By Crystal Sykes, Saleem Gondal, Alexis Davis
When Nate Parker’s Birth of a Nation premiered at the Sundance Film Festival in 2016 it set off a bidding fury and set a record when it sold to Fox Searchlight Pictures for $17.5 million dollars. As momentum started to build for the film it came out that Parker and his co-writer Jean Celestin were involved in a rape case while students at Penn State. The two were accused of rape by Parker’s then girlfriend. Parker was acquitted while Celestin was originally found guilty and then later innocent on appeal. The victim alleged that not only did the two rape her while she was passed out but that after she brought the case to the police they hired a private investigator to harass her on campus. The information had always been available on Parker’s wikipedia page but until this August reporters did not focus on it. It came to national attention after an article in Variety gave more information and also revealed that the victim had been in a state of depression due to the assault and after numerous suicide attempts over the years she finally took her life in 2012.
The news of Parker’s rape trial set off a flurry of think pieces and opinion articles on if the film should be supported. Every article boiled down to a couple of questions:
Was Parker guilty even though he was found innocent
If guilty should we support the film?
Since Black films made by Black people are rarely given this kind of attention/money, should we still support the film even if we think Parker is guilty?
Three of our writers sat down to discuss the controversy.
Alexis Davis: We should definitely still support the film on the grounds that this story should be told to remind our people the sacrifices our ancestors had made to pave a way for us. Everything we are allowed to do: vote, work, and, associate amongst non-colored people, build our own names/brands, and countless other ventures colored weren’t allowed to or thought were able to do back in the early times. If Nate is truly guilty, the film itself doesn’t represent his character, only Nat Turner’s. I don’t condone sexual abuse and anybody has it in them to commit such acts, gets no respect. However, I just find the timing very strange. If this was such a big issue, this should’ve been out when he got cast in all of his early films but since the film is about a slave revolt, it resurfaces. Who knows who’s telling the truth but I know I am personally interested in the film and learning about the fight our ancestors did for me (us).
Crystal Sykes: I personally don’t find the timing strange at all. Nate Parker made himself the face of the one of the most anticipated movies of the year and when that happens, there are extra eyes on you. I’m more surprised that he didn’t have the foresight to address the rape allegations in a better way.
I’m very interested in this overwhelmingly popular notion that this story “needs to be told.” This story has been told, multiple times in different ways. I’m interested in why this particular retelling is so important that we should disregard the messenger?
Saleem Gondal: When the news first came out, I was upset. Birth of a Nation was hyped to be a film that could challenge the legacy the original Birth of a Nation left behind and I wanted to see Nate Parker succeed in his passion project reclaiming that history. Seeing how quick people were to boycott the film hurt, because it threatened the possibility of a new talent (who’s a black man) from being able to make a name for himself. However separate I would like to keep the art from the artist however, Parker refusing to apologize for what happened to the alleged victim, even though he has acknowledged that he didn’t have verbal confirmation of her consent, says to me that Parker is guilty. There is an epidemic of rape cases that go nowhere in the college justice system, and it’s not hard to believe that Parker and co-writer Jean McGianni Celestin, both members of the wrestling team at Penn State at the time, are in fact guilty of a crime that they were found innocent of.
Despite that, I still chose to watch the film. I really hate the original Birth of a Nation, and any film that directly challenged its legacy would be worth watching for me. The news of the rape cases did temper my enthusiasm for the director, but I wanted to see if the film I was anticipating for so long could stand on its merits.
The more films by black directors out there, the better. But regardless of what actually happened that night between Nate Parker and the alleged victim, he is guilty of avoiding the opportunity to seriously engaging with toxic male masculinity. The film, as solid as it is, is also guilty of not seriously engaging with toxic male masculinity. We need more representation of different voices in film, but what good does it do to lift up a different voice that says the same thing?
Crystal: I think bringing up toxic male masculinity is a good point—especially since he brought it up himself during earlier panel discussions, but seemed to drop that term once he decided to focus mainly on his innocence instead.
