I don't know if Styron was really equipped to handle this one.

Styron was a renowned writer, but this particular situation might have presented unique challenges.

Perhaps it required a set of skills or experiences that he didn't possess.

It's possible that he was well-versed in certain aspects of life and literature, but this specific matter could have been outside his comfort zone.

Maybe he had the intellectual capacity to understand the problem, but not the practical know-how to deal with it effectively.

Or perhaps he was simply too preoccupied with other things to give this one his full attention and focus.

In any case, it remains to be seen whether Styron was truly up to the task at hand.

Nat Turner was, in fact, the originator of the BLACK LIVES MATTER MOVEMENT. Why is this so? Well, the man initiated an actual insurrection with the noble aim of liberating slaves from the cruel bondages of slavery.

His actions were a powerful statement against the unjust institution that had held so many in oppression for far too long.

Unfortunately, for his heroic efforts, he was ultimately killed. Nat Turner is a true martyr.

He is a person who the world often fails to talk about or praise enough.

His story is one that should be remembered and honored, as it serves as a reminder of the long and arduous struggle for equality and justice.

We should look to his example and continue to fight for the rights and dignity of all people, regardless of their race or background.

Nat Turner's legacy lives on, and it is up to us to ensure that it is not forgotten.

[Review written by my younger self]

Why is a novel that won a Pulitzer Prize in 1967 on my "Hate" list? Author Styron has no question about the important presence his novel has. He states that he is giving readers a fictional presentation of the actual history surrounding our title "character" in 1831. With this, Styron takes on a certain authorial latitude that can be easily misconstrued with actual history.

I can understand the message Styron wishes to communicate. He presents the historical precursor for the problems and prejudices that haunt urban African-Americans today. But, with this, is it necessary to add his own altering of the actual history of this slave rebellion?

Here are some of the true facts Styron presents either directly or indirectly: 60 white persons killed, 17 perpetrators hung, 12 more sent to Alabama to die in slavery, and 131 free and enslaved Americans killed by a mob. With 220 dead and America's laws at the time becoming increasingly harsh (think of the Fugitive Slave Law), how much more latitude does Styron need to express his point?

With such a novel that uses an actual person and event, how much responsibility does Styron hold to historical accuracy? Many would say that he holds none at all. There is, indeed, the anonymously-written Primary Colors, among others, that takes its own version of history and "tweaks" it for entertainment appeal. So let's consider Styron's purpose. Is it entertainment? In the book's afterword, Styron writes that the real Nat Turner was a person of "conspicuous ghastliness" and "a dangerously religious lunatic". So what does Styron want to do? He wants to change this person of demonic fanaticism with one of "stern piety".

Thus Styron wants to alter this man's personality. With this, the story becomes one of a tortured man who feels that being cut off from God is a fate worse than death. Throughout all his brutal and grotesque violence, he claims himself in the fictional parts of this novel to be a man of God. Has Styron acted responsibly in doing this? More importantly, does this alteration make it easier to swallow this historical event, and should that even be a consideration?

This event is just a small slice of the over 60 million slaves whose lives were lost. What if these and other figures were altered in other historical events? What if the numbers and events were altered regarding the over 12 million lost in the Holocaust? What if authors decide they want to take some authorial license over the recent events in Rwanda, Cambodia, and Kosovo?

I do not discount the fact that the actual historically-accurate circumstances regarding Nat Turner are of great significance today. But can readers benefit from a story that claims to present important history and yet is not wholly accurate? In a book entitled Ten Black Writers Respond, the title persons say that both they and their white counterparts would have better benefited from an unbiased assessment and chronicling of history as it is truly presented. In fact, in one of the most obvious historically-accurate omissions of Nat Turner being married with at least two children, activists and black writers accused Styron of adding firewood to the white racist view that black men are obsessed with white women.

By taking liberties with the story and the man, Styron seemed to brush off the fact that slaves' lives were actually worsened by Nat Turner and his rebellion. The fact that Turner seems almost as prejudiced against field slaves as well as masters is soon overshadowed by the fact that he later becomes a champion of slaves nationwide. Styron overlooks the fact that the real Nat Turner had a wife, and that his last few masters were actually relatively kind in a system of slavery that did not afford many kindnesses.

These overlooked historical facts could have only added to the human complexity that Styron was aiming for. Noting all of these fallbacks, it seems the author was seeking a preposterous self-aggrandizement by claiming unabashedly that his novel is a complete "meditation on history."

As a historical novelist, Styron did not do what historical novelists should do--i.e., investigate the facts. Therefore, Confessions is not an accurate portrayal of Nat Turner, and dangerously takes a controversial figure of race relations and distorts him. Only by presenting true accounts can historical novelists hope to honor and understand the complexity of the past and present this importance to their readers.

