The Black Panther Party: A Graphic Novel History
WINNER OF THE EISNER AWARD • A bold and fascinating graphic novel history of the revolutionary Black Panther Party.
Founded in Oakland, California, in 1966, the Black Panther Party for Self-Defense was a radical political organization that stood in defiant contrast to the mainstream civil rights movement. This gripping illustrated history explores the impact and significance of the Panthers, from their social, educational, and healthcare programs that were designed to uplift the Black community to their battle against police brutality through citizen patrols and frequent clashes with the FBI, which targeted the Party from its outset.
Using dramatic comic book-style retellings and illustrated profiles of key figures, The Black Panther Party captures the major events, people, and actions of the party, as well as their cultural and political influence and enduring legacy.
BUY THE BOOK
Community Reviews
Review
This is my review. I go over single pages below expanding on some mainly misguided arguments in the book. I knew very little about this group and actually felt positive towards them as they seemed like a group that used the constitution to protect their own ingroup. Which seems wise overall and obviously the police cannot attack them for using the constitution as given to them. After reading the book I definitely think this is a misguided and stupid idea all around. Created by Marxist criminals recruiting criminals. And working together with Marxist White groups and also Black gangs. Murders and crime every year. At times the author says it was just a member who did it by himself. But it's so many criminal activities that it's hard to ignore it all. For some murders no one is convicted despite seemingly it being clear Black Panthers were responsible. They even tortured and killed their own member for thinking he worked with FBI, he didn't. And we have a tape recording of the torture. Yet again they skirt a prison sentence.
The author frantically tries to make them look as good as possible. Drawing them as heroic handsome muscular men with strong voices. But it's hard to draw good enough to cover up some of these deeds. At the end they ended up becoming a full-blown gang and shutting down. The author thinks Black Panther was a fight for him and his rights so any setback is a sad disaster and any FBI or police win a sad event. Which comes across as forced and at times lazy history. Especially as he starts out with a hollow and misleading overview of US history. That part is painfully dull. The Black Panther history finally starts and it's better, but the bias remains. History fanatics will definitely cringe a lot. This feels more like a progressive TV show with cops being comedically racist. This is definitely not proper history despite being a well-drawn overview with clean text. The author taking a side to this degree makes everything feel comedic. Really, a Black Panther member shooting a cop is "the police set him up". A Black Panther killing another member is now "FBI set him up". It's a clueless Black men understanding of Black people where no matter what they do or say they are not responsible. A progressive worldview where all Black criminals or conservatives are just forced into it by evil White men. While other races have choices in the matter no matter where they end up in life.
One founder ended up being a drug addict robbing dealers getting himself shot at 47. The other is still alive and still talking his propaganda. I like that he grew old and arrogant. All the murders I cannot condone, but as with IRA the murders that disgust me the most are the ones against their own members or their ingroup. That part of IRA is so repulsive I don't think anyone can excuse it when they drive a Catholic mother to Ireland and shoot her into a shallow grave as they assume she is a snitch. Was she? Frankly I don't care either way you can scare her to move country or something they did that successfully with other members. Here the left-wing Black Panthers accused of murder typically fled to Cuba.
I feel about this the same way as I feel about a faux history TV show like Manhunt about the Lincoln assassination. History wise it's not strong enough with a bias so strong it drags history into an iffy area of becoming propaganda. At other times it's clear and direct history I greatly enjoy. Of course every time he takes the side of the group and puts his claims as "most likely" we know the author is talking using an argument from their own writings directly. This is not what people who study history do. Clearly Black Panther is not the final word in a murder case. And clearly FBI is not responsible for everything bad that ever happened to them. The conspiracy stuff in the book is too much. Turned up to 11 for no good reason. And murder should not be talked about this lazily. Not even just history wise. Family members are still alive so show a tad respect.
