Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.91 AVERAGE
3.91 AVERAGE
in my opinion, this was a great look into the mind of someone with Asperger's. I thought she did a great job in that aspect. as far my opinion on the book in general... not one of my favorites of hers.
"House Rules" bills itself as a murder mystery with an Asperger's twist, but Picoult brings nothing original to either the mystery genre or books featuring characters on the Autism spectrum.
I would chalk it up to a mindless, predictable read best left for the times a reader is stuck in an airport, except it is so incredibly long that the reader will have the "mystery" solved and be left to slog through 400 more pages. Much too long for a reluctant reader and too boring and predictable for an intelligent one.
I would chalk it up to a mindless, predictable read best left for the times a reader is stuck in an airport, except it is so incredibly long that the reader will have the "mystery" solved and be left to slog through 400 more pages. Much too long for a reluctant reader and too boring and predictable for an intelligent one.
Another Jodi Picoult book that I really liked. While some people have trouble with the changing voices with each chapter, this is exactly what I like about Jodi Picoult's writing.
And while I had sort of an idea what happened, I didn't know the exact particulars until revealed at the end. So, the part that bothered me was...Jacob's brother, Theo, knew all along that Jacob didn't kill Jess. So, was he just going to never say anything and hope he was acquitted, or did he really want him convicted because he was tired/jealous of all the attention that Jacob got? I guess these are questions Jodi Picoult wanted us to wrestle with. Seems like she leaves questions unanswered at the end of many of her books.
And while I had sort of an idea what happened, I didn't know the exact particulars until revealed at the end. So, the part that bothered me was...Jacob's brother, Theo, knew all along that Jacob didn't kill Jess. So, was he just going to never say anything and hope he was acquitted, or did he really want him convicted because he was tired/jealous of all the attention that Jacob got? I guess these are questions Jodi Picoult wanted us to wrestle with. Seems like she leaves questions unanswered at the end of many of her books.
I've enjoyed several of Jodi Picoult's books, so I decided to give this one a try. Picoult is great at writing about controversial and current topics from multiple perspectives. Her books usually involve some sort of legal battle as well, which keeps me interested as I try to predict what will happen at the end. I was able to figure out one of the big plot twists in House Rules early on, but it was still interesting to watch all the events and discoveries unfold from different characters' perspectives. It was especially interesting to get in the minds of a character with Asperger's and his family members. If you're a fan of courtroom dramas and stories about family relationships, pick this one up!
Jacob Hunt is an 18-year-old with Asperger's. Jess, his social skills tutor, is found dead and Jacob is charged with her murder.
The book has multiple narrators: Jacob; Emma, Jacob's mother; Theo, Jacob's brother; Rich, the detective; and Oliver, Jacob's lawyer. This narrative technique allows for full development of the characters. This creation of round characters is the novel's strong suit; unfortunately, it is the book's only strength.
Jacob has every possible Asperger's characteristic to an extreme degree. He is highly intelligent but has definite quirks. For example, he requires a strict adherence to order and routine, is unable to make eye contact, lacks empathy and fixates on subjects (e.g. forensic science). I am not an expert on autism or Asperger's but I have taught students with the latter, and Picoult seems to have given Jacob every possible Asperger's trait.
The author seems focused on educating the reader about this syndrome. The problem is that there is so much sermonizing that the flow of the narrative is continuously interrupted. Picoult seems to have an Asperger's fixation!
Besides the didactic tone, there are other weaknesses. Jacob's behaviour at the crime scene, which ultimately leads to his being charged, is understandable only because of a coincidence so enormous that it's impossible for a perceptive reader to suspend disbelief. Furthermore, the reader is expected to believe that no one, neither the mother, or the detective or the lawyer, asks Jacob to detail what happened the night of Jess's death. This conversation never takes place despite everyone repeatedly being told that Jacob is incapable of lying, although questions must be worded carefully because he is so literal in his interpretations. A reticence to ask difficult questions is understandable, but not to do so in Jacob's circumstances is not. Picoult's use of this weak ploy to create suspense indicates her lack of sophistication as a writer.
Skip this diatribe on Asperger's. Anyone interested in the subject would be better to read The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time by Mark Haddon.
Please check out my blog (http://schatjesshelves.blogspot.ca/) and follow me on Twitter (@DCYakabuski).
The book has multiple narrators: Jacob; Emma, Jacob's mother; Theo, Jacob's brother; Rich, the detective; and Oliver, Jacob's lawyer. This narrative technique allows for full development of the characters. This creation of round characters is the novel's strong suit; unfortunately, it is the book's only strength.
