Search Jump: Comments
    Chapter Index
    Back to Story

    Small Great Things

    by

    Picoult, Jodi

    Jodi Picoult’s Small Great Things (2016) explores themes of race, privilege, and justice through the story of Ruth Jefferson, an African American labor and delivery nurse accused of causing the death of a white supremacist couple’s newborn. The novel alternates perspectives between Ruth, the infant’s father Turk Bauer, and Ruth’s public defender Kennedy McQuarrie, revealing systemic racism and personal biases. Inspired by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s quote about doing “small things in a great way,” the narrative examines moral dilemmas and societal structures. The book has been praised for its thought-provoking examination of contemporary racial tensions and is being adapted into a film.

    PreviousNext
    Small Great Things

    Stage One: Transition — Kennedy 4

    by

    Picoult, Jodi

    Kennedy McQuar­rie con­fides in her hus­band Mic­ah about her strained rela­tion­ship with her client, Ruth Jef­fer­son, who believes Kennedy is racist. Mic­ah acknowl­edges the racial pow­er dynam­ics at play, prompt­ing Kennedy to defend her aware­ness of sys­temic inequal­i­ties while main­tain­ing that race should­n’t be cen­tral to Ruth’s mur­der tri­al. Their con­ver­sa­tion reveals Kennedy’s inter­nal con­flict as she grap­ples with Ruth’s accu­sa­tions and her own pro­fes­sion­al approach. The ten­sion esca­lates when Kennedy admits she can’t stop replay­ing their argu­ment, hint­ing at her under­ly­ing doubts about her stance.

    Dur­ing a din­ner with Mic­ah’s col­leagues, Kennedy’s mind remains pre­oc­cu­pied with Ruth’s case. She argues that intro­duc­ing race into a crim­i­nal tri­al is as inap­pro­pri­ate as break­ing unspo­ken social rules, com­par­ing it to stand-your-ground cas­es where race is often side­lined. Mic­ah humor­ous­ly cri­tiques her blunt com­mu­ni­ca­tion style, liken­ing her hints to a “Mack truck.” Their ban­ter under­scores Kennedy’s frus­tra­tion and her strug­gle to bal­ance legal strat­e­gy with Ruth’s emo­tion­al needs, fur­ther high­light­ing the dis­con­nect between them.

    The chap­ter takes a dra­mat­ic turn when Rev­erend Wal­lace Mer­cy, a promi­nent racial jus­tice advo­cate, calls Kennedy to announce his involve­ment as Ruth’s advis­er. Kennedy is furi­ous, inter­pret­ing this as a betray­al and a threat to her legal strat­e­gy. She accus­es Mer­cy of exploit­ing Ruth’s case for his plat­form and abrupt­ly ends the call. Mic­ah’s jok­ing remark about Ruth hat­ing her under­scores the deep­en­ing rift between Kennedy and her client, as well as Kennedy’s fear of los­ing con­trol over the case.

    Kennedy rush­es to Ruth’s home late at night, deter­mined to pre­vent her from for­mal­iz­ing Mer­cy’s involve­ment. She admits her con­cern that Mer­cy’s high-pro­file advo­ca­cy could harm Ruth’s case, despite her gen­uine care about the racial injus­tice Ruth faced. The chap­ter ends on a cliffhang­er, with Kennedy plead­ing for five min­utes to explain her­self, leav­ing the res­o­lu­tion of their con­flict unre­solved and the future of their attor­ney-client rela­tion­ship uncer­tain.

    Down­load PDF Sum­ma­ry

    FAQs

    • 1. What is the primary conflict between Kennedy and Ruth in this chapter, and how does it reflect broader societal issues?

      Answer:
      The primary conflict stems from Kennedy’s insistence that race should not be a focal point in Ruth’s criminal trial, while Ruth believes her racial identity and experiences of discrimination are central to her case. This tension mirrors broader societal debates about systemic racism and whether ignoring race perpetuates inequities. Kennedy views race as a distraction from legal strategy, exemplified by her metaphor of treating cancer (the murder charge) before poison ivy (racial bias). Ruth, however, sees this dismissal as part of the problem—a refusal to acknowledge how systemic racism shapes her circumstances. The involvement of Reverend Wallace Mercy underscores Ruth’s desire to center racial justice, challenging Kennedy’s colorblind approach.

      2. Analyze Micah’s role in the chapter. How does his dialogue with Kennedy reveal her blind spots?

      Answer:
      Micah serves as a foil to Kennedy, highlighting her unconscious biases through candid remarks. When he notes, “You’re white and she’s not, and you both happen to live in a world where white people have all the power,” he confronts Kennedy with the structural privilege she overlooks. His analogy about scratching an itch—a subtle critique of her metaphor—suggests that racial bias (the “itch”) demands attention, even if Kennedy prioritizes legal tactics. Micah’s tone is diplomatic but incisive, exposing Kennedy’s defensive stance and her failure to grasp how Ruth’s lived experience informs her legal strategy. His presence underscores the chapter’s theme: well-intentioned allies may still perpetuate harm by dismissing systemic issues.

