Nat Turner

More about the film "Nat Turner: A Troublesome Property."
Nat Turner's slave rebellion is a watershed event in America's long and troubled history of slavery and racial conflict. Nat Turner: A Troublesome Property tells the story of that violent confrontation and of the ways that story has been continuously re-told during the years since 1831. It is a film about a critical moment in American history and of the multiple ways in which that moment has since been remembered. Nat Turner was a "troublesome property" for his master and he has remained a "troublesome property" for the historians, novelists, dramatists, artists and many others who have struggled to understand him.

To emphasize the fictive component of historical reconstruction, the film adopts an innovative structure: interspersing documentary footage and interviews with dramatizations of different versions of the story, using a new actor to represent Nat Turner in each version. As literary critic Henry Louis Gates explains in the film, "There is no Nat Turner to recover; you have to create the man and his voice." The filmmakers chronicle an extraordinary history of attempts to create and to recreate the man. Such a complex film required a unique collaboration between MacArthur Genius Award feature director Charles Burnett, acclaimed historian of slavery Kenneth S. Greenberg and award-winning documentary producer Frank Christopher.

The earliest source, The Confessions of Nat Turner, was not written by Nat Turner but was assembled out of a series of jail cell interviews by white Virginia lawyer Thomas R. Gray. The man portrayed in this first telling of the Nat Turner story clearly saw himself as a prophet, steeped in the traditions of apocalyptic Christianity. However, this first confession of Nat Turner raised the question of whether the slave rebel was an inspired and brilliant religious leader in search of freedom for his people, or a deluded fanatic leading slaves to their doom. Viewers watch this same controversy play itself out over and over again during next 170 years of our nation's history.

Historians Eugene Genovese and Herbert Aptheker discuss how the figure of Nat Turner was transformed as a metaphor whenever racial tensions flared. Religious scholar Vincent Harding and legal scholar Martha Minnow reflect on our nation's attitudes towards violence. Alvin Poussaint and Ossie Davis recall how Nat Turner became a hero in the Black community. And when William Styron published his Pulitzer Prize winning novel, The Confessions of Nat Turner - and invented a sexually charged relationship between Turner and a white teenaged girl he later killed - it unleashed one of the most bitter intellectual race battles of the 1960s. Today, Nat Turner's slave rebellion continues to raise new questions about the nature of terrorism and other forms of violent resistance to oppression.

Additional Resources



==''' Source 1: John W. Cromwell-“The Aftermath of Nat Turner’s Insurrection” '''== 

 “Whether Nat Turner hastened or postponed the day of the abolition of slavery,. . . considered in the light of its immediate effect upon its participants, it was a failure, an egregious failure, a wanton crime. Considered in its necessary relation to slavery and as contributory to making it a national issue by deepening and stirring of the then weak local forces, that finally led to the Emancipation Proclamation…the insurrection was a moral success and Nat Turner deserves to be ranked with the greatest reformers of his day.

             This insurrection may be considered an effort of the Negro to help himself rather than depend on other human agencies for the protection which could come through his own strong arm; for the spirit of Nat Turner never was completely quelled. He struck ruthlessly, mercilessly, it may be said in cold blood, innocent women and children; but the system of which he was the victim had less mercy in subjecting his race to the horrors of the “middle passage” and the endless crimes against justice, humanity, and virtue, then perpetrated throughout America. The brutality of his onslaught was a reflex of slavery, the object lesson which he gave brought the question home to every fireside until public conscience, once callous, became quickened and slavery was doomed.”



 = Source 2: Herbert Aptheker-''American Negro Slave Revolts '' = 

<p class="MsoNormal"> “In the absence of any evidence of equal weight to the contrary, one must conclude that Turner possessed the characteristic of great leaders in that he sensed the mood and feelings of the masses of his fellow beings, not only in his immediate environment but generally. The years immediately preceding his effort had been marked by a great rumbling of discontent and protest. Turner’s act itself carrying that rumbling to a high point caused an eruption throughout the length and breadth of the slave south—which always rested on a volcano of outraged humanity.”

