#hamilton unofficial quotes

[chaotic-history]

"While waiting [for Émilie], [Voltaire] seemed attached to several horses, for he had made the little 'abbé' Linant come to Rouen and even offered hospitality to another young man named Lefebvre, a budding poet aged 20 like the other, and like a certain Lamare, the third ephebos that he cosseted and who was also an abbot. The first had already made a trip to Paris to keep his acquaintance with [Lord Bolingbroke]. This boy seems to have had equivocal relations with Cideville, which makes this phrase from a letter from Voltaire from May 29 to this advisor, a letter prior to the return of the 'chubby abbot', amusing: 'When he wants to come back to Paris, I will rent him a hole near my house; he will furthermore be the master of dinner and supper every day in my retreat.' He practically offered him to share his bed. The presence of these two young men by him distinctly reminds one of the young 'writers' that the abbé Desfontaines, the famous pederast, had had near him for so long, and who served at once as mignons and secretaries. Even if he did not take up with them the liberties that he had formerly had with Thieriot in M. Alain's study, he still cherished this extreme familiarity with young people." - Voltaire et Frédéric II by Roger Peyrefitte.

FIRST off, why are we stating as fact that any "liberties" happened with Thieriot. There is zero proof. There is circumstantial evidence in that you could interpret V's letters to Thieriot as being kinda gay and then infer that "liberties" occurred, but even if we are interpreting the letters as gay, that's still a big jump to make from 'V felt more than just friendship for Thieriot' to 'they definitely slept together', which there's no real evidence for.

Second of all, there is no evidence of anything going on with Linant. Nancy Mitford suggested it as well, with the reasoning being that Linant was stupid and useless and why else would V keep him around, which is the same argument that's been used for V and Thieriot being gay. But a relationship between V and Linant being a possible explanation for something does not mean that that's evidence for a relationship, and Mitford doesn't cite anything V wrote as potential proof. And also like. The man resorted to full-on referring to his plays + la Henriade as his children to an extent and (unofficially) adopted Marie-Françoise and pretty much Reine Philiberte and Villette as well. And reading the letters about Linant from V to Cideville, and V talking about Linant's improvements in writing, it very much sounds like he's just proud of Linant and sees himself as a father figure. Again, also just a possibility, but it works equally well as an explanation and it fits into an already established pattern, plus it's based on what V actually wrote.

Thirdly, I would like to emphasise the "aged 20". "Aged 20" is not the same as what the "famous pederast" was doing.

Fourthly, saying that that quote about Linant coming back to Paris is "practically offering him to share his bed" is the single most batshit far-fetched gay interpretation I have ever seen in my life, and I was in the Hamilton fandom for three years. Genuinely how do you even get there. Bitch could've invited Linant to stay with him but he specifically said he'd rent him a different place. How does that equate to inviting him into his bed. This part alone is what's gonna convince me of Peyrefitte's bottom V thesis cause I can interpret two letters in that way and I can no longer be self-conscious about how I interpret literally anything, because it's still gonna be 10 miles more sane and evidenced than anything Peyrefitte's said.

@enlitment I apologise deeply for making you read this, but here's a taste of why the book sucks... Turns out I actually stopped reading on page 20 lol cause that's where my yelling at Peyrefitte in the margins stops.

[scrollonso]

About the "I can understand why he [Daniil] chose to stay standing considering his situations but unsure how the others justify their choice".

It is possible the (initially six, more later) who didn't kneel could have had each had subtly different reasons/combinations of reasons. Some never attempted to explain why they stopped kneeling, so we'll probably never know. Others either explained (including all the initial non-kneelers), or events around the time/other drivers' explanations/circumstances relating to the request suggest possibilities.

Of course, it is impossible to rule out actual racism, and some of the drivers said things that suggested some insufficiently-examined attitudes were at play. Two said things I regarded as outright racist. However, anti-racism is itself an iterative process and we know a lot of them were starting from a low base; most wouldn't have had occasion to put much discretionary thought into the topic before 2020 beyond "racism = bad". (In most countries represented by F1 drivers, the way racism is presented to white people tends to make it sound more like a peripheral issue, in some cases a semi-historical one). There were no American drivers and Lewis Hamilton was the only Black driver on the grid, hence why so much of the racism focus ended up on Lewis and Lewis alone.