More thoughts
Page 5 has drawings of Du Bois, Wallace D. Fard, and Marcus Garvey. I looked at the text and it talked about the founder of Nation of Islam. Wasn't he White? Why is he drawn Black here? Also, why even include him as a Black leader when Nation of Islam is an anti-Semitic hate group all reasonable people hate? It would be an excuse to present him as more White why make him part of your group when he's a bigot criminal?
On page 20 is another story I recognize. James Meredith shot during a lone march. Yet the text says "During his second day on the road, Meredith was shot by a sniper." Which is a misleading at best. He was shot by bird shots. A sniper rifle would typically be something you use to snipe and kill. Bird shots are for hunting birds. They hurt like heck though and at close range may cause serious injury. The greatest American cyclist ever was shot by pellets at close range and experienced a career decline as they remained in his body and he got led poisoning and still does. From distance it's often scrapes and a scare. Secondly the whole montage is presented as a Black vs. White fight for power up to this point. Yet the guy who shot him never said why he did it. Is he White? Is he insane? Is he racist? Who knows.
Page 30 talks about Malcolm X being assassinated. The Black power Seale is so enraged that his hero got killed he starts throwing bricks at random cars before his friends escort him away. Malcolm X was assassinated from an infight with Nation of Islam. The anti-Semitic hate group for Black people he himself was a leader in a few years before. The author could have pointed it out.
Page 38 contains their 10 point manifesto. This is a mindblow. Point 6 says all Black men must be exempt from military service. Considering how many high ranking leaders and generals are Black this would devastate the Black communities in USA. Military, nursing, repair work, police force. All these are central work areas for Black communities and the military uniquely has a ton of amazing career opportunities. Did Black Panthers forget that Black Americans begged to fight for the Union in the civil war and again in WW2? Same way Japanese-Americans found respect in USA after their WW2 efforts in Germany.
Page 67. The killing of Denzil Dowell. I don't know the case, but author concludes the most likely explanation is that a racist cop killed him. I don't know if it's true or a spin? But "most likely" is definitely not beyond a reasonable doubt. Since they are fighting for civil rights they should protect the rights of a cop too until he's proven guilty. Here we are also dealing with a burglary gone wrong leading to this outcome. The author seldom explains what made the cops react. He just alludes that the cops are clearly White and the perpetrator didn't deserve to get shot. Never stating either outright.
Page 72 finally shows a person drawn in a very unflattering style instead of handsome and heroic and it's of course Reagan. The governor of California who restricted constitutional gun rights. Frankly, I get it here and it's warranted as it does feel like an attack on a Black group for no valid reason.
Page 78 has a Black Panther leader stating something funny. That the Japanese-American internment camps are being renovated to now imprison Black people.
Page 85. Now the author is finally not sure about what happened. In all prior instances he basically knows. This one is a grand mystery! A Black Panther member kills a cop and shoots another. Or did he actually do it? We don't know as no gun is found and no story is conclusive. This case seems to have 100 times more evidence than the last one yet this one is described as more inconclusive. True crime logic this is not.
Page 104. Another depicting of racist White cops. Now looking at a dead body of a man they just killed. Many smirking. This time we at least get the background story. A Black Panther member wanted to kill a random cop after Martin Luther King was assassinated leading to this event. The shooting is presented as an execution with panels showing it. Of course the cops all say he was fleeing yet we see the Black Panther version of the story here.
Page 119 is another story where the author defends someone convicted of murder. He does not describe the case yet rather says the conviction seemed to be an FBI hit job. Perhaps, but there is no evidence of that. A 27 year old woman was killed in a robbery and her husband shot. The husband survived. So there was an eyewitness and then the FBI informant who said the accused admitted the shooting to him. FBI putting an innocent man in prison is a stretch. Especially with no evidence. The "but FBI didn't like Black Panther" logic is not enough. Just because someone is a snitch for FBI doesn't mean he was lying or that FBI made him lie. It's definitely a strong defense. But why skip the prosecution side of things?
