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.

    The chap­ter opens with Turk Bauer attempt­ing to com­fort his wife, Brit, dur­ing a tense moment in the court­room. He reminds her to focus on their shared dream of vis­it­ing Vien­na, a calm­ing tech­nique they used dur­ing the birth of their son, Davis. How­ev­er, the con­text is now trag­i­cal­ly different—they are grap­pling with the loss of their child. The pros­e­cu­tor, Odette Law­ton, inter­rupts, crit­i­ciz­ing Brit’s emo­tion­al out­burst in court as a risky move. Brit reacts defi­ant­ly, assert­ing her gen­uine grief, and storms out after a heat­ed exchange, leav­ing Turk to man­age the sit­u­a­tion.

    Odette con­fronts Turk about the chal­lenges of the tri­al, reveal­ing that Brit’s unpre­dictable behav­ior makes her an unre­li­able wit­ness. She insists that Brit’s tes­ti­mo­ny could harm their case, espe­cial­ly giv­en her poten­tial to express racist sen­ti­ments. Turk argues that the jury needs to hear from Davis’s moth­er, but Odette remains firm, empha­siz­ing that Turk must be the sole wit­ness. The ten­sion between them under­scores the racial and per­son­al divides at play, as Odette, a Black woman, nav­i­gates the Bauers’ prej­u­dices while striv­ing to secure jus­tice for their son.

    A piv­otal moment occurs when Odette informs Turk that med­ical evi­dence sug­gests Davis had an undi­ag­nosed meta­bol­ic dis­or­der, MCADD, which may have con­tributed to his death. Turk is shak­en by this rev­e­la­tion, grap­pling with the ran­dom­ness of the tragedy. Odette advis­es him to stay focused dur­ing his tes­ti­mo­ny, empha­siz­ing that the tri­al must cen­ter on the cer­tain­ty of Davis’s death rather than spec­u­la­tive med­ical the­o­ries. Turk inter­nal­izes this, resolv­ing to ensure some­one is held account­able.

    As Turk pre­pares to tes­ti­fy, he reflects on his past, par­tic­u­lar­ly his time in jail and his com­pli­cat­ed rela­tion­ship with a Black inmate named Twinkie. These mem­o­ries high­light his inter­nal con­flict about race and iden­ti­ty. Mean­while, Brit returns to the court­room, vis­i­bly com­posed but still emo­tion­al­ly raw. The chap­ter ends with Turk swear­ing on the Bible, sym­bol­iz­ing both his com­mit­ment to the tri­al and his unre­solved moral dilem­mas, set­ting the stage for his tes­ti­mo­ny and the ongo­ing legal bat­tle.

    FAQs

    • 1. What is the significance of Turk telling Brit to “think of Vienna” during the trial?

      Answer:
      The mention of Vienna serves as a calming mechanism for Brit, originally used during the birth of their son Davis. Turk references this to help Brit cope with the trauma of seeing their deceased child’s image. Vienna represents an idealized future vacation spot depicted in an antique shop picture—a white, orderly world that aligns with their worldview. This moment highlights the tragic irony that the same word meant to bring comfort during birth now serves to distance Brit from grief. The chapter underscores how their shared fantasy of Vienna contrasts sharply with their current reality of loss and racial tension in the courtroom.

      2. How does the prosecutor, Odette Lawton, justify her decision not to call Brit as a witness?

      Answer:
      Odette argues that Brit is too emotionally volatile and unpredictable to testify effectively. She cites Brit’s outburst in court (including calling Odette a “bitch”) and fears Brit might unleash racist remarks at the defendant, jeopardizing the case. Odette emphasizes that while the Bauers may resent her, she is their only path to justice. Her decision reflects legal strategy: avoiding a “wild card” witness who could alienate the jury. This tension reveals the conflict between the Bauers’ raw grief and the calculated demands of the legal system, as well as their unspoken racism toward Odette, a Black woman representing them.

      3. Analyze how Turk’s reflection on Twinkie reveals his internal conflict about race.

      Answer:
      While swearing on the Bible, Turk recalls Twinkie, a Black inmate he befriended in jail. He wrestles with whether their bond would transcend racial divides outside prison, questioning if he’d see Twinkie as a friend or revert to racist labels (“another nigger”). This introspection highlights Turk’s cognitive dissonance: his lived experience challenged his white supremacist beliefs, yet societal conditioning lingers. The passage underscores how systemic racism warps personal connections, leaving Turk torn between empathy and prejudice. His momentary humanity contrasts with his earlier courtroom focus on vengeance, adding complexity to his character.

