Small Great Things
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.
Stage One: Transition — Kennedy 1
byPicoult, Jodi
The chapter opens with Kennedy arriving at her office, where her colleague Ed Gourakis is complaining about the new hire, Howard. Ed, a privileged yet perpetually dissatisfied public defender, makes snide remarks suggesting Howard was hired to meet diversity quotas rather than merit. Kennedy deflects Ed’s negativity with sarcasm and refuses to engage further, focusing instead on her work. The tension escalates when Howard, a young Black man in a bow tie and hipster glasses, reveals he overheard Ed’s comments, creating an awkward but revealing moment about workplace dynamics.
Kennedy quickly shifts to warmly welcoming Howard, offering assistance and suggesting they have lunch together. She attempts to distance herself from Ed’s prejudiced remarks, praising Howard for giving back to his community. However, Howard humorously deflates her assumption by revealing he grew up in Darien, one of Connecticut’s wealthiest towns. This exchange highlights Kennedy’s well-intentioned but slightly patronizing attitude, as well as Howard’s ability to navigate microaggressions with grace. The scene underscores themes of privilege, perception, and the complexities of racial dynamics in professional settings.
The narrative then shifts to Kennedy’s hectic morning in court, where she handles a series of arraignments for defendants ranging from a non-English speaker to an identity thief. She reflects on the chaotic nature of her job, comparing it to a rotating door where she must quickly adapt to new cases with minimal preparation. Kennedy’s internal monologue reveals her frustration with the system, as high-profile cases often get reassigned to more senior or private attorneys, leaving her with less rewarding work.
The chapter concludes with Kennedy’s resigned acknowledgment of the challenges in her role as a public defender. Despite her efforts to secure fair outcomes for her clients, systemic issues and office politics often undermine her work. The juxtaposition of her interactions with Howard and her courtroom experiences paints a vivid picture of the personal and professional hurdles she faces, blending themes of racial tension, workplace inequality, and the grind of public service.
FAQs
1. How does Ed Gourakis characterize the new hire Howard, and what does this reveal about Ed’s personality and biases?
Answer:
Ed Gourakis makes two disparaging remarks about Howard: he suggests Howard was hired to meet a diversity target and mockingly describes him as “so wet behind the ears he’s leaving a trail.” These comments reveal Ed’s entitlement and implicit bias. His focus on Howard’s perceived inexperience (rather than qualifications) and his assumption that diversity hiring undermines merit reflect a privileged worldview. The text notes Ed comes from wealth (“a trust fund so large it doesn’t matter how shitty our salaries are”) and habitually complains about minor inconveniences, reinforcing his lack of self-awareness and tendency to dismiss others’ value.2. Analyze Kennedy’s reaction to Howard after realizing he overheard Ed’s comments. What does her behavior suggest about her professional ethics and interpersonal skills?
Answer:
Kennedy immediately adopts an exaggeratedly warm demeanor, offering assistance, inviting Howard to lunch, and assuring him not everyone shares Ed’s views. While well-intentioned, her reaction borders on performative allyship—especially when she praises Howard for “giving back to your community,” assuming his background aligns with stereotypes about Black professionals. Her effort to distance herself from Ed’s bias is ethical, but her assumption about Howard’s socioeconomic status (later corrected when he mentions growing up in wealthy Darien) reveals unconscious biases of her own. This highlights the complexity of addressing workplace discrimination even with good intentions.3. What challenges does Kennedy face during arraignment day, and how do these reflect broader systemic issues in public defense work?
Answer:
Kennedy describes arraignment day as requiring “Perry Mason with ESP”—she must quickly advocate for strangers with minimal case knowledge, often losing clients to senior attorneys or private counsel afterward. This underscores systemic problems: underfunded public defense systems overload attorneys, prioritizing speed over quality representation. The text notes even successful bail arguments rarely lead to trial involvement, demoralizing defenders and disadvantaging clients. The revolving-door nature of the work (“trapped in a rotating door”) metaphorically critiques a justice system where marginalized defendants receive fragmented, overburdened counsel.4. Howard’s response to Kennedy’s comment about “giving back to your community” subverts expectations. Why is this moment significant, and what theme does it introduce?
Answer:
Howard’s revelation that he grew up in affluent Darien challenges Kennedy’s assumption that his race defines his background or motivations. This moment underscores the theme of implicit bias: even well-meaning allies like Kennedy may project narratives onto people of color. The disconnect between Howard’s actual upbringing (wealthy, likely privileged) and Kennedy’s praise for “giving back” highlights how racial stereotypes persist in professional settings. It also introduces the idea that diversity in public defense isn’t solely about “community representation” but about equitable opportunity regardless of background.5. Evaluate the author’s use of irony in this chapter, particularly in contrasting characters’ perspectives.
Answer:
The chapter employs irony to critique workplace dynamics and bias. For example:- Ed, who benefits from nepotism (implied by his “nephew” remark), accuses Howard of being a diversity hire.
- Kennedy, who dislikes Ed’s overt prejudice, unintentionally stereotypes Howard herself.
- Howard, assumed to be inexperienced, demonstrates maturity by calmly addressing the awkward situation.
These contrasts reveal how systemic biases operate at multiple levels, from blatant (Ed) to subtle (Kennedy). The irony culminates in Howard’s Darien comment—a wealthy Black man in a role others assume is “charitable,” challenging simplistic notions of race and class in professional spaces.
- Ed, who benefits from nepotism (implied by his “nephew” remark), accuses Howard of being a diversity hire.
Quotes
1. “Ed is the kind of guy who went into public defense because he could. In other words—he has a trust fund so large it doesn’t matter how shitty our salaries are.”
This quote sharply characterizes Ed’s privilege and detachment from the realities of public defense work, setting up a contrast with Howard’s later introduction. It critiques systemic inequities even within justice-focused professions.
2. “‘Well, he’s clearly here to meet a diversity target. Just look for the puddles on the floor. This guy is so wet behind the ears he’s leaving a trail.’”
Ed’s racist microaggression reveals workplace dynamics and foreshadows Howard’s introduction. The metaphor’s awkwardness underscores the speaker’s prejudice while highlighting the challenges marginalized professionals face.
3. “‘Thanks, but…I grew up in Darien.’ Darien. One of the wealthiest towns in the state.”
Howard’s revelation subverts Kennedy’s (and the reader’s) assumptions about race and class, challenging stereotypes about who “gives back to their community.” This moment underscores the complexity of identity.
4. “The way it works in New Haven Superior Court on arraignment day is that one of us from the PD’s office stands in for anyone who is brought before a judge and doesn’t have a lawyer but needs one. It’s like being trapped in a rotating door…”
This vivid description exposes the chaotic reality of public defense work, emphasizing the systemic pressures and impersonal nature of arraignment proceedings that form the backdrop of Kennedy’s professional challenges.
5. “Then again, as I often tell myself, if my clients were all smarter, my job would be obsolete.”
Kennedy’s dark humor reveals both her professional pragmatism and the cyclical nature of poverty and crime. The quote encapsulates the frustrating paradox at the heart of public defense work.