"Hamilton" at SHN

SHN tour photo by Joan Marcus

It's hard to know what to say about a show that is this well known already. Hamilton is quite the event, that rare stage show that becomes a true pop-culture phenomenon. As luck would have it, we managed to see it on Broadway early last year, when it was merely difficult, but not impossible, to get tickets at face value.

So what I can offer here is two things: 1) my impressions on seeing the show a second time, and 2) a little bit of contrast between the New York original cast production and the current touring show in San Francisco.

The Hamilton Phenomenon

Back in 2015, we purchased a theater trip package to New York City at the Shotgun Players fundraising auction. When they asked what shows we wanted to see, we said "Well, of course, Hamilton!" without really knowing much about it beyond some vague notions that it was a huge hit and very, very different from the usual Broadway fare. And then by luck, the day they called for tickets, some had just come available, so we got them, in the very last row of the orchestra, where our view of the upper parts of the set was slightly occluded by the edge of the balcony.

And we literally knew almost nothing about the show, beyond it being a sort of rap/hip-hop musical about Alexander Hamilton and the founding of the United States. We made a point of not reading reviews or listening to the soundtrack. We just knew there was a buzz around the show, so we should try to see it.

As a result, I was entirely prepared to be disappointed, assuming that nothing could live up to the kind of hype we'd been hearing about the show. But I have to say that well before the intermission it was clear that this was not just a ground-breaking show, but something of a "black swan" event: rare, unpredictable, and important.

There are all kinds of ways it didn't meet my expectations. I don't generally care for rap, and I was concerned that I would have difficulty both understanding and appreciating the music. But I got virtually every word, and more than that, I understood why certain characters expressed themselves that way. The contrast of the rapping revolutionaries and the more traditionally Broadway melodic singers was stark and extremely effective.

We bought a copy of the original cast recording and listened to it a lot. So did our daughter, who had not seen the show. She shared it with her friends on their weekly commute to choral rehearsal, and soon they were all singing it together, in harmony, switching parts. It was amazing to see how quickly and how totally they accepted and absorbed the show.

Come Again?

Fast forward a year or so, and the first touring casts are announced, with one coming first to San Francisco. Now we have the difficult choice, knowing that tickets are going to be rare and pricey: Do we see it again? And do we take our daughter (and her grandmother, who has been driving the group of girls to chorus all this time, listening to the soundtrack)? The second question was actually easy: the girls clearly needed to see this show they had absorbed so much of through their ears. Of course we wanted to see it again, but it was hard to justify the kinds of prices the tickets would command on the secondary market.

As luck would have it, as subscribers we were able to get a couple of extra tickets, and friends got extras for us off their subscription as well, so all of us were able to go see the San Francisco production, though not all at the same time.

So, what's it like seeing it a second time? Interesting, to say the least. For one thing, we couldn't come into it unprepared like the first time. In addition to the previous viewing, there were countless repetitions of the soundtrack, reading of books and reviews and analyses, as well as discussions with friends who had seen either the New York or San Francisco productions. So we had definite expectations this time. And of course, nothing about the show can really be a surprise anymore, though in truth, I had forgotten some of the nuances. And then there were differences. The obvious one being the cast, as we had seen the original cast before Lin-Manuel Miranda and most of the others departed.

On the whole, I'd say the show holds up very well to a second viewing. It isn't (and can't be) as intense and gripping the second time, but the story still holds my interest, and the performances are also very strong. And in some ways, knowing what is going to come, one can watch and anticipate, seeing hints and foreshadows that are not apparent on first viewing. Indeed, if anything I appreciate the complexity of the show more now, as the first viewing is pretty overwhelming, and the second allows for some analysis and focus away from the center of the current action.

Early on I found myself kind of singing along with several numbers, but ultimately I found that instead of drawing me into the show, it was actually causing me to put a little distance between myself and the cast. So I just stopped and let myself get drawn in, and found that more satisfying.

Better? Worse? Different.

There are some very obvious differences in the San Francisco and Broadway productions. Even though I was sitting much closer to the stage (and off to the side), the stage and set felt considerably smaller than the one on Broadway. I don't know whether that's just an illusion, but the whole thing felt a little compressed. On the other hand, I could see it (especially the parts with actors on the catwalk/balcony above) much better and more clearly than I had in New York. So visually I felt like it was a better experience for me, and I could see the detail of the dancing and movement.

It goes without saying that the original Broadway cast was outstanding. Not only did many of the actors have amazing resumes to start with, the sheer volume of awards and nominations speaks volumes. That said, I think it's pretty clear that Michael Luwoye as Alexander Hamilton is a better singer than Lin-Manuel Miranda, though Miranda's Hamilton has a depth of pathos that probably just comes from having spent so many years dredging the role out of the history. And Joshua Henry as Aaron Burr probably can't touch Leslie Odom Jr as a pure singer, but he's very strong and totally holds his own. I thought Jordan Donica as Lafayette/Jefferson played the roles a bit too much for goofs, where Daveed Diggs on Broadway managed to be fun with a certain amount of gravitas. And there was definitely a choice to play King George III a bit less straight on the tour. It all works, but it's definitely different.

Bottom Line

I knew I was going to like it. I was a little worried that I might not like it quite as much the second time, and I think it's fair to say that was true. But just as the Broadway production exceeded my (consciously lowered) expectations, the San Francisco touring company managed to exceed my (tempered by experience) expectations as well. If nothing else, it reinforces my impression of the quality of the material. A really good show can survive and even thrive absent its original stars, where some shows just never quite live up to the bar set by the first actors.

But Hamilton is for real. The style of the show may not hold up over decades (only time will tell), but the show itself will hold up for a good long time, and will no doubt change some of the ways people think about musical theater. I certainly have some notions about what is possible and what is desirable on the musical stage that are different from what I thought before seeing the show either time. And that, to me, is the measure of a great show.

Needless to say, if you haven't seen it, you should. It runs in San Francisco well into August, I believe, before moving on to Los Angeles. Check it out!