"Jodi Picoult is a mean person." Discuss.

Disclaimer: I have not read My Sister's Keeper. I probably won't read this book. Jodi may be a wonderful writer or a terrible writer. I don't know, but I wish her well.

For those who don't know, this book has a "shocking" twist ending. (You can find it on Wikipedia; I did.) It seems that this ending is both tragic for the characters, and comes out of left field for the reader. Which prompted my friend of mine to say today:

"I thought it was a really cruel thing to do to the reader and that Jodi Piccoult must be a mean person."

Which now prompts me to say:

Why in the heck would anyone think a bad ending makes a writer a "mean person"?

I've read a number of books that have enraged me because bad things happen to good people. (A Fine Balance, I'm looking at you.) But isn't that kind of the point? To evoke a reaction in the reader, to change our perceptions, to show us that in fact life doesn't tie together in a nice bow at the end of the third act?

I don't know. Hate the book, fine. Hate the writer's particular choices, okay. But hate the writer? Judge the writer's character? Call the writer a big meanie? Really?

As it happens, My Sister's Keeper was the first of her books I read, so the twist did come out of nowhere and it did leave me saying "Nonono THAT can't happen." I wasn't expecting a happy ending but it was unhappy in the wrong way for my expectations.

I don't think that makes the author a mean person though and the twist wasn't quite the end of the book, it did end with hope and happiness.

My only issue with her as a writer is that she does this 'surprise' twist in every book and once you know about them they are expected and easy to work out.

As a person, I saw her as a guest panellist on a call-in talk show and she seemed like a lovely, generous woman who raises issues she cares about by doing something she loves.

I just finished reading a book The Devil's Children: A History of Childhood Murder in which the author says that when telling people what she was researching & planning to write a book about (child on child murders) she would get looks as if she were sick for finding this topic interesting. So obiviously there are people who judge an authors character on what they have written.

I personally think its stupid.. its like saying that an author that has written a book revolved around incest or rape is somehow tied to those things???

There a lot's of real life mean things people can do to each other. Verbally and physically (and probably other ways) both at home at work and anywhere just because people feel like it. Of course a case can be made that some people are too sensitive and perceive slights and put-downs where none were intended and of course some people are really dense etc and don't realize that they have hurt someone...

All this just to say that the idea that a work of fiction like my sister's keeper is 'mean' to a reader is nonsense. People can not like the ending, can discuss it, can never read a book by the same author again because of it... but mean? What the h*ll??

Jodi Picoult wrote a good ending for MY SISTER'S KEEPER. Hollywood messed it up by changing the ending.

Jackie K Cooper
www.jackiekcooper.com

>3 ZJF: - "I personally think its stupid.. its like saying that an author that has written a book revolved around incest or rape is somehow tied to those things???"

Just look at Nabokov's Lolita. A lot of people say they think the author is, really and truly, Humbert; pathetic.

#2 My Sister's Keeper was my first Picoult as well and I didn't guess the twist but I agree with you she does the same thing in all her books - the unexpected twist at the tail end of the book. I'm thinking of Nineteen Minutes and the one where the lawyer's son is abused. It's like she's found a formula that works and she doesn't vary from it and it becomes predictable. So I don't think she's a "mean" writer just an uninspired one.

No, it's not being mean - it's being wealthy. Ms. Picoult discovered a formula that sold books & she has taken advantage of the publicity to enhance that formula into an even more lucrative style. The 1st. book I read Vanishing Acts was fairly well written & the ending was not too much "Out of the blue" she had prepared the reader with hints along the way. 19 Minutes had a very tragic, but reality based theme which again the reader was prepared for. The problem with "out of the blue" endings is that readers start to expect them. If Ms. Picoult wishes to impress her readers again, she might surprise them with an ending that everyone realized was going to happen. Again, trying to sell your books to an audience sated with all kinds of violence is not an easy thing to do, no matter how good a writer one is. If a trick works, go for it.

I think it is just such a shocking ending that you don't know what to do with all that upset. So blame the author... she is mean for causing me so much emotional pain! (I'm kidding). It was a crazy, shocking ending. Someone suggested that I should not make plans after I finished the book. Good advise. I was upset when I heard the movie ending is different. What is up with THAT?

As a former bookseller in New Hampshire, I have met Jodi Picoult on several occasions and she is neither mean nor mercenary. She is a delightful person who is very approachable, not at all pretentious, who takes her work seriously and researches well. It may be true to some extent that her work has become formulaic but this doesn't necessarily reflect on the character of the writer. Most authors come under great pressure from their publishers to repeat successes. The formula may not have been her 'discovery' at all. Several of her books (The Pact and My Sister's Keeper) have been and are being read and discussed in many high schools. She is fortunate to actually make a living at writing and clearly, as many writers might tell you, that can mean some sacrifices.

All that said, I'm not particularly a Picoult fan. While I read and enjoyed Plain Truth, I also read The Tenth Circle which I found much less enjoyable (she was trying to do too much in it, imo).

