I’ll admit it. I am not quite sure what Baker’s intentions were while creating this graphic novel. At least, I feel as if he sent some mixed messages.
We know from his preface that the artist felt a certain type of fascination with Nat Turner. And if makes sense to draw/write on a topic that interests one. But I feel as if he went a little far in his preface when he mentions, ” The Nat Turner story has lots of action and suspense, also a hero with superhuman abilities. I often choose to write books on subjects I wish to know more about. I wanted to know how a person nobody wanted to talk about could be arguably one of the most important men in American history” (pg. 6).
A hero with superhuman abilities? Exactly how is murder heroic and superhuman? How is using religion to support one’s own view unusual? Even his megalomania was commonplace.
One of the most important men in American history? Well I assume murdering a bunch of people will grant you a footnote in some history book somewhere.
I guess I just don’t understand the juxtaposition of the preface in relation to the story. It causes a lot of conflict.
Without the preface I would have viewed this story as a “for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction” story. Basically, treating men as beasts will probably make them so.
To be fair to Baker, he related a rather realistic background for the story and didn’t try to portray Nat Turner in a heroic manner. In fact, using Turner’s own clinical and chilling recounting completely obliterated any thoughts of a knight on a charger. But Baker did give him some manner of nobility. Especially during the depiction of the lynching scene. The crowd completely surrounding him with expectant faces as he stoically views the brilliant sky. The unnerved faces as they watch the stillness of his body as he exhales his last breath.
Maybe I am having such a difficult time with this text because I don’t share the same fascination that Baker does…