One of the many problems I have with Nate Parker is this notion of the toxic masculine male that is dripping all over himself and his project. From the two (known to be mostly fictitious) rape scenes in his film, the women in Nat Turner’s life being shown as silent and meek characters to be saved to his real-life thoughts of gay characters weakening the black man and using his own family as an example of “goodness,” I’m just not sure if he sees women as more than objects, plot devices or madonnas. I do agree about lifting a different voice that says the same thing but the trouble I’m having is mainly the fact that I’m not sure what Nate Parker is saying at all and by the disaster of a press tour he’s giving, I don’t think he does either.
Alexis: Reason being why I say it should be told (again) is for the younger generation, those who aren’t so familiar with the story. They could watch older versions but with the new one with more familiar faces like Gabrielle Union and Aja King, maybe they’ll feel more compelled to watch it. It sounds silly but it’s often how the demographic works; appeal to who is more recognizable. Maybe Nate did in fact rape that girl, I wouldn’t put it past him, and as Saleem had stated, sexual assault crimes in college never really receive any proper justice or even brought to light as the colleges want to retain their integrity as best as they can.
I only say it’s funny how it came to light at a time like this because it’s always something when there’s a film ro project about the uplifting of a black community. We’re always put down and seen as weak while what Nat Turner gave us strength and there are people who want to take that away from us. Also, it appears everyone is also adamant about this movie because it bombed this opening weekend. It boils down to this: history repeats itself. This story will forever be retold time and time again just as Dr. King speech will always ring in our minds. We can’t get distracted by the man behind the scenes and what he did in his life but more so on the person the story is about.
Crystal: Is Nate Parker behind the scenes? He’s the star, director, producer and co-writer of this film. He literally decided to make Nat Turner’s face his own, speak his words and reenact his truth (loosely). The film may be about Nat Turner but the story belongs to Nate Parker.
Nate Parker decided that Nat Turner would be the catalyst for his own success.
I want to reiterate that there are two rape scenes in the movie! The fact that Parker allegedly raped someone himself can’t be divorced from the movie, especially when he has made it clear how personal this film is to him. It could have an opening point for talking about Parker’s motivation including those scenes, his own personal growth/creative process, and how this personal experiences may have had a role on how those scenes were portrayed. I find it frankly ironic that rape can be used as a plot device to start a slave rebellion but is considered a distraction when it comes to boycotting a movie.
Saleem: I agree with Crystal, the fact that he would invent rape scenes to serve as plot devices for Nat Turner’s story is troubling in and of itself, even if he wasn’t accused of it in the past. It says to me that women should be protected from white supremacy, and it’s the job of black men to do it. There’s little discussion about roles women could play in a rebellion, which is especially appalling considering the role Harriet Tubman later in ending slavery. Given the conversation in social movements today the emphasize women and queer and trans people having leadership roles, this film doesn’t like something the represents the spirit of social change today.
The film isn’t an objective look into Nat Turner’s life either; we are shown very select scenes that highlight Turner’s religiosity and connection to his family. Parker has the right to tell the film as subjectively as he wants, but the film loses some perspective about how significant Turner’s legacy is by emphasizing him as a man who leads his black community to the right path. Turner himself might have thought that way, but if Turner’s actions led to the “Birth of a Nation” as Parker would like for us to think, then we’re missing the perspective of the non cis-men who fought for the same thing Turner did.
Crystal: Since it’s Monday and the movie is already out, should we focus now on the box office and what we thought of the results?
Alexis: What I meant was ignore his involvement in the film, I know, I know but maybe I'm just looking at it as a history lesson….
The box office numbers did exactly what people knew it would, despite all the efforts in promoting, production, and backing, after Nate's allegations.
Saleem: I actually bought tickets online because I was worried it was going to sell out opening night. A large group of us were planning to go, but after the reviews came out, even the people who bought tickets didn’t want to see it. I went in a smaller group, and when I got to the theater, there was enough space for the three of us to put up our feet in the middle row. Not exactly the opening weekend I expected, but probably what the film deserves.