      3. How does the author use irony in Kennedy’s interaction with Reverend Wallace Mercy?

      Answer:
      The scene is steeped in irony: Kennedy, who earlier dismissed race as irrelevant to Ruth’s case, is suddenly confronted by a prominent racial justice advocate. Her panic—”What. The. Hell.“—reveals the disconnect between her professional control and Ruth’s autonomy. Kennedy accuses Mercy of seeking to “boost [his] ratings,” ironically mirroring the very cynicism she resents when applied to her own motives. The reverend’s calm authority (“Rumors of my superstardom have been greatly exaggerated”) contrasts with Kennedy’s flustered reaction, underscoring her lack of preparedness to engage with race as a legitimate factor. The irony culminates in Micah’s deadpan verdict: “She hates you,” which humorously underscores Kennedy’s missteps.

      4. Evaluate Kennedy’s metaphor of cancer vs. poison ivy. Why does it fail to resonate with Ruth’s perspective?

      Answer:
      Kennedy’s metaphor frames racial discrimination as a superficial concern (poison ivy) compared to the life-or-death stakes of the murder charge (cancer). This analogy fails because it assumes racial bias is separable from the legal case, whereas Ruth experiences them as intertwined. By dismissing the “itch” of racism, Kennedy invalidates Ruth’s lived reality—that systemic bias led to her wrongful accusation. Micah’s reinterpretation (“you keep scratching it”) subtly critiques Kennedy’s oversimplification, suggesting that ignoring racial trauma is impossible for those who endure it. The metaphor ultimately reveals Kennedy’s privilege: she can compartmentalize race, while Ruth cannot.

      5. What does Kennedy’s late-night visit to Ruth suggest about her evolving understanding of the case?

      Answer:
      Kennedy’s impulsive visit—without a coat, driven by urgency—signals a dawning recognition that her approach may alienate Ruth irreparably. Her admission (“It’s not that I don’t care”) hints at self-doubt, though she still frames Wallace Mercy’s involvement as a threat rather than a collaboration. The visit reflects her struggle to balance legal pragmatism with empathy, but her focus on intercepting the release form (not reconciling with Ruth) suggests she prioritizes control over genuine dialogue. This moment foreshadows Kennedy’s potential growth: to defend Ruth effectively, she must confront her own biases and acknowledge the systemic forces shaping the case.

    Quotes

    • 1. “You’re white and she’s not, and you both happen to live in a world where white people have all the power.”

      Micah calls out Kennedy’s racial blind spot, highlighting the systemic power imbalance that Kennedy fails to acknowledge in her defense strategy. This quote represents the central tension between Kennedy’s legal approach and Ruth’s lived experience of racism.

      2. “I work with minority clients every day who’ve been screwed by the healthcare system and the criminal justice system and the educational system. I mean, prisons are run as a business. Someone’s profiting from keeping a steady stream of people going to jail.”

      Kennedy demonstrates awareness of systemic racism while simultaneously refusing to apply this understanding to Ruth’s case. This contradiction shows her cognitive dissonance about race in the legal system.

      3. “But you just don’t bring up race in a criminal trial. It’s like one of those unspoken rules, you know, like Don’t use your brights in oncoming traffic…”

      This quote reveals Kennedy’s adherence to legal norms that avoid addressing racial bias, showing how the justice system maintains colorblindness as an unspoken rule despite racial realities.

      4. “Getting Ruth Jefferson acquitted is my job, not yours. You want to boost your ratings? Don’t think you’re going to do it on my back.”

      Kennedy’s defensive reaction to Reverend Mercy’s involvement shows her territorial approach to the case and her fear of the racial discourse he represents, revealing her discomfort with race being central to the defense.

      5. “It’s not that I don’t care about how you were treated—I do. It’s that I know having Wallace Mercy involved is going to cost you in the short run…”

      In this late-chapter moment, Kennedy begins to show vulnerability about her position, though still maintains her pragmatic approach over Ruth’s desire for racial justice to be acknowledged.

    Quotes

    1. “You’re white and she’s not, and you both happen to live in a world where white people have all the power.”

    Micah calls out Kennedy’s racial blind spot, highlighting the systemic power imbalance that Kennedy fails to acknowledge in her defense strategy. This quote represents the central tension between Kennedy’s legal approach and Ruth’s lived experience of racism.

    2. “I work with minority clients every day who’ve been screwed by the healthcare system and the criminal justice system and the educational system. I mean, prisons are run as a business. Someone’s profiting from keeping a steady stream of people going to jail.”

    Kennedy demonstrates awareness of systemic racism while simultaneously refusing to apply this understanding to Ruth’s case. This contradiction shows her cognitive dissonance about race in the legal system.