      4. How does the revelation about Davis’s MCADD diagnosis impact Turk’s perspective on the trial?

      Answer:
      The MCADD diagnosis (a metabolic disorder) destabilizes Turk’s certainty about the case. Learning Davis had an undiagnosed condition introduces doubt—that his death might not solely be the nurse’s fault. This clashes with Turk’s need for a clear villain to blame, as seen in his thought: “There is a body. And someone has to pay.” Odette reframes the diagnosis as speculative to keep Turk focused on vengeance, but the revelation forces Turk to confront the randomness of tragedy. His momentary vulnerability (“How could a hospital overlook that?”) contrasts with his later resolve to pursue retribution, showing grief’s manipulation by legal narratives.

      5. Evaluate how power dynamics operate between the Bauers and Odette Lawton in this chapter.

      Answer:
      Odette holds professional power as the prosecutor, dictating trial strategy (e.g., barring Brit from testifying), but the Bauers resist her authority due to racial prejudice. Brit’s aggression (“bitch”) and Turk’s defiance (“Why don’t you just… win this case?”) reveal their resentment toward a Black woman in control. Odette leverages her legal expertise to manipulate their grief, insisting they conform to her strategy for “justice.” This dynamic exposes systemic irony: racist clients depend on a Black attorney, who must suppress their bigotry to serve them. The tension underscores how race, grief, and power intersect in the legal system.

    Quotes

    • 1. “I PUT MY HANDS ON both sides of Brit’s face and touch my forehead to hers. ‘Breathe,’ I tell her. ‘Think of Vienna.’”

      This opening quote establishes the emotional tension between Turk and Brit as they grapple with their grief over their son’s death. The reference to Vienna—a shared fantasy of escape—contrasts sharply with their current reality in the courtroom, highlighting their fractured coping mechanisms.

      2. “Brit bristles. She pushes away from me and gets up in the lawyer’s face. ‘I am not acting,’ she says, her voice dangerously soft. ‘And you don’t get to tell me what’s a good idea and what’s not, bitch.’”

      This moment reveals Brit’s raw, unfiltered grief and anger, clashing with the prosecutor’s strategic courtroom approach. It underscores the tension between performative justice and authentic emotion, while also exposing Brit’s volatility as a liability in the legal process.

      3. “Your wife is a wild card. And you do not put a wild card in the witness box.”

      The prosecutor’s blunt assessment captures the central conflict between personal trauma and legal strategy. This quote reflects how the justice system often requires victims to conform to narrow expectations of “acceptable” grief to secure a conviction.

      4. “I feel my knees giving out, and I sit heavily on the tabletop. My baby boy was actually sick, and we didn’t know? How could a hospital overlook that? It’s so…random. So pointless.”

      Turk’s visceral reaction to learning about his son’s undiagnosed condition introduces the theme of moral ambiguity. This pivotal moment shakes his black-and-white worldview, forcing him to confront the possibility that systemic failures—not just individual malice—contributed to the tragedy.

      5. “All you need to remember is that there is no room for maybe in this trial. There is no this might have happened. It already did happen. Your son is dead.”

      The prosecutor’s instruction epitomizes the chapter’s exploration of justice as a performative narrative rather than a search for complex truths. This quote highlights how legal proceedings often demand simplified causality from messy human tragedies.

    Quotes

    1. “I PUT MY HANDS ON both sides of Brit’s face and touch my forehead to hers. ‘Breathe,’ I tell her. ‘Think of Vienna.’”

    This opening quote establishes the emotional tension between Turk and Brit as they grapple with their grief over their son’s death. The reference to Vienna—a shared fantasy of escape—contrasts sharply with their current reality in the courtroom, highlighting their fractured coping mechanisms.

    2. “Brit bristles. She pushes away from me and gets up in the lawyer’s face. ‘I am not acting,’ she says, her voice dangerously soft. ‘And you don’t get to tell me what’s a good idea and what’s not, bitch.’”

    This moment reveals Brit’s raw, unfiltered grief and anger, clashing with the prosecutor’s strategic courtroom approach. It underscores the tension between performative justice and authentic emotion, while also exposing Brit’s volatility as a liability in the legal process.

