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 cap­tures the tense wait­ing peri­od as Ruth and Kennedy await the jury’s ver­dict in their high-stakes tri­al. Dur­ing this time, Kennedy reflects on the racial dis­par­i­ties in the jus­tice sys­tem, not­ing the over­whelm­ing num­ber of black men in arraign­ments. Mean­while, Ruth gains pub­lic sup­port through an appear­ance on Wal­lace Mer­cy’s show, where she receives dona­tions and heart­felt mes­sages from sup­port­ers world­wide. The nar­ra­tive also reveals Kennedy’s clever dis­cov­ery of Brit­tany Bauer’s hid­den African Amer­i­can her­itage through med­ical records, expos­ing the hypocrisy of the Bauer fam­i­ly’s racism.

    As the jury delib­er­a­tion stretch­es into a sec­ond day, ten­sions rise among the group. Howard research­es sen­tenc­ing dis­par­i­ties between crack and cocaine offens­es, high­light­ing sys­temic racial bias in drug-relat­ed con­vic­tions. Ruth grows increas­ing­ly anx­ious, inter­pret­ing the pro­longed delib­er­a­tion as a bad sign, though Kennedy attempts to reas­sure her. The group’s cama­raderie is test­ed by the stress, with Howard’s relent­less legal analy­sis adding to the charged atmos­phere. The chap­ter under­scores the emo­tion­al toll of the tri­al on all involved.

    The jury even­tu­al­ly reports a dead­lock, split eleven to one, forc­ing the judge to deliv­er an Allen charge urg­ing fur­ther delib­er­a­tion. Kennedy and Ruth take a brief respite, shar­ing a moment of dark humor over cof­fee that momen­tar­i­ly light­ens the mood. Their laugh­ter at Ruth’s order for “black” cof­fee becomes a sub­tle nod to the racial ten­sions under­ly­ing their case. This scene con­trasts sharply with the grav­i­ty of their sit­u­a­tion, empha­siz­ing the com­plex­i­ty of their bond and the shared bur­den they car­ry.

    The chap­ter con­cludes with Judge Thun­der declar­ing a mis­tri­al due to the hung jury, leav­ing the out­come unre­solved. Kennedy and Howard spec­u­late that juror num­ber twelve—the lone holdout—may have been the dis­sent­ing voice, hint­ing at poten­tial racial or ide­o­log­i­cal divides with­in the jury. The unre­solved ver­dict leaves Ruth’s fate uncer­tain, set­ting the stage for fur­ther legal bat­tles. The chap­ter ends on a note of lin­ger­ing ten­sion, with the char­ac­ters brac­ing for the next phase of their fight for jus­tice.

    FAQs

    • 1. What key discovery did Kennedy make about Brittany Bauer’s background, and how did it impact the case?

      Answer:
      Kennedy discovered through neonatal screening records that Brittany Bauer carried the sickle-cell trait, which is statistically rare in white individuals (1 in 10,000) but more common in African Americans (1 in 12). This, combined with Brittany’s admission during her deposition that she never knew her mother, led Kennedy to suspect Brittany had African American ancestry. She collaborated with Wallace Mercy to track down Brittany’s birth mother, Adele Adams, revealing the hypocrisy of Turk Bauer’s racism. While this revelation didn’t directly affect the legal case, it underscored the racial tensions central to the trial and served as a symbolic victory.

      2. How does Howard’s research on sentencing disparities between crack and cocaine offenses reflect broader themes in the chapter?

      Answer:
      Howard’s research highlights systemic racial bias in the justice system, mirroring the prejudice Ruth faces in her trial. He notes that crack offenses (84% of which involve Black defendants) historically carried harsher sentences than cocaine offenses (18:1 disparity), despite being chemically similar. This parallels the unequal treatment Ruth experiences as a Black woman on trial. Howard’s focus on appeal strategies underscores how legal systems perpetuate inequality, reinforcing the chapter’s critique of institutional racism and the need for reform.