Jacob has every possible Asperger's characteristic to an extreme degree. He is highly intelligent but has definite quirks. For example, he requires a strict adherence to order and routine, is unable to make eye contact, lacks empathy and fixates on subjects (e.g. forensic science). I am not an expert on autism or Asperger's but I have taught students with the latter, and Picoult seems to have given Jacob every possible Asperger's trait.
The author seems focused on educating the reader about this syndrome. The problem is that there is so much sermonizing that the flow of the narrative is continuously interrupted. Picoult seems to have an Asperger's fixation!
Besides the didactic tone, there are other weaknesses. Jacob's behaviour at the crime scene, which ultimately leads to his being charged, is understandable only because of a coincidence so enormous that it's impossible for a perceptive reader to suspend disbelief. Furthermore, the reader is expected to believe that no one, neither the mother, or the detective or the lawyer, asks Jacob to detail what happened the night of Jess's death. This conversation never takes place despite everyone repeatedly being told that Jacob is incapable of lying, although questions must be worded carefully because he is so literal in his interpretations. A reticence to ask difficult questions is understandable, but not to do so in Jacob's circumstances is not. Picoult's use of this weak ploy to create suspense indicates her lack of sophistication as a writer.
Skip this diatribe on Asperger's. Anyone interested in the subject would be better to read The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time by Mark Haddon.
Please check out my blog (http://schatjesshelves.blogspot.ca/) and follow me on Twitter (@DCYakabuski).
In true Jodi Picoult fashion this book offers so many elements of emotion. You laugh, cry, hurt, and are excited by the characters in this book. It also educates many on the nature of what people with Asperger's Syndrome deal with on a daily basis. Beautiful read!
slow-paced
I really expected to like this novel more - it started out strong, and as usual Picoult did a good job with the multiple view points, but my experiences with her works have been hit or miss, and this definitely fell into the miss category for me.
My second biggest two complaints were the repetition (like telling the same story - from the same view point, same character, etc. - multiple times throughout the novel) and the ending (I don't care if an ending is happy, sad, or indifferent, but I *hate* open ended novels. Make a decision already, author! This was the first Picoult novel I found ended this way and I was so frustrated because I kept telling myself "at least I want to know how it ends before I give up!").
But the biggest complaint of all was how STUPID the characters were that no one once thought to ask someone who was destined to only tell the truth outright what happened the day of the murder. For a few, it made some sense for a while (the defense attorney, yes, definitely. The mom for a while, not wanting to know, sure, but at some point it was just ridiculous. And the police never tried to get a piece by piece description of the events?? What in the world was the prosecutor smoking?!).
I will say, the whole vaccine/autism link was handled well - it actually suggested a viewpoint I'd never considered or heard raised (the mother's), both sides were covered, but it was hardly a large point of the novel.
My second biggest two complaints were the repetition (like telling the same story - from the same view point, same character, etc. - multiple times throughout the novel) and the ending (I don't care if an ending is happy, sad, or indifferent, but I *hate* open ended novels. Make a decision already, author! This was the first Picoult novel I found ended this way and I was so frustrated because I kept telling myself "at least I want to know how it ends before I give up!").
But the biggest complaint of all was how STUPID the characters were that no one once thought to ask someone who was destined to only tell the truth outright what happened the day of the murder. For a few, it made some sense for a while (the defense attorney, yes, definitely. The mom for a while, not wanting to know, sure, but at some point it was just ridiculous. And the police never tried to get a piece by piece description of the events?? What in the world was the prosecutor smoking?!).
I will say, the whole vaccine/autism link was handled well - it actually suggested a viewpoint I'd never considered or heard raised (the mother's), both sides were covered, but it was hardly a large point of the novel.
I'm really disappointed in this book. It was yet another formulaic Jodi Picoult book: a family in crisis going through a court battle, an afflicted child (Asperger’s) who has the worst, most extreme symptoms of his affliction, a neglected rebellious sibling, and a mother-of-the-year candidate. I really wanted to like this book because I used to really like reading Jodi Picoult, but I wanted something fresh. If this was the first Picoult book I had ever read, I would have probably given this book 4 stars, but after reading the same old thing, I could only give it 2 stars. I just wish she would try something new! The next time I pick up a new Picoult book in the library, I’ll tell myself, “Just put down the Picoult book and walk away” (But it will be really hard!)
It was a good read, but her books are getting predictable to me. Take the disease of the day, add in family drama, some crisis, and take us through the story from multiple perspectives. I liked reading this story: a kid with Apsbergers, a murder maybe, a single mom, a neglected younger brother, and what the truth is. It did give me perspective on autism and apsbergers syndrome.