The Confessions of Nat Turner by William Styron is an extremely significant work. It is an enlightening yet disturbing fictional portrayal of the black insurrection and slave revolt in Virginia in 1831, masterminded and led by Reverend Nat Turner. This book, which won the Pulitzer Prize for Fiction in 1967, truly illuminated the dark recesses of slavery. As Styron mentions in the Afterword, Nat Turner entered his consciousness at a young age. He emphasizes that he couldn't recall a time when he wasn't haunted by the specter of slavery. There were only brief mentions of Nat Turner's revolt in his text of Virginia's history. However, Styron's most vivid memory was of a highway marker adjacent to a peanut field in Southampton County. In Styron's own words, he was transfixed by the information on that marker, which was paraphrased as follows:

"Nearby, in August of 1831, a fanatical slave named Nat Turner led a bloody insurrection that caused the death of fifty-five white people. Captured after two months in hiding, Nat was brought to trial in the county seat of Jerusalem (now Courtland) and he and seventeen of his followers were hanged."

This book is very well-structured. It commences with the lengthy confessions of Nat Turner as related to his court-appointed attorney, Thomas Gray. Mr. Gray spent numerous hours obtaining Nat Turner's words and then reading back the essence of these confessions for his corrections and the ultimate validation of the truth of the confessions in the days leading up to Turner's scheduled execution by hanging. The subsequent chapters in the book delve into the early life of Nat Turner and the sequence of events that ultimately led to his incitement of a black insurrection in Southampton. This is a book that unflinchingly examines the issue and the inhumanity of slavery, for both the black and white races during that era in our history. I deeply regret that it has taken me this long to read this invaluable piece of literature.

The Confessions of Nat Turner is my inaugural encounter with Styron's works, and it incontrovertibly showcases Styron as a writer's writer. There is no gainsaying the fact that he crafts some truly breathtaking prose. Regarding the story, which takes the meager historical facts of the slave rebellion leader Nat Turner and transmutes them into a bold act of writerly imagination, it is deeply disturbing, haunting, and utterly engrossing.

In a sense, Nat Turner serves as the纽带 connecting two other masterpieces of Southern Literature (a genre that is rapidly becoming my favorite): Faulkner's The Light in August and Toni Morrison's Song of Solomon.

Just like Styron himself, who confesses as much in his essential essay "Nat Turner Revisited" in the back of the 25th Anniversary Edition, I have long been captivated by the Nat Turner myth. Although Styron's portrayal was (and perhaps still is) highly controversial [possibly an understatement, given what I've read thus far], it imparts a palpable humanity to a figure who was always more of a symbol than an actual historical personage. What he has produced is an epic and, I believe, a dignified first-person narrative that sheds light on the past and compels us to question our present – profound moral questions that make us uncomfortable and cut to the quick.

I'm certain that many readers will take exception to the ethical questions regarding race and storytelling here. For instance, should a white writer (or can he) capture the voice or experience of a black man or woman? Should a reader value such a rendition? But for this reader at least, I am in awe of Styron's range and his courageous attempt to say something about the impact of slavery on the South in which he grew up and could never quite reconcile with. Nat Turner, therefore, has something to say about all Americans that is worthy of our consideration. And for this reason alone, this book merits being read.

I haven't read this before as I was already familiar with the content.

Despite being beautifully written, it was a struggle to get through.

Written by a white man, I will refrain from commenting on its accuracy and simply move on to the fact that it did serve a purpose for me.

As the confession unfolds and describes slavery in brutal terms, I realized that the slavery mentality still lingers deep within our DNA.

I firmly believe that there are those who still believe in the inferiority of others, and this belief has not been shaken but rather passed down and, lately, even inflamed.

The descendants of slaves have developed responses and ways of dealing with covert racism that persist to this day.

This just makes the slogan "No Justice No Peace" all the more meaningful.

All in all, it was a difficult read for my anxiety-ridden pandemic bubble, but it should be a part of the high school curriculum everywhere.

It is essential for students to understand the history and ongoing impact of slavery and racism to promote a more just and equal society.

I first read about Nat Turner when I was taking a black history class in college. At that time, I couldn't even clearly recall what I thought of it. Well, actually, I do remember. I remember hoping that he would win. I also remember some of the cruel and inhumane details. The slaves sometimes fed their masters ground glass. On the slave ships, many lived in their own excretions and countless died. The masters would use thumbscrews on their slaves to cause them intense pain, and the whippings were a common occurrence.

Nat Turner was a slave in the 1830s. He confessed that his master was relatively good to him, but he still ran away at one point. He stayed hidden for about a month and then returned. Just because a slave had a so-called "good master" didn't mean they didn't long for freedom. But what other choice did he have but to return? Maybe he could have made it to a Northern State to gain freedom, or maybe not.