Page 125, members torture an innocent Black Panther into confessing being a snitch for FBI. They tie him to a bed for several days and pour scolding water over him. When he confesses they kill him yet no one is found guilty. The author proposes this whole event is another FBI plot they engineered from behind the scenes.
Page 143 author says the Panthers put on a good fight but had to surrender after a 2 hour shootout with cops. Again language showing bias. Not ideal.
This is my review. I go over single pages below expanding on some mainly misguided arguments in the book. I knew very little about this group and actually felt positive towards them as they seemed like a group that used the constitution to protect their own ingroup. Which seems wise overall and obviously the police cannot attack them for using the constitution as given to them. After reading the book I definitely think this is a misguided and stupid idea all around. Created by Marxist criminals recruiting criminals. And working together with Marxist White groups and also Black gangs. Murders and crime every year. At times the author says it was just a member who did it by himself. But it's so many criminal activities that it's hard to ignore it all. For some murders no one is convicted despite seemingly it being clear Black Panthers were responsible. They even tortured and killed their own member for thinking he worked with FBI, he didn't. And we have a tape recording of the torture. Yet again they skirt a prison sentence.
The author frantically tries to make them look as good as possible. Drawing them as heroic handsome muscular men with strong voices. But it's hard to draw good enough to cover up some of these deeds. At the end they ended up becoming a full-blown gang and shutting down. The author thinks Black Panther was a fight for him and his rights so any setback is a sad disaster and any FBI or police win a sad event. Which comes across as forced and at times lazy history. Especially as he starts out with a hollow and misleading overview of US history. That part is painfully dull. The Black Panther history finally starts and it's better, but the bias remains. History fanatics will definitely cringe a lot. This feels more like a progressive TV show with cops being comedically racist. This is definitely not proper history despite being a well-drawn overview with clean text. The author taking a side to this degree makes everything feel comedic. Really, a Black Panther member shooting a cop is "the police set him up". A Black Panther killing another member is now "FBI set him up". It's a clueless Black men understanding of Black people where no matter what they do or say they are not responsible. A progressive worldview where all Black criminals or conservatives are just forced into it by evil White men. While other races have choices in the matter no matter where they end up in life.
One founder ended up being a drug addict robbing dealers getting himself shot at 47. The other is still alive and still talking his propaganda. I like that he grew old and arrogant. All the murders I cannot condone, but as with IRA the murders that disgust me the most are the ones against their own members or their ingroup. That part of IRA is so repulsive I don't think anyone can excuse it when they drive a Catholic mother to Ireland and shoot her into a shallow grave as they assume she is a snitch. Was she? Frankly I don't care either way you can scare her to move country or something they did that successfully with other members. Here the left-wing Black Panthers accused of murder typically fled to Cuba.
I feel about this the same way as I feel about a faux history TV show like Manhunt about the Lincoln assassination. History wise it's not strong enough with a bias so strong it drags history into an iffy area of becoming propaganda. At other times it's clear and direct history I greatly enjoy. Of course every time he takes the side of the group and puts his claims as "most likely" we know the author is talking using an argument from their own writings directly. This is not what people who study history do. Clearly Black Panther is not the final word in a murder case. And clearly FBI is not responsible for everything bad that ever happened to them. The conspiracy stuff in the book is too much. Turned up to 11 for no good reason. And murder should not be talked about this lazily. Not even just history wise. Family members are still alive so show a tad respect.
More thoughts
Page 5 has drawings of Du Bois, Wallace D. Fard, and Marcus Garvey. I looked at the text and it talked about the founder of Nation of Islam. Wasn't he White? Why is he drawn Black here? Also, why even include him as a Black leader when Nation of Islam is an anti-Semitic hate group all reasonable people hate? It would be an excuse to present him as more White why make him part of your group when he's a bigot criminal?
