You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
gnatie 's review for:
House Rules
by Jodi Picoult
Usually Jodi Picoult surprises me, this one did not. The most surprising thing about it was how we didn’t get a proper ending. The big mystery was revealed but we didn’t see the results of the trial or their lives afterword. The ending definitely could have been better imo but I think that’s what would make it a very good book club book, bc you have this conundrum of an ending to discuss. Perhaps it’s Picoults way of letting the jury (her audience) decide what should happen, what the verdict should be.
Other than the ending, the rest of the book was pretty great. Classic Picoult style, multiple POVs and well researched as usual. I enjoyed reading about someone with Asperger’s, I haven’t had that experience yet in a novel and it was different and made me appreciate what people on the spectrum go through.
Another gripe I have about this book is that it’s set up in the beginning to have the detective and the mom get together. He secretly loves her advice column and they’re on opposing sides of this issue. But then nothing happens and we don’t get a reveal of her identity. Why include that little tidbit if they weren’t gonna connect in a deeper way? Instead we get the young lawyer and the mom? Go momma but are you kidding me? That just felt a little bland if I’m being honest. Emotions are high and he’s helping her kid and actually respecting him so she has sex with him… great plot.
Also I get why the lawyer couldn’t ask for the truth from Jacob but why couldn’t the mom?? It was killing me bc I knew Jacob couldn’t have killed her, that’d be too easy. And obviously he was helping his brother bc this book is called house rules for a reason, so why couldn’t the mom have just asked? She didn’t believe that Jacob killed her, so why wouldn’t she ask him what happened, what he did and what he saw?? Seems like it’s bc of plot reasons and prolonging the suspense.
I love how we always get multiple perspectives and sides on the issues presented in Picoults books. Like how Theo struggled with having Jacob as a brother and also knowing he would help him when needed. Or how we got the detectives side as well as the moms.
All in all, not a bad book but I wouldn’t reread it. And I would steer people towards one of her better books. But if you want to learn more about Asperger's, this is a good fiction book for that representation.
Other than the ending, the rest of the book was pretty great. Classic Picoult style, multiple POVs and well researched as usual. I enjoyed reading about someone with Asperger’s, I haven’t had that experience yet in a novel and it was different and made me appreciate what people on the spectrum go through.
Also I get why the lawyer couldn’t ask for the truth from Jacob but why couldn’t the mom?? It was killing me bc I knew Jacob couldn’t have killed her, that’d be too easy. And obviously he was helping his brother bc this book is called house rules for a reason, so why couldn’t the mom have just asked? She didn’t believe that Jacob killed her, so why wouldn’t she ask him what happened, what he did and what he saw?? Seems like it’s bc of plot reasons and prolonging the suspense.
I love how we always get multiple perspectives and sides on the issues presented in Picoults books. Like how Theo struggled with having Jacob as a brother and also knowing he would help him when needed. Or how we got the detectives side as well as the moms.
All in all, not a bad book but I wouldn’t reread it. And I would steer people towards one of her better books. But if you want to learn more about Asperger's, this is a good fiction book for that representation.