    3. “But you just don’t bring up race in a criminal trial. It’s like one of those unspoken rules, you know, like Don’t use your brights in oncoming traffic…”

    This quote reveals Kennedy’s adherence to legal norms that avoid addressing racial bias, showing how the justice system maintains colorblindness as an unspoken rule despite racial realities.

    4. “Getting Ruth Jefferson acquitted is my job, not yours. You want to boost your ratings? Don’t think you’re going to do it on my back.”

    Kennedy’s defensive reaction to Reverend Mercy’s involvement shows her territorial approach to the case and her fear of the racial discourse he represents, revealing her discomfort with race being central to the defense.

    5. “It’s not that I don’t care about how you were treated—I do. It’s that I know having Wallace Mercy involved is going to cost you in the short run…”

    In this late-chapter moment, Kennedy begins to show vulnerability about her position, though still maintains her pragmatic approach over Ruth’s desire for racial justice to be acknowledged.

    FAQs

    1. What is the primary conflict between Kennedy and Ruth in this chapter, and how does it reflect broader societal issues?

    Answer:
    The primary conflict stems from Kennedy’s insistence that race should not be a focal point in Ruth’s criminal trial, while Ruth believes her racial identity and experiences of discrimination are central to her case. This tension mirrors broader societal debates about systemic racism and whether ignoring race perpetuates inequities. Kennedy views race as a distraction from legal strategy, exemplified by her metaphor of treating cancer (the murder charge) before poison ivy (racial bias). Ruth, however, sees this dismissal as part of the problem—a refusal to acknowledge how systemic racism shapes her circumstances. The involvement of Reverend Wallace Mercy underscores Ruth’s desire to center racial justice, challenging Kennedy’s colorblind approach.

    2. Analyze Micah’s role in the chapter. How does his dialogue with Kennedy reveal her blind spots?

    Answer:
    Micah serves as a foil to Kennedy, highlighting her unconscious biases through candid remarks. When he notes, “You’re white and she’s not, and you both happen to live in a world where white people have all the power,” he confronts Kennedy with the structural privilege she overlooks. His analogy about scratching an itch—a subtle critique of her metaphor—suggests that racial bias (the “itch”) demands attention, even if Kennedy prioritizes legal tactics. Micah’s tone is diplomatic but incisive, exposing Kennedy’s defensive stance and her failure to grasp how Ruth’s lived experience informs her legal strategy. His presence underscores the chapter’s theme: well-intentioned allies may still perpetuate harm by dismissing systemic issues.

    3. How does the author use irony in Kennedy’s interaction with Reverend Wallace Mercy?

    Answer:
    The scene is steeped in irony: Kennedy, who earlier dismissed race as irrelevant to Ruth’s case, is suddenly confronted by a prominent racial justice advocate. Her panic—”What. The. Hell.“—reveals the disconnect between her professional control and Ruth’s autonomy. Kennedy accuses Mercy of seeking to “boost [his] ratings,” ironically mirroring the very cynicism she resents when applied to her own motives. The reverend’s calm authority (“Rumors of my superstardom have been greatly exaggerated”) contrasts with Kennedy’s flustered reaction, underscoring her lack of preparedness to engage with race as a legitimate factor. The irony culminates in Micah’s deadpan verdict: “She hates you,” which humorously underscores Kennedy’s missteps.

    4. Evaluate Kennedy’s metaphor of cancer vs. poison ivy. Why does it fail to resonate with Ruth’s perspective?

    Answer:
    Kennedy’s metaphor frames racial discrimination as a superficial concern (poison ivy) compared to the life-or-death stakes of the murder charge (cancer). This analogy fails because it assumes racial bias is separable from the legal case, whereas Ruth experiences them as intertwined. By dismissing the “itch” of racism, Kennedy invalidates Ruth’s lived reality—that systemic bias led to her wrongful accusation. Micah’s reinterpretation (“you keep scratching it”) subtly critiques Kennedy’s oversimplification, suggesting that ignoring racial trauma is impossible for those who endure it. The metaphor ultimately reveals Kennedy’s privilege: she can compartmentalize race, while Ruth cannot.

    5. What does Kennedy’s late-night visit to Ruth suggest about her evolving understanding of the case?

    Answer:
    Kennedy’s impulsive visit—without a coat, driven by urgency—signals a dawning recognition that her approach may alienate Ruth irreparably. Her admission (“It’s not that I don’t care”) hints at self-doubt, though she still frames Wallace Mercy’s involvement as a threat rather than a collaboration. The visit reflects her struggle to balance legal pragmatism with empathy, but her focus on intercepting the release form (not reconciling with Ruth) suggests she prioritizes control over genuine dialogue. This moment foreshadows Kennedy’s potential growth: to defend Ruth effectively, she must confront her own biases and acknowledge the systemic forces shaping the case.

    Note