<p class="MsoNormal">

<p class="MsoNormal"> ==' Source 3: William S. Drewery-The Southampton Insurrection  '== <p class="MsoNormal">

<p class="MsoBodyText"> “Thus the insurrection was not instigated by motives of revenge or sudden anger, but the result of long deliberation and a settled purpose of mind, the offspring of gloomy fanaticism acting upon materials but too well prepared for such impressions,” and of love of self importance, encouraged by the efforts of Negro preachers, who were influenced by external affairs, and employed in circulating inflammatory and seditious periodicals. Those who have received most are the most jealous and ready to complain. Nat Turner, as the Southampton slaves in general, was like a spoiled child, who, having been allowed too many privileges in youth, soon thinks he ought to be master of all he surveys. The calling of a Constitutional Convention to meet in October, 1829, inspired in the slaves of Matthews Isle of Wright, and the neighboring counties hopes of emancipation, and in case of failure of such declaration to rebel and massacre the whites. Doubtless Nat had heard the same subjects discussed, and, being conscious of the results of the convention, which not only failed to emancipate slaves, but limited the right of suffrage to the whites, he considered it time to carry out his threats. He was undoubtedly inspired with the hope of freedom, and the mere discussion of emancipation by a convention may have led him to believe that many of the whites would sympathize with his schemes. He is said to have passed the home of some poor white people because he considered it useless to kill those who thought no better of themselves than they did of the Negroes.”

<p class="MsoBodyText"> ==' Source 4: The Richmond Whig-September 17, 1831 and The Richmond Whig''-September 3, 1831 '''== <p class="MsoNormal">

<p class="MsoNormal"> “Our insurrection, general, or not, was the work of fanaticism-General Nat was no preacher, but in his immediate neighborhood, had acquired the character of a prophet…he traced his divination in characters of blood, on leaves alone in the woods; he would arrange them in some conspicuous place, have a dream telling him of the circumstance; and then send some ignorant black to bring them to him, to whom he would interpret the meaning. Thus, by means of this nature, he had acquired an immense influence, over such persons as he took into his confidence. He, likewise pretended to have conversations with the Holy Spirit; and was assured by it, that he was invulnerable… I have been credibly informed, that something like three years ago, Nat received a whipping from his master, for saying that the blacks ought to be free…

<p class="MsoNormal">

<p class="MsoNormal"> “. . .We therefore incline to the belief that he acted upon no higher principle than the impulse of revenge against the whites, as the enslavers of himself and his race; that being a fanatic, he possibly persuaded himself that Heaven would interfere; and then he may have convinced himself as he certainly did his deluded followers to some extent, that the appearance of the sun some weeks ago prognosticated something favorable to their cause. . .”

<p class="MsoNormal">

<p class="MsoNormal"> ==' Source 5: The Richmond Enquirer''-August 1831 '''== <p class="MsoNormal">

<p class="MsoNormal"> “…What strikes us as the most remarkable thing in this matter is the horrible ferocity of these monsters. They remind one of a parcel of blood-thirsty wolves rushing down from the Alps; or rather like a former incursion of the Indians upon white settlements nothing is spared; neither age nor sex is respected-the helplessness of women and children pleads in vain for mercy. The danger is thought to be over-but prudence still demands precaution. The lower country should be on alert-the case of Nat Turner warns us. No black man ought to be permitted to turn a preacher through the country…

<p class="MsoNormal"> …A fanatic preacher by the name of Nat Turner (Gen. Nat Turner) who had been taught to read and write, and permitted to go about preaching in the country, was at the bottom of this infernal brigandage. He was artful, impudent, and vindictive, without any cause or provocation that could be assigned. He was the slave of Mr. Travis. He and another slave of Mr. T.. a young fellow, by the name of Moore, were two of the leaders. Three or four others were first concerned and most active…They had 15 others to join them. And by importunity or threats they prevailed upon about 20 others to cooperate in the scheme of massacre…

<p class="MsoNormal">             …Nat, the ringleader, who calls himself General, pretends to be a Baptist preachers great enthusiast—declares to his comrades that he is commissioned by Jesus Christ, and proceeds under his inspired directions—that the late singular appearance of the sun was the sign for him…”

<p class="MsoBodyText">