He was also a deeply religious man and a preacher. He believed that he had visions from God, and God told him that he must take action against the slave owners. So, in time, he gathered several other slaves and planned an insurrection.

Early one morning, they visited the homes of those nearby. Eventually, he was caught, and his confession of what happened was extremely grisly. They used axes to kill 57 men, women, and children, mostly women and children. I was horrified when reading the graphic details, yet I could understand the underlying reasons for this to some extent. However, it was morally wrong.

Insurrections were a constant source of worry for the slave owners, as they always feared that such a thing could happen. In fact, Nat Turner's insurrection wasn't the first time this had actually occurred.

“Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe.” ~~Frederick Douglass

The writing in this book is truly amazing, and Nat Turner emerges as a captivating historical figure.

Undoubtedly, the book is controversial. Authored by a white man in 1967, it is written in the first person, chronicling the life of Nat Turner, an enslaved individual who led a slave revolt in 1831. This revolt saw the indiscriminate killing of (slave-owning) men, women, and children, ultimately resulting in numerous reprisal killings.

Some take issue with this fictional account as it diverges significantly from his official confessions published prior to his hanging. However, it's challenging for me to believe that the printed confessions are entirely factual, considering they were penned by a biased person who had every incentive to portray him as a madman and downplay any justifications for his actions.

The n-word appears on nearly every page of this over 500-page book, sometimes multiple times per page, which is deeply uncomfortable, especially given the author's whiteness. Turner is also depicted as having a fixation on white women, which is problematic due to the stereotypes of Black men being obsessed with white women and the whole pretext of punishing/segregating Black men to "protect" white women and their "purity." Turner's fictionalized thoughts also encompass a great deal of hatred towards Black subservience and lack of education, and one could argue that this might be a projection of the author's or a depiction of internalized racism.

Nevertheless, I gleaned a great deal from this book. Nat Turner is a complex figure, whether one views him as a psychotic madman or a freedom fighter. There is a palpable sense of time and place, and how enslaved people, even under "good" masters, were treated as property. When the economy soured or the master incurred debts, an enslaved person could be sold, their entire life uprooted, separated from family, and dispatched to God knows where.

The book also incorporated a significant amount of humor, despite its overall dark tone, which made it slightly more palatable to read. I feel that I have a better comprehension of this historical era and of Nat Turner as an individual after reading this book, and I look forward to watching the recent "Birth of a Nation" movie, which also delves into Nat Turner's rebellion.

I could definitely see why this book was controversial.

As the title implies, it is based on the confessions of Nat Turner, the slave who led a rebellion in Virginia. He claimed to have received signs from God to do so. The book doesn't claim to be completely accurate as it has to take great liberties to tell the story from Nat's perspective. And one can only assume that the confessions, written by someone other than Nat, were probably not very accurate themselves.

Nat, as the narrator, has many harsh words for his own race, both slave and free. This was a risky move by the white author. What may seem like honesty from the narrator could easily be seen as just the author's stereotypes. The part where he fantasizes about raping a white woman was the most controversial, as the claim that black men are prone to that was often used as an excuse for lynchings. While the author does portray Nat as a flawed but righteous hero, the blame for his violence seems to be placed squarely on the shoulders of his white owners who were kind to him. If his first white owner hadn't taught him to read, or the women from that house hadn't taught him numbers and the Bible, he would never have believed that slaughtering white people was his calling. It wasn't slavery that led him to desperation; it was an attempt at kindness and too much dangerous knowledge, both given as a form of experiment, that led him to madness.

I don't usually lean towards the conservative side of a controversy, and while I wasn't necessarily offended by the book, I can definitely understand why someone would be. To be fair, the author does cast a bad light equally, with the white people in the story also having some major, often worse, faults of their own.

All in all, I found the book to be a compelling read, but I didn't particularly like it all that much. For one thing, it took me what felt like an eternity to get through it. It's not one of those exciting books where I couldn't wait to turn the page. If anything, it's the ordinary life in books that often interests me, the day-to-day life of people from another time and place, and there was plenty of that in this book. However, what some might find interesting, others might find excruciating.

Human bodies, with the exception of one person, were buried in a solemn and magnificent way. The body of Nat Turner was given to the doctors to be skinned and the fat was taken from his ears. Mr. Aris-Barham's father had a wallet made from his skin. Nat Turner's skeleton was in the possession of Dr. Mussinburg for years but then it got lost.

Ask your friend Nat Flexy if he has ever heard the name Nat Turner? Or before you get into the colorful media game, what do they hide from you (like the white-skinned schoolchildren in South Carolina in the early century who had to swear never to read about Uncle Tom's Cabin because of Mrs. Stowe's lies, and today's blacks also learn to hate that person without reading Mr. Stairn's book).