      3. Analyze the significance of Ruth and Kennedy sharing a moment of laughter over “black coffee.”

      Answer:
      The moment is layered with irony and camaraderie. When Ruth orders her coffee “black,” the double entendre—referencing both the drink and racial identity—triggers shared laughter. This breaks the tension of the trial’s uncertainty and symbolizes their growing bond despite racial and cultural differences. The barista’s confusion mirrors society’s inability to understand their connection, emphasizing how their friendship transcends conventional expectations. The scene humanizes both characters, showing solidarity in adversity.

      4. Why does Ruth interpret the jury’s delay as a bad sign, and what does this reveal about her perspective on justice?

      Answer:
      Ruth worries that a quick verdict would favor acquittal, while prolonged deliberation suggests disagreement—likely along racial lines. Her anxiety reflects lived experience with a justice system she perceives as biased against Black defendants. Kennedy’s reassurance (“No news is good news”) feels hollow to Ruth, highlighting their differing trust in the system. This moment underscores Ruth’s awareness of racial inequity and her skepticism about receiving fair treatment, contrasting with Kennedy’s (initially) more optimistic, albeit naive, outlook.

      5. How does the judge’s Allen charge to the deadlocked jury reflect the tension between justice and procedural efficiency?

      Answer:
      The judge’s Allen charge prioritizes resolving the case over ensuring unanimous consensus, emphasizing the cost and effort of a retrial. His plea for jurors to “hear another’s point of view” subtly pressures dissenters to conform, potentially compromising individual convictions for the sake of efficiency. This mirrors systemic flaws where procedural deadlines overshadow nuanced deliberation, especially in racially charged cases. The 11-1 split suggests deep division, possibly along racial lines, raising questions about whether justice is served by forcing agreement rather than addressing root disagreements.

    Quotes

    • 1. “I read an article on the front page of the paper, about a march at Yale by students of color, who want—among other things—to rechristen a residential college currently named for John C. Calhoun, a U.S. vice president who supported slavery and secession.”

      This quote highlights the ongoing cultural reckoning with systemic racism and historical figures tied to oppression. It sets the stage for the chapter’s exploration of racial justice themes by showing how these issues permeate society beyond the courtroom.

      2. “One in twelve African Americans carry the sickle-cell trait. One in ten thousand white people carry it. Suddenly, it looked less like a wild card.”

      This revelation about genetic probabilities becomes crucial evidence exposing the hypocrisy of white supremacist Turk Bauer’s situation. The quote demonstrates how scientific facts can undermine racist ideologies in unexpected ways.

      3. “Up until 2010, a person convicted of possession with intent to distribute fifty grams or more of crack got a minimum of ten years in prison. To get the same sentence for cocaine, you had to distribute five thousand grams. Even now, the sentencing disparity ratio’s eighteen to one.”

      This statistic starkly illustrates systemic racism in the justice system, a central theme of the novel. Howard’s research underscores how racial bias becomes institutionalized through seemingly neutral policies.

      4. “We are both laughing so hard that the barista looks at us as if we are crazy, as if we are speaking a language she can’t understand. Which, I guess, is not all that far from the truth.”

      This poignant moment of shared humor about racial terminology (“black” coffee) represents a breakthrough in Kennedy and Ruth’s cross-racial understanding. It symbolizes how their lived experiences create perspectives that others may not comprehend.

      5. “I got a note from the foreman. We have a hung jury. Eleven to one…‘Juror number twelve,’ we say simultaneously.”

      The deadlocked jury and immediate recognition of the holdout juror (#12, the black juror) encapsulates the novel’s examination of how racial perspectives shape interpretations of justice. This moment leaves the reader questioning whether true impartiality is possible.

    Quotes

    1. “I read an article on the front page of the paper, about a march at Yale by students of color, who want—among other things—to rechristen a residential college currently named for John C. Calhoun, a U.S. vice president who supported slavery and secession.”

    This quote highlights the ongoing cultural reckoning with systemic racism and historical figures tied to oppression. It sets the stage for the chapter’s exploration of racial justice themes by showing how these issues permeate society beyond the courtroom.

    2. “One in twelve African Americans carry the sickle-cell trait. One in ten thousand white people carry it. Suddenly, it looked less like a wild card.”

    This revelation about genetic probabilities becomes crucial evidence exposing the hypocrisy of white supremacist Turk Bauer’s situation. The quote demonstrates how scientific facts can undermine racist ideologies in unexpected ways.

