Nate Parker’s Past: Can We Separate the Art from the Artist?

In January, Nate Parker was riding high. His passion project – The Birth of a Nation, about Nat Turner and the slave rebellion he led – had just sold to Fox Searchlight for a record $17.5 million. A slew of Oscar nominations were sure to follow.

But Parker's higher profile has renewed interest in a 1999 incident that occurred when Parker and his friend Jean Celestin – who shares a writing credit on The Birth of a Nation – were accused of raping a woman while all three were students at Penn State. The case went to trial, and Parker was acquitted while Celestin was convicted, though that was later overturned.

This has cast a dark cloud over the film. Parker clearly wants to move on, but his tone in recent interviews has solely been focused on how he has been affected by the negative attention. His attitude has been received as off-putting to say the least. Some have already chosen not to see the film, and some will say no one should see it. But some will say we should separate the art from the artist, letting the work speak for itself.

And some media hasn't been objective or tasteful. A Hollywood Reporter piece downplayed the serious nature of the allegations, instead highlighting this controversy as another obstacle Parker and his film now face in terms of Oscar chances. They may be a trade publication, but that's no way to treat such a delicate topic.

The woman's case was heard and a verdict from a jury of her peers was handed down. But the court of public opinion has handed out a different verdict. In many cases, neither the legal system nor the public properly acknowledge such allegations, which is a grand tragedy. How you react to this particular case – and how vocal you are about your reaction – is up to you. One thing we can all agree on, however, is how seriously we as the public should respond to accusations of rape and abuse. Whether this specific situation affects your viewing of the film (and indeed, whether you'll view it at all) must remain a personal decision.

Facebooktwitterredditmail

About Kip Mooney

Kip Mooney
Like many film critics born during and after the 1980s, my hero is Roger Ebert. The man was already the best critic in the nation when he won the Pulitzer in 1975, but his indomitable spirit during and after his recent battle with cancer keeps me coming back to read not only his reviews but his insightful commentary on the everyday. But enough about a guy you know a lot about. I knew I was going to be a film critic—some would say a snob—in middle school, when I had to voraciously defend my position that The Royal Tenenbaums was only a million times better than Adam Sandler’s remake of Mr. Deeds. From then on, I would seek out Wes Anderson’s films and avoid Sandler’s like the plague. Still, I like to think of myself as a populist, and I’ll be just as likely to see the next superhero movie as the next Sundance sensation. The thing I most deplore in a movie is laziness. I’d much rather see movies with big ambitions try and fail than movies with no ambitions succeed at simply existing. I’m also a big advocate of fun-bad movies like The Room and most of Nicolas Cage’s work. In the past, I’ve written for The Dallas Morning News and the North Texas Daily, which I edited for a semester. I also contributed to Dallas-based Pegasus News, which in the circle of life, is now part of The Dallas Morning News, where I got my big break in 2007. Eventually, I’d love to write and talk about film full-time, but until that’s a viable career option, I work as an auditor for Wells Fargo. I hope to one day meet my hero, go to the Toronto International Film Festival, and compete on Jeopardy. Until then, I’m excited to share my love of film with you.

Leave a Reply