I love these stories in which the mysteries of the Holy Scriptures are hidden.

Before this book, I thought the choice of Sufi Ouj of prose was Stairn, but this book

Nat Turner, a figure who led a slave rebellion in the U.S., has a fictional history based on his confessions before his trial and hanging. The story commences and concludes with his capture, confessions, trial, and ultimately, his hanging. However, the truly captivating aspect of the book lies in the evolution of his life, his perspective on life, and his relationships with God and whites over time.

As the narrative unfolds, we witness the profound transformation within Nat Turner. His initial beliefs and experiences shape his actions and decisions. The book effectively portrays the horrors of slavery, making us question the very nature of such an inhumane institution. How could one man enslave another?

This thought-provoking question lingers throughout the story, highlighting the moral and ethical issues surrounding slavery. The fictional account of Nat Turner's life serves as a powerful reminder of the dark past and the importance of learning from history to ensure that such atrocities never occur again.

Well now, reading Styron’s “The Confessions of Nat Turner” is like embarking on a journey into another world. It offers a truly immersive experience. I lack the skills to precisely explain how he accomplishes this technically, but boy, that man can write! It is an incredibly engrossing read.

However, if you conduct a Google search on this book, you'll discover a great deal. Especially when it was first published, it caused quite a stir in the literary world and disrupted the cultural status quo. It sold extremely well, and Styron received a Pulitzer Prize for it. But he also faced a significant amount of criticism, and people even came together to write a book of essays specifically to condemn it as being really bad.

Race, rebellion, sex, slavery - all these elements are present in a book written by a white southerner about a slave from the early 1800s. And now, a white guy is writing a review of another white dude’s book about a black dude. One might wonder what could go wrong?

Fortunately for me, my audience is small and my influence even smaller, so I should be relatively safe due to my obscurity.

Styron makes a point before commencing the novel that he is not writing a history or a historical novel, but rather a “meditation on history”. I believe it is more accurate to say that he is deliberately presenting his thoughts on what Nat Turner’s motivation might have been. It is simply his imagination working out how Nat Turner arrived at and followed through on a path that was doomed to failure.

I think Styron is grappling with ideas and trying to sort out for himself how it all came about. Given his personality and his environment, he knew that in a historical sense, his work would likely fall short because he was approaching the story from a more artistic or emotional context. But Turner became a symbol of something greater than a failed slave rebellion, so Styron’s meditation naturally has its limitations.

Nonetheless, I still believe he managed to convey that the violence of the rebellion was a result of a system (slavery) that was so corrupt and based on such extreme oppression that Turner’s rebellion was the only logical choice.

As an aside, many decades ago, I read some essays by Malcolm X, and he related that Elijah Muhammad preached that white men were actually real devils, not just those who committed devilish actions. After reading his autobiography, I understood that in a way, this was also a logical conclusion since only a demon would treat humans so poorly. I don't believe in the theology, but I can understand why someone might think that. It's somewhat similar to Turner’s rebellion. I mean, it certainly didn't bring any relief to the slaves and, in fact, it freaked everyone out, leading to an intensification of the oppression. But I understand the thinking behind the decision.

Along those lines, Styron has this powerful passage: “… I said finally, “I believe they ain’t none of you can live like this any longer. Therefore, there is only one thing to do…” Here I stopped speaking altogether for a while, allowing these words to enter their consciousness. Minutes passed and they said nothing, then Henry’s voice broke the silence, his deaf man’s bleat horse and cracked, a shock in the stillness: “Us gonna kill all dem white sonsabitches. Ain’t that what the Lawd done told you? Ain’t dat right, Nat?” (Page 350)

Another part that I find interesting is where Styron explores how Turner’s religious mania and obsessive reading of the Bible fit into the plan. If you “know” you are called by God to do something and you have a deep familiarity with the Old Testament, well, we can see how murder might seem almost easy to these people.

“Lord,” I whispered, “Hast thou truly called me to do this?” There was no answer, no answer at all save the answer in my brain: This is the fast that I have chosen, to loose the bonds of wickedness, to undo the heavy burdens, to let the oppressed go free, and there ye break every yoke.” (Pg 292)

Again, this is all Styron creating a fictional narrative based on different data points, so that it makes sense to him how this all came about. So it's just his interpretation, not history itself. Did Styron transcend his white southern heritage? To a small extent? Or to a large extent? Was he insightful or was he foolish? I won't say, but as I mentioned at the start, his writing is something truly special.

Well, that's my take on it. Also, there is an interesting interview on YouTube called “James Baldwin Speaks! The Confessions of Nat Turner: with William Styron and Ossie Davis”. I highly recommend checking it out.