    3. “Your wife is a wild card. And you do not put a wild card in the witness box.”

    The prosecutor’s blunt assessment captures the central conflict between personal trauma and legal strategy. This quote reflects how the justice system often requires victims to conform to narrow expectations of “acceptable” grief to secure a conviction.

    4. “I feel my knees giving out, and I sit heavily on the tabletop. My baby boy was actually sick, and we didn’t know? How could a hospital overlook that? It’s so…random. So pointless.”

    Turk’s visceral reaction to learning about his son’s undiagnosed condition introduces the theme of moral ambiguity. This pivotal moment shakes his black-and-white worldview, forcing him to confront the possibility that systemic failures—not just individual malice—contributed to the tragedy.

    5. “All you need to remember is that there is no room for maybe in this trial. There is no this might have happened. It already did happen. Your son is dead.”

    The prosecutor’s instruction epitomizes the chapter’s exploration of justice as a performative narrative rather than a search for complex truths. This quote highlights how legal proceedings often demand simplified causality from messy human tragedies.

    FAQs

    1. What is the significance of Turk telling Brit to “think of Vienna” during the trial?

    Answer:
    The mention of Vienna serves as a calming mechanism for Brit, originally used during the birth of their son Davis. Turk references this to help Brit cope with the trauma of seeing their deceased child’s image. Vienna represents an idealized future vacation spot depicted in an antique shop picture—a white, orderly world that aligns with their worldview. This moment highlights the tragic irony that the same word meant to bring comfort during birth now serves to distance Brit from grief. The chapter underscores how their shared fantasy of Vienna contrasts sharply with their current reality of loss and racial tension in the courtroom.

    2. How does the prosecutor, Odette Lawton, justify her decision not to call Brit as a witness?

    Answer:
    Odette argues that Brit is too emotionally volatile and unpredictable to testify effectively. She cites Brit’s outburst in court (including calling Odette a “bitch”) and fears Brit might unleash racist remarks at the defendant, jeopardizing the case. Odette emphasizes that while the Bauers may resent her, she is their only path to justice. Her decision reflects legal strategy: avoiding a “wild card” witness who could alienate the jury. This tension reveals the conflict between the Bauers’ raw grief and the calculated demands of the legal system, as well as their unspoken racism toward Odette, a Black woman representing them.

    3. Analyze how Turk’s reflection on Twinkie reveals his internal conflict about race.

    Answer:
    While swearing on the Bible, Turk recalls Twinkie, a Black inmate he befriended in jail. He wrestles with whether their bond would transcend racial divides outside prison, questioning if he’d see Twinkie as a friend or revert to racist labels (“another nigger”). This introspection highlights Turk’s cognitive dissonance: his lived experience challenged his white supremacist beliefs, yet societal conditioning lingers. The passage underscores how systemic racism warps personal connections, leaving Turk torn between empathy and prejudice. His momentary humanity contrasts with his earlier courtroom focus on vengeance, adding complexity to his character.

    4. How does the revelation about Davis’s MCADD diagnosis impact Turk’s perspective on the trial?

    Answer:
    The MCADD diagnosis (a metabolic disorder) destabilizes Turk’s certainty about the case. Learning Davis had an undiagnosed condition introduces doubt—that his death might not solely be the nurse’s fault. This clashes with Turk’s need for a clear villain to blame, as seen in his thought: “There is a body. And someone has to pay.” Odette reframes the diagnosis as speculative to keep Turk focused on vengeance, but the revelation forces Turk to confront the randomness of tragedy. His momentary vulnerability (“How could a hospital overlook that?”) contrasts with his later resolve to pursue retribution, showing grief’s manipulation by legal narratives.

    5. Evaluate how power dynamics operate between the Bauers and Odette Lawton in this chapter.

    Answer:
    Odette holds professional power as the prosecutor, dictating trial strategy (e.g., barring Brit from testifying), but the Bauers resist her authority due to racial prejudice. Brit’s aggression (“bitch”) and Turk’s defiance (“Why don’t you just… win this case?”) reveal their resentment toward a Black woman in control. Odette leverages her legal expertise to manipulate their grief, insisting they conform to her strategy for “justice.” This dynamic exposes systemic irony: racist clients depend on a Black attorney, who must suppress their bigotry to serve them. The tension underscores how race, grief, and power intersect in the legal system.

    Note