On page 20 is another story I recognize. James Meredith shot during a lone march. Yet the text says "During his second day on the road, Meredith was shot by a sniper." Which is a misleading at best. He was shot by bird shots. A sniper rifle would typically be something you use to snipe and kill. Bird shots are for hunting birds. They hurt like heck though and at close range may cause serious injury. The greatest American cyclist ever was shot by pellets at close range and experienced a career decline as they remained in his body and he got led poisoning and still does. From distance it's often scrapes and a scare. Secondly the whole montage is presented as a Black vs. White fight for power up to this point. Yet the guy who shot him never said why he did it. Is he White? Is he insane? Is he racist? Who knows.
Page 30 talks about Malcolm X being assassinated. The Black power Seale is so enraged that his hero got killed he starts throwing bricks at random cars before his friends escort him away. Malcolm X was assassinated from an infight with Nation of Islam. The anti-Semitic hate group for Black people he himself was a leader in a few years before. The author could have pointed it out.
Page 38 contains their 10 point manifesto. This is a mindblow. Point 6 says all Black men must be exempt from military service. Considering how many high ranking leaders and generals are Black this would devastate the Black communities in USA. Military, nursing, repair work, police force. All these are central work areas for Black communities and the military uniquely has a ton of amazing career opportunities. Did Black Panthers forget that Black Americans begged to fight for the Union in the civil war and again in WW2? Same way Japanese-Americans found respect in USA after their WW2 efforts in Germany.
Page 67. The killing of Denzil Dowell. I don't know the case, but author concludes the most likely explanation is that a racist cop killed him. I don't know if it's true or a spin? But "most likely" is definitely not beyond a reasonable doubt. Since they are fighting for civil rights they should protect the rights of a cop too until he's proven guilty. Here we are also dealing with a burglary gone wrong leading to this outcome. The author seldom explains what made the cops react. He just alludes that the cops are clearly White and the perpetrator didn't deserve to get shot. Never stating either outright.
Page 72 finally shows a person drawn in a very unflattering style instead of handsome and heroic and it's of course Reagan. The governor of California who restricted constitutional gun rights. Frankly, I get it here and it's warranted as it does feel like an attack on a Black group for no valid reason.
Page 78 has a Black Panther leader stating something funny. That the Japanese-American internment camps are being renovated to now imprison Black people.
Page 85. Now the author is finally not sure about what happened. In all prior instances he basically knows. This one is a grand mystery! A Black Panther member kills a cop and shoots another. Or did he actually do it? We don't know as no gun is found and no story is conclusive. This case seems to have 100 times more evidence than the last one yet this one is described as more inconclusive. True crime logic this is not.
Page 104. Another depicting of racist White cops. Now looking at a dead body of a man they just killed. Many smirking. This time we at least get the background story. A Black Panther member wanted to kill a random cop after Martin Luther King was assassinated leading to this event. The shooting is presented as an execution with panels showing it. Of course the cops all say he was fleeing yet we see the Black Panther version of the story here.
Page 119 is another story where the author defends someone convicted of murder. He does not describe the case yet rather says the conviction seemed to be an FBI hit job. Perhaps, but there is no evidence of that. A 27 year old woman was killed in a robbery and her husband shot. The husband survived. So there was an eyewitness and then the FBI informant who said the accused admitted the shooting to him. FBI putting an innocent man in prison is a stretch. Especially with no evidence. The "but FBI didn't like Black Panther" logic is not enough. Just because someone is a snitch for FBI doesn't mean he was lying or that FBI made him lie. It's definitely a strong defense. But why skip the prosecution side of things?
Page 125, members torture an innocent Black Panther into confessing being a snitch for FBI. They tie him to a bed for several days and pour scolding water over him. When he confesses they kill him yet no one is found guilty. The author proposes this whole event is another FBI plot they engineered from behind the scenes.
Page 143 author says the Panthers put on a good fight but had to surrender after a 2 hour shootout with cops. Again language showing bias. Not ideal.
See why thousands of readers are using Bookclubs to stay connected.