I agree with Studio1, books that spark an emotional response - either good or bad, make for great discussions in groups. I imagine with this particular story it could get rather heated. I remember discussing House of Sand & Fog and people got worked up into a lather over that one! Those are the best kinds of meetings and also makes you remember the book which is clever on the part of the author but I doubt very much is a true reflection of themselves, they are just telling a story of their own creation.

Whether or not I like or agree with the endings, I do appreciate Picoult's talent in story telling. I love the way in her later books she tells the story through a different character's viewpoint, chapter by chapter. And she usually tackles difficult topics.

In her latest Handle with Care, she addresses the topics of medical malpractice, adolescence, osteogenesis imperfecta, abortion, bulemia, cutting, and friendship. While I did not agree with the ending, and will say up front it is not a feel good ending, I did enjoy the story. And I appreciate the talent it takes to put something like this together.

The fact that Jodi Picoult can elicit such discussion about her books says a lot about her writing.

Isn't it great that we can choose to read or not read a particular book or author? For instance, I choose not to read Stephen King because he frequently uses children or animals as the catalyst for whatever happens and it just kind of makes me ill. But, whatever, there are people out there, both of my daughters included, who do not miss out on any of his books. So to each his own, live and let live, whatever.
belva

I too steer clear of King, annybette. I also like Picoult . You can always count on her for a good ending...

When I read her books, the endings are fun to try to guess, but what really gets me is how she changes how I feel about people and situations. There is no black and white in her books. I actually felt sorry for the boy in Nineteen minutes. Yeah most of her books have a twist at the end, but what really amazes me is how affected I am by her books for days after. I can't read two in a row because I need a mental break after one.

#16 - also spoilers

But Kate asked Anna to refuse to donate anymore, she'd had enough but didn't know how to tell her parents. Anna wanted to continue donating. So she was trying to help her sister all along, not evil at all, she was the only one listening to Kate and the only one Kate trusted.

Evil is as evil does.

Really though, since she is a fictional character, she isn't actually anything. Not good or evil, she's a product of imagination.

So that takes us back to the original question with a twist of it's own, do you think the author is evil because she is the one who makes her characters act as they do?

No, no, no, no, no. Fiction is fiction is fiction. And why kill the messenger anyway? It is a thought put down upon paper. I have yet to know of a thought killing anyone.

wtf? never read any of her books but my mum says their all really sad so maybe thats the point? loads of books i've read have charracters who are evil in and thats never stopped tha author.
also, ivekilledpeople is right, its FICTION!!!

This is a lighthearted spirited discussion. It is full of opinions.. so no one is right.. no one is wrong.

My Sister's Keeper was my first Picoult. The ending blew me away. I think Picoult ran the risk of alienating readers, but her gamble paid off because the poignancy in the epilologue was beautiful and heartbreaking.

However, I too am able to guess most Picoult endings now. I don't blame her for going formula, but I felt she took it too far in Handle with Care. At least in My Sister's Keeper something good came from something bad.

If anyone is interested, I go into great detail comparing the two books on my reviews blog here. I have to forewarn, though: it not only has complete spoilers for the two books, but also for the television series Battlestar Galactica! (which I really did find relevant to the books)

Well, I don't think you can make any sort of cogent argument that the author is a mean person in a general sense because of this (or any) ending, but perhaps the question is a little more nuanced...perhaps what was really being posed was whether it was one mean gesture on the part of the author to include this ending without much (or any) foreshadowing, knowingly taking readers by surprise.

When I read My Sister's Keeper it was the 2nd or 3rd Picoult novel I had read but the first with this kind of unexpected, twist ending. I really did not like the ending.

I googled the book and found an interview with Picoult in which she said it was the only ending that made sense to her and, if I recall correctly, suggested that any readers surprised by the ending would agree with this assessment if they gave it some thought.

I haven't seen the movie but my mom told me the ending, which I understand to be entirely different than the book ending. I may go look it up some more later and see if Picoult has made any comment about the movie ending (which, I take from the previous interview with her I read, she would totally disagree with)....

This to say, I think a persuasive argument can be made that if an author deliberately manipulates readers by throwing in a surprise ending that is a mean gesture (which does not mean the author is mean in a more general sense) but I am quite convinced that Picoult truly believed this was the best ending to the book and the ending she wanted to the story (not the ending she thought would sell the most copies or make her more famous or anything like that). So it wasn't a mean thing for her to do.

But it was a stinky ending!

I don't think it is fair to pull the 'it's only fiction' line. Why are you on this then discussing books? It is fun, interesting, challenging, etc. to discuss these books. We all obviously know they are fiction... but healthy, polite discussion is why we are on this, correct?!

I think it is HILARIOUS the 'I've killed people' has this pov about MSK.

Isn't it great that we can have these discussions about books? Especially when a lot of the people around me are arguing politics ;-)