    3. “Up until 2010, a person convicted of possession with intent to distribute fifty grams or more of crack got a minimum of ten years in prison. To get the same sentence for cocaine, you had to distribute five thousand grams. Even now, the sentencing disparity ratio’s eighteen to one.”

    This statistic starkly illustrates systemic racism in the justice system, a central theme of the novel. Howard’s research underscores how racial bias becomes institutionalized through seemingly neutral policies.

    4. “We are both laughing so hard that the barista looks at us as if we are crazy, as if we are speaking a language she can’t understand. Which, I guess, is not all that far from the truth.”

    This poignant moment of shared humor about racial terminology (“black” coffee) represents a breakthrough in Kennedy and Ruth’s cross-racial understanding. It symbolizes how their lived experiences create perspectives that others may not comprehend.

    5. “I got a note from the foreman. We have a hung jury. Eleven to one…‘Juror number twelve,’ we say simultaneously.”

    The deadlocked jury and immediate recognition of the holdout juror (#12, the black juror) encapsulates the novel’s examination of how racial perspectives shape interpretations of justice. This moment leaves the reader questioning whether true impartiality is possible.

    FAQs

    1. What key discovery did Kennedy make about Brittany Bauer’s background, and how did it impact the case?

    Answer:
    Kennedy discovered through neonatal screening records that Brittany Bauer carried the sickle-cell trait, which is statistically rare in white individuals (1 in 10,000) but more common in African Americans (1 in 12). This, combined with Brittany’s admission during her deposition that she never knew her mother, led Kennedy to suspect Brittany had African American ancestry. She collaborated with Wallace Mercy to track down Brittany’s birth mother, Adele Adams, revealing the hypocrisy of Turk Bauer’s racism. While this revelation didn’t directly affect the legal case, it underscored the racial tensions central to the trial and served as a symbolic victory.

    2. How does Howard’s research on sentencing disparities between crack and cocaine offenses reflect broader themes in the chapter?

    Answer:
    Howard’s research highlights systemic racial bias in the justice system, mirroring the prejudice Ruth faces in her trial. He notes that crack offenses (84% of which involve Black defendants) historically carried harsher sentences than cocaine offenses (18:1 disparity), despite being chemically similar. This parallels the unequal treatment Ruth experiences as a Black woman on trial. Howard’s focus on appeal strategies underscores how legal systems perpetuate inequality, reinforcing the chapter’s critique of institutional racism and the need for reform.

    3. Analyze the significance of Ruth and Kennedy sharing a moment of laughter over “black coffee.”

    Answer:
    The moment is layered with irony and camaraderie. When Ruth orders her coffee “black,” the double entendre—referencing both the drink and racial identity—triggers shared laughter. This breaks the tension of the trial’s uncertainty and symbolizes their growing bond despite racial and cultural differences. The barista’s confusion mirrors society’s inability to understand their connection, emphasizing how their friendship transcends conventional expectations. The scene humanizes both characters, showing solidarity in adversity.

    4. Why does Ruth interpret the jury’s delay as a bad sign, and what does this reveal about her perspective on justice?

    Answer:
    Ruth worries that a quick verdict would favor acquittal, while prolonged deliberation suggests disagreement—likely along racial lines. Her anxiety reflects lived experience with a justice system she perceives as biased against Black defendants. Kennedy’s reassurance (“No news is good news”) feels hollow to Ruth, highlighting their differing trust in the system. This moment underscores Ruth’s awareness of racial inequity and her skepticism about receiving fair treatment, contrasting with Kennedy’s (initially) more optimistic, albeit naive, outlook.

    5. How does the judge’s Allen charge to the deadlocked jury reflect the tension between justice and procedural efficiency?

    Answer:
    The judge’s Allen charge prioritizes resolving the case over ensuring unanimous consensus, emphasizing the cost and effort of a retrial. His plea for jurors to “hear another’s point of view” subtly pressures dissenters to conform, potentially compromising individual convictions for the sake of efficiency. This mirrors systemic flaws where procedural deadlines overshadow nuanced deliberation, especially in racially charged cases. The 11-1 split suggests deep division, possibly along racial lines, raising questions about whether justice is served by forcing agreement rather than addressing root disagreements.

    Note