people in old times used to think "if you insult me badly enough then we need to go out to a field and SHOOT AT EACH OTHER"
why was that a thing?!
You say that like it isn't still a thing for people to get mad and hurt/try to kill each other.
There's a difference between hurting someone in a fit of rage and having a complex code of honor built around sometimes attacking each other with lethal weapons
If you didnt shoot or very clearly used your shot in a way that could not hurt the other party, and they shot you, that's murder
If you shoot first in a way that would lead the other party to feel justifiably threatened for their life then if they shoot you they can claim self defense
My Shot is fantastic but I like Lafayette's verse in Guns and Ships more and the My Shot reprise and Hercules Mulligan's verse in Yorktown better, personally
Burn destroys me every time. After that it's satisfied and room where it happens for me... Wait I can't choose they are all so good, and my favorite changes from day to day.
people in old times used to think "if you insult me badly enough then we need to go out to a field and SHOOT AT EACH OTHER"
why was that a thing?!
You say that like it isn't still a thing for people to get mad and hurt/try to kill each other.
There's a difference between hurting someone in a fit of rage and having a complex code of honor built around sometimes attacking each other with lethal weapons
I really don't think there's very much of a distinction.
Maybe you have ample opportunity to step back and change your mind in the duel system, but really it's the same underlying nonsense. There's way weirder cultural practices surrounding way more esoteric human social behavior than "fuck that guy".
people in old times used to think "if you insult me badly enough then we need to go out to a field and SHOOT AT EACH OTHER"
why was that a thing?!
You say that like it isn't still a thing for people to get mad and hurt/try to kill each other.
There's a difference between hurting someone in a fit of rage and having a complex code of honor built around sometimes attacking each other with lethal weapons
I really don't think there's very much of a distinction.
Maybe you have ample opportunity to step back and change your mind in the duel system, but really it's the same underlying nonsense. There's way weirder cultural practices surrounding way more esoteric human social behavior than "fuck that guy".
Getting mad at someone and shooting them and the situation in a duel are incredibly different
its the difference between a crime of passion and violence with planning and forethought
Its why the justice system looks on those things very differently
Duels were just...more bullshit from people kind of obsessed with being honorable gentlemen, like...there are all these rules surrounding duels, and surrounding how you even start a duel, and mostly they seem like this absurd combination of pageantry and absurd chest thumping. Like, most of the time, people don't even get to the duel phase, someone comes in and goes "alright, just apologize to this giant baby so we can all move on," and even when both sides are giant babies, most of the time they don't shoot each other, it's this fucking insane game of chicken.
+15
Options
StraightziHere we may reign secure, and in my choice,To reign is worth ambition though in HellRegistered Userregular
people in old times used to think "if you insult me badly enough then we need to go out to a field and SHOOT AT EACH OTHER"
why was that a thing?!
You say that like it isn't still a thing for people to get mad and hurt/try to kill each other.
There's a difference between hurting someone in a fit of rage and having a complex code of honor built around sometimes attacking each other with lethal weapons
Yeah
One involves far less of a chance of someone getting hurt
Like, I don't agree with the "duels were a better way" hypothesis, but it's pretty much based on this principle
If you punch someone in the face you're going to hurt him, and he's going to punch you back and eventually you'll stop (or be stopped) but you're both going to get hurt
If you instead challenge that same man to a duel
Then two days later you're going to think about it a lot and decide that maybe you don't want to have that much blood on your hands
people in old times used to think "if you insult me badly enough then we need to go out to a field and SHOOT AT EACH OTHER"
why was that a thing?!
You say that like it isn't still a thing for people to get mad and hurt/try to kill each other.
There's a difference between hurting someone in a fit of rage and having a complex code of honor built around sometimes attacking each other with lethal weapons
I really don't think there's very much of a distinction.
Maybe you have ample opportunity to step back and change your mind in the duel system, but really it's the same underlying nonsense. There's way weirder cultural practices surrounding way more esoteric human social behavior than "fuck that guy".
Getting mad at someone and shooting them and the situation in a duel are incredibly different
its the difference between a crime of passion and violence with planning and forethought
Its why the justice system looks on those things very differently
Which is wrapped up in our culture and the philosophies that were produced by it.
people in old times used to think "if you insult me badly enough then we need to go out to a field and SHOOT AT EACH OTHER"
why was that a thing?!
You say that like it isn't still a thing for people to get mad and hurt/try to kill each other.
There's a difference between hurting someone in a fit of rage and having a complex code of honor built around sometimes attacking each other with lethal weapons
I really don't think there's very much of a distinction.
Maybe you have ample opportunity to step back and change your mind in the duel system, but really it's the same underlying nonsense. There's way weirder cultural practices surrounding way more esoteric human social behavior than "fuck that guy".
Getting mad at someone and shooting them and the situation in a duel are incredibly different
its the difference between a crime of passion and violence with planning and forethought
Its why the justice system looks on those things very differently
Which is wrapped up in our culture and the philosophies that were produced by it.
If you really think spur of the moment violence and delayed, continued intent to commit violence are the same I don't know what to say other than that you are wrong.
people in old times used to think "if you insult me badly enough then we need to go out to a field and SHOOT AT EACH OTHER"
why was that a thing?!
You say that like it isn't still a thing for people to get mad and hurt/try to kill each other.
There's a difference between hurting someone in a fit of rage and having a complex code of honor built around sometimes attacking each other with lethal weapons
I really don't think there's very much of a distinction.
Maybe you have ample opportunity to step back and change your mind in the duel system, but really it's the same underlying nonsense. There's way weirder cultural practices surrounding way more esoteric human social behavior than "fuck that guy".
