The influence of background information

Joy Wagener

While I was reading the primary sources and looking at photos from the Turner rebellion, I was wondering whether this material brought positive light to my first reading of Nat Turner, or if my first reading was better because I had zero context. It’s hard to say, actually.  When I first read it, I was literally in shock, jaw agape, when I saw images of severed hands and heads with blood smeared across the frames. With each turn of the page, I felt as shocked as Nat’s victims must have felt when awakened by the shouts of the murderous mob.  I felt sympathy for the white men, but I also could feel Nat’s pent-up rage and discontent.  However, now that I have so much background and context for this story, I feel more enlightened about the bias of Kyle Baker, but also surprisingly skeptical of Thomas Gray’s motives and reliability.

In the article by Greenberg (“The Confessions of Nat Turner: Text and Context”), the author mentioned that Gray was poor and in need of money. He was not Nat’s lawyer. There is no evidence that this testimony was ever read in court. Gray’s motive seems to be completely monetary which calls into question the reliability of the “confession.”  Another interesting point Greenberg brought up was the strange use of language Nat presumably used in his confession—ie, his eloquent way of stating things which would have been outside of his vocabulary. If these are Gray’s words and not Nat’s, then the story is significantly impacted.  Also, why would Nat feel comfortable enough to open up on Gray?

While my first read of the novel was simplistic and filled with my gasping, my second read created many more questions for me about the truthfulness of the story—in the language, the interpretation, and in Nat’s “confession” of facts.  Did Gray alter events in his recording? Did his motives to make money overreach the truth and facts? I find my reading of Nat Turner forever altered by these questions and my considerations of their impact.