Other causes known at the time:

International semiotics - single different meaning of kneeling. I'm starting with this because Daniil quoted it as his official reason for not kneeling. The kneel originated in the USA because, among other things, in the USA, kneeling has long been the unofficially accepted means of respectfully protesting something (in quarters which accepted that protests could be done at all when national anthems are playing). Specifically, that in Russia kneeling is something one does towards God or one's national representation (e.g. flag) If this is a common belief in Russia (I've not looked into this for Russia specifically), Daniil kneeling would lead to confusion and people getting the wrong message. Daniil did not want to suggest that racism is worthy of worship or fealty! Not every country is as knowledgeable about USA cultural facets, or as keen to adopt them for particular causes, as the UK is.

International semiotics - multiple different meanings of kneeling in the same place. Italy has a more complex version of the issue. I had the misfortune to be stuck in a social media argument between three Italians who had different, incompatible meanings to kneeling. One accepted the USA version wholeheartedly and was criticising Charles Leclerc for not kneeling. Another considered the kneel to be a submissive act implying anti-Italophone sentiment, in this context in the shadow of the Anglophone request (in other words, racism against Italians), and thus criticised Sebastian Vettel for kneeling. A third one was negative about kneeling, but more mildly because they felt there was too much social pressure to kneel and that this nullified any possible meaning for kneeling or not kneeling. I saw more one-sided versions of this happening in newspapers, and the Italian-based teams, drivers and backers (think Ferrari, Alpha Tauri - so, this also covers Daniil -, Antonio Giovinazzi and Alfa Romeo) would have seen these. It is hard to imagine a bigger fail on a subject than failing to be seen as anti-racist due to using a gesture seen as racist and claiming it is for anti-racist means. It turned out there was no way to win that argument with the whole Italian population, and probably no way to avoid what eventually happened (the kneeling/not-kneeling issue ended up discussed in the Italian government, with at least one representative loudly stating the "standing is the proper way to avoid being racist" stance. This would probably have gone better had said representative not bundled a whole bunch of racist cant into other parts of their speech!).

Partially equivalent local semiotics - In the USA, kneeling is the accepted form of protest during a national anthem. In Western Europe, the accepted form of protest is looking down while standing. Partly this is due to the ambiguity of the gesture's meaning - it is also a gesture of solemnity and respect (such as typically seen on Remembrance Sunday parades commemorating the end of World War I). Drivers may well have used it as an easy translation, especially if they were unsure whether the people at home would have understood the kneel in the manner the kneeling protesters intended. The anti-racism part would have been lost in translation but not the "respectful protest" element.

Drivers protecting their teams and possibly each other - Ferrari may have inadvertently done the best compromise strategy in the light of the previous two points. By ending up with one driver kneel, the other stand and both narrating why, it meant any given source could complain all it wanted about one driver without being able to say Ferrari as a whole was racist. The message got through. It also had the side effect that some of the criticism that would have been put onto Vettel was put into praising Leclerc instead, which helped protect Vettel's protest (it's not clear if that part was intended in the plan, but I'm 99% sure that protecting Ferrari did in Charles' case). Other teams where the drivers had split stances may also be explicable this way.

Distrust of BLM. Even at the beginning, a couple of the people who knelt said they wanted to distance themselves from BLM. It didn't help that at one point, the UK branch of BLM advocated violence (in the specific context of responding to an initiation of violence by police at a London protest, to protect self and others immediately around them). After that statement, several more drivers joined in and if I remember rightly, two of the drivers stopped kneeling. It was no good explaining to them that BLM was a franchise and not the organising force behind the kneeling movement, when the UK branch was the one the drivers not called Lewis Hamilton knew most about.

Pressure from teams. When I said Ferrari inadvertently did their best compromise strategy, this is because Fiat is known to have banned the kneeling gesture in its company during the hottest part of the kneeling protest.

Pressure from the FIA and Liberty. Both wanted their way, and only their way, of fighting/"fighting" racism accepted. Neither wanted anyone kneeling at all, much less in a way that TV could easily broadcast.

Protecting the right to choice in how anti-racism was marked. Liberty assured drivers they would be permitted to mark the anti-racism gesture any way that motivated them, provided it was clear they wished to end racism. Some drivers (notably Kimi Raikkonen) considered this freedom worth protecting. A couple of the drivers who did kneel mentioned that one reason they did so was because it was voluntary (either because they didn't like the idea of being forced into a stance or because they felt having the choice of how to position oneself lent meaning to their choice to kneel). Without that choice, it's probable fewer people would have knelt.

As you can see, there were quite a lot of reasons why people chose different stances for their anti-racism protest. I get the impression even the drivers who did racist things during the protest were less racist than the FIA and Liberty during that time.

very well worded,, unsure how to respond but i agree with everything you said!!

[toffyrats]

ya know what i’m bringing this back w more quotes!