Getting mad at someone and shooting them and the situation in a duel are incredibly different
its the difference between a crime of passion and violence with planning and forethought
Its why the justice system looks on those things very differently
Which is wrapped up in our culture and the philosophies that were produced by it.
If you really think spur of the moment violence and delayed, continued intent to commit violence are the same I don't know what to say other than that you are wrong.
I don't think they're identical.
But I think the distinction is a small one and more related to the cultural background of the participants than anything else.
Edit: Like, passion is not something that invariably and necessarily wanes over time, especially if there are no cultural forces at work that discourage it.
sarukun on
0
Options
StraightziHere we may reign secure, and in my choice,To reign is worth ambition though in HellRegistered Userregular
Also dueling pistols were notoriously unreliable and so much of dueling was just about challenging someone and then everyone apologizes
And most duels were not fought past the first shot, or in the time of swords, first blood
Dueling is what happens when codes of masculinity meet codes of honor
+5
Options
Theodore Flooseveltproud parent of eight beautiful girls and shalmelodorne (which is currently being ruled by a woman (awesome role model for my daughters)) #dornedadRegistered Userregular
Does the play address Hamilton's relationship with Laurens at all?
By which I mean, this is a good excuse to read those letters some more.
There's hamilton's line "Laurens I like you a lot" in My Shot, which Miranda has confirmed alludes to their purported relationship, but it doesn't do anything more with it
The one point where they don't swear that actively confuses me is in Satisfied when she says 'And when you said hi/ I forgot my dang name' vs damn name
I don't know what makes that choice happen but I keep expecting to hear 'damn' and it is definitely not 'damn'
Posts
You say that like it isn't still a thing for people to get mad and hurt/try to kill each other.
Miranda called it one of the best songs he's ever written. According to my play count, it's #1 on my list.
Guns and Ships is #2. Because Lafayette.
By which I mean, this is a good excuse to read those letters some more.
Steam: Chagrin LoL: Bonhomie
There's a difference between hurting someone in a fit of rage and having a complex code of honor built around sometimes attacking each other with lethal weapons
http://www.audioentropy.com/
Laurens is a pretty minor character, after he duels Charles Lee he just sort of disappears from the play and he's not in it much before that
http://www.audioentropy.com/
Forgiveness
Can you imagine
Forgiveness
-Indiana Solo, runner of blades
There is a small song about his death that's cut from the cast recording. It's basically the only thing not on there.
Sucks that he died in a battle after Yorktown, less than a month before the last of the british troops left.
Burr's attitude in the show seems opportunistic and cowardly
But he ends up marrying the woman he loves and if it weren't for Hamilton he might have won the election
Both of their approaches are valid and were it not for them fucking each other up they wouldn't have had any issues
http://www.audioentropy.com/
Maybe "justifiable response" is more accurate. Either way, that argument didn't really benefit ol' Burr.
I'm gonna throw out a favorite song that most people haven't mentioned
I absolutely love Non-Stop, its probably my second favorite after guns and ships
But it also doesn't work without like the whole first half so I kinda get it
If you didnt shoot or very clearly used your shot in a way that could not hurt the other party, and they shot you, that's murder
If you shoot first in a way that would lead the other party to feel justifiably threatened for their life then if they shoot you they can claim self defense
http://www.audioentropy.com/
But Guns and Ships, Yorktown and You'll Be Back are all stuck in a brutal, unending fight for my personal favorite
http://www.audioentropy.com/
ineedmayo.com Eidolon Journal Updated
http://www.audioentropy.com/
Maybe you have ample opportunity to step back and change your mind in the duel system, but really it's the same underlying nonsense. There's way weirder cultural practices surrounding way more esoteric human social behavior than "fuck that guy".
Getting mad at someone and shooting them and the situation in a duel are incredibly different
its the difference between a crime of passion and violence with planning and forethought
Its why the justice system looks on those things very differently
Buzz Aldrin would've shot so many jerks by now
Yeah
One involves far less of a chance of someone getting hurt
Like, I don't agree with the "duels were a better way" hypothesis, but it's pretty much based on this principle
If you punch someone in the face you're going to hurt him, and he's going to punch you back and eventually you'll stop (or be stopped) but you're both going to get hurt
If you instead challenge that same man to a duel
Then two days later you're going to think about it a lot and decide that maybe you don't want to have that much blood on your hands
Which is wrapped up in our culture and the philosophies that were produced by it.
If you really think spur of the moment violence and delayed, continued intent to commit violence are the same I don't know what to say other than that you are wrong.
I don't think they're identical.
But I think the distinction is a small one and more related to the cultural background of the participants than anything else.
Edit: Like, passion is not something that invariably and necessarily wanes over time, especially if there are no cultural forces at work that discourage it.
And most duels were not fought past the first shot, or in the time of swords, first blood
There's hamilton's line "Laurens I like you a lot" in My Shot, which Miranda has confirmed alludes to their purported relationship, but it doesn't do anything more with it
Right Hand Man miiiight be my favorite (for now anyway).
Edit: Err, not album I guess. Whatever you'd call it, good stuff!
I'm way into this.
Careful how you proceed, good man
Intemperate indeed, good man
Recognize the accusations I lay at your feet
or prepare to bleed, good man
YOU KNOCK ME DOWN I GET THE FUCK BACK UP AGAIN
It isn't afraid to swear, but isn't afraid to shy away from it when that's funnier.
Makes it a seasoning, not a main dish.
I don't know what makes that choice happen but I keep expecting to hear 'damn' and it is definitely not 'damn'
ineedmayo.com Eidolon Journal Updated