughout this whole song, "You'll be Back", George sings the lyrics in a "frolicking through the flower''-esque fashion. It's easy to imagine George dancing and parading around the stage while singing this song. Only someone who is truly crazed would act like this, especially after his country had lost the American Revolution in the song, "What Comes Next?"
I find it very interesting how Lin-Manuel Miranda ties George's real life mental illness into George's songs and his character.
So: question time! Do you think it was a good move to have George III framed as a sort of fun madman, or do you think that his character should have been more of a villain?
I agree with you; I think King George was portrayed fantastically in the show. The lyrics of his songs hint at him being kind of crazy ("I will kill your friends and family to remind you of my love" comes to mind), while still establishing him as a force of opposition. I think making him the outright villain of the show wouldn't have been a great move, as he wasn't nearly as involved in Hamilton's personal story as characters like Burr, Jefferson, and Madison. He fills his role perfectly; I wouldn't change a thing about it.
ReplyDeleteI think you are totally right. I also think that the way he is portrayed in the play is witty at first glance, like it's some kind of comic relief but in actuality, this man was nuttier than a fruit cake. No wonder America wanted out. I also think this character description is a stroke of genius on Miranda's part because even without knowing about King George he is truly unsettling when you look further into him. It's a good symbolism for the American/Britain relationship, because on the surface it just seemed like a symbiotic relationship, but look a bit closer and it's a bit disconcerting.
ReplyDeleteI think it was a pretty good idea to make King George III kind of witty and fun like Miranda did Like Lillian said I think it was purely genius of him. I think it was genius because when you actually look into who king george actually was in real life you find out that his character was not actually who he was in the play, that he was actually a really cruel and crazy guy. I totally agree with everything you said! I actually like this post was a genius idea.
ReplyDeleteI think that your point of him being crazy totally coexists with the fact that the song is pretty much a breakup letter to the United States. He's hacked off.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you in the fact that he is shown to be less of a villain then Burr and Jefferson, however I feel that this is done because the two of them never see each other and are never on stage together. This musical is like Hamilton's biography so to him King George probably was a bit of a child to him. There's also the fact that in What's comes next? George is a lot less happy than in the previous song so this could be Miranda's nod to his illness.
ReplyDelete