“auuuhh but that’s so meeeeaaannn!!” -charlie morningstar (hazbin hotel)

“if you sing in musicals you’re going to end up in my mom’s refrigerator.” -chad danforth (hsm)

“oh my god it is sooo fantastamazing!!” -viva (trolls)

“how about when i get back we all strip down to our socks?” “OHHHKAYYY!” -philip hamilton (hamilton)

“don’t talk down to me!” -jedediah smith (night at the museum)

@hammyham-o-o @imobsessedwiththeatre @unicornsaures @unofficially-racetrack @ratsnu @lemonlord14 @dhmisfour no pressure !

toff starts a tag game

reblog with a quote from your fav character from atleast 5 fandoms that you’re in/used to be in!!

ok mine:

”your fingers might not be so burnt if you cooked with an air fryer!” -frye onaga (splatoon)

“you ever think about runnin in pictures? buy a ticket, they let anyone in!” -albert dasilva (newsies)

“now, what the heck happened around here? oh right- my doing!” -caine (tadc)

“what happened to you that made you hate fun?” -serafine savoy (lackadaisy)

“the romantic tension is so palpable… how can you guys even concentrate??” pavitr prabhakar (atsv)

hey guys 😏 @the-woild-is-y-erster @sluttylittlenewsboy @ftm-megamind @newsiesfixation @itsgrapes-exe @newsiesreference and anyone else that wants to join!!

[thebulletinhamilton-quotes]

Alexander Hamilton: Philip, finish your vegetables, there are children starving in France!

Philip Hamilton: Dad, there’s children suffering from obesity here in America, and I don’t want to join them.

[totallyaccurate-hamilquotes]

The real reason Peggy wasn’t in Act II

Alexander Hamilton: Peggy! We almost forgot about you but—Peggy? Why are you staring at the wall?

Peggy Schuyler: *slowly turns*

Alex: ...

Alex: THE ZOMBIE VIRUS HAS SPREAD I REPEAT—

Technically it’s from @thebulletinhamilton-quotes (your blog got me inspired to be apart of it so as a thank you here is a taste of my zombie au, *bows* if it is terrible I will not be upset if you delete it)

(This is incredible, I could never delete it!)

[thebulletinhamilton-quotes]

Washington, a history teacher: So, can anyone tell me what happened December 18th, 2019?

Peggy Schuyler: Baby Yoda wasn’t in the Rise of Skywalker and I was very disappointed in humanity.

[thebulletinhamilton-quotes]

Alex: no offense, but does it look like I give a shit? Spoiler alert: I don’t.

Thomas: D:<

[thebulletinhamilton-quotes]

Hercules: Is this one of those things where you are posing a hypothetical question but in reality it’s an event that’s actually occurred and you need my help immediately?

John: No

Lafayette: Yes

[thebulletinhamilton-quotes]

Hello I was wondering and if you could do some Jamilton please!! I also love your blog so much

Of course anon!!! Don’t hesitate to ask again. I was screeching (my form as a ptdectorial) so get ready:

Cabinet Meeting #4

Thomas: You’re so gross, Hamilton!

Alex: This isn’t about last night, Jefferson!

Thomas & Alex: *continue to argue*

George: ....

James: ....

Aaron: ...

[thebulletinhamilton-quotes]

Alex: Wow Angelica! What are you dressed up as?

Angelica: *dressed up as a police officer* Your future parole officer, Alexander.

Alex:

Alex: You know what, I’m somehow both terrified and impressed by this.

[thebulletinhamilton-quotes]

Henry Laurens: Son! Stop being so sappy! It’s unbecoming!

John Laurens:

John Laurens: I’ll be sappy whenever I want. I don’t give a shit. I love you dad but fuck off with your bullshit.

[thebulletinhamilton-quotes]

Lafayette: Someone just asked me why I did something like I’m some sort of nerd who does things because he has reasons.

[thebulletinhamilton-quotes]

Thomas Jefferson: exCUSE ME BUT I AM AN ABSOLUTE DELIGHT!

James Madison, reading a book: *snorts*

[thebulletinhamilton-quotes]

Angelica: So what do you think of feminism?

Thomas: A conspiracy, women are inferior—what are you doing?!

Angelica: *rewriting the Declaration of Independence* Give me a second, so what were you saying??

[thebulletinhamilton-quotes]

John Laurens: The only straight I am is a straight up bitch who will F*CK YOU UP if ever provoked

[thebulletinhamilton-quotes]

Jefferson, T-posing: Bet you cant stop this!

Hamilton, T-posing: Bitch you thought!

Burr:

Burr: So this is what happens in the room then?

Madison, crying: *nods*