Themes - Race's Role in the Criminal Justice System

     Monster showcases how many people feel about how minorities are unfairly viewed in the criminal justice system. With Steve as the narrator, we felt as if we were able to really know him as a person and always trusted his innocence throughout the story; however, during the numerous talks with his attorney, Ms. O’Brien, it was made clear that the jury did not know him as we did and they would most likely not feel the same. 

Steve’s attorney leads us to believe that the jury will be blinded by his skin color and not be capable of seeing past it. Until the ending is revealed, this way of thinking gives us a feeling of hopelessness surrounding young African Americans when their fate is in the hands of the criminal justice system. 

     Perhaps it's noteworthy that the story takes place in Harlem. While only 27% of New York's population is made up of African Americans, they represent over 57% of the prison populations. Even more, that prison population is YOUNG with over 58% of the inmates being between the ages of 16 and 34. 

**This data was taken from an interesting article which young can find below: 

http://theblinker.com/mainpage/2013/08/27/nycs-jails-are-full-of-young-men-of-color/

Kayla's Personal Thoughts

This book was super neat. I love how it was written like a movie script; it definitely added to the suspense of wondering whether or not Steve was guilty. I loved the little flashbacks throughout the story that panned to semi-important conversations in Steve's life. It was neat to see that normal side of him since the entire story takes place during his jail time. Speaking of that, I like that we don't learn a whole lot about Steve--or any of the other characters for that matter--because there is less room for influence on the readers' judgments on the guiltiness of each character.

I honestly didn't think much of the hug scene while reading. I saw it as a mere act of professionalism by the attorney. It would be neat if there was some indication of affection like this after they were out of the court room, or perhaps a while after the day of the verdict. The fact that the story ends on the cliff-hanger of "What did she see?" makes the reader know that five months after the trial, that idea is still bothering Steve. After further character analysis, I still don't really know what O'Brien was thinking in that moment. The two characters' relationship ended so abruptly, as did the novel. I think there is some parallelism in that; however, questions like "Why did O'Brien shy away from Steve after the verdict was called?" and "Does Steve still see himself as a monster?" still linger. Steve's personal anxiety about being a monster and wondering who he is followed him throughout the novel and beyond. Perhaps the two unanswered questions are supposed to be what follows readers' after they finish the novel.

-Kayla Loos

Character Analysis: Kathy O'Brien

Kathy O'Brien is Steve's lawyer. In theory, it is her job to prove Steve innocent, but O'Brien shows little faith in Steve winning the trial. Throughout the novel, it appears that O'Brien isn't too thrilled about having to work for Steve, let alone holding a job as a lawyer. She has presumptions about Steve on account of his association with the "thugs" of Manhattan. One could say that she's in the wrong for having such presumptions since it's her job to prove Steve innocent; however, one could also argue that perhaps O'Brien's track record in court the reason why she doubts Steve's innocence. She has no emotional drive to prove Steve's innocence, seeing his case as just another trial.

Another topic of discussion is O'Brien's refusal of a hug from Steve after the trail.  This refusal could simply be because O'Brien wishes to maintain professional standards. She works for Steve, she isn't his friend, and the trial results happened simply because she did her job. O'Brien's "stiffness" is a reason why professionalism isn't enough of an explanation for the awkwardness of this scene. It's possible that O'Brien wanted Steve to be proven guilty, but that would require her to be careless of her stature as a reliable lawyer. Does she care? Though she works immensely hard to prove Steve's innocence, she shows little passion for the job. A lot of her hard work comes from her coaching Steve on what to say in court and criticizing his improvised responses. The interaction between Steve and O'Brien in this final scene, or lack thereof, is a hot topic of discussion for the classroom. With these two characters driving a majority of the story, readers have a load of conversations and information to use when analyzing the characters' relationship and why it ended so abruptly.

-Kayla Loos

Character Analysis: Steve Harmon

Steve Harmon is the sixteen-year-old boy whose trial is the entire premise of the story. The book begins with him writing a journal entry about the trial and how he feels about being in prison. He decides he is going to record his experiences like a film script, thus initiating the formatting style in which the book is published. In choosing to write his story like this, Steve has put himself in full control of what the readers know. He does a fair job at capturing the emotion of other characters in the story like that of the lawyers and the other inmates involved in the crime, yet he is the only character who keeps a personal journal that the readers get to see.

Reading the story through Steve's lens is a juggling task because not only does one see his frustration with trying to prove his innocence, but one also sees his anxiety regarding his reference as a "monster." Petrocelli, the prosecutor, calls Steve a monster early in the trial process. In addition to this, Steve receives early criticism by his own lawyer, O'Brien, who is skeptical about winning because Steve is "young...[and] black" (Myers 79). She converses with Steve multiple times and makes her doubts known. She reminds him that she has worked hard in a lot of trials, but this one will be hard for her to win (not only due to the racial circumstances, but due to her lack of faith in Steve's innocence). Knowing that his lawyer doesn't even fully believe in him, Steve is brought to ponder if he really is a monster. Even if he does win the trial, the tag sticks with him and he is uneasy about it.

When the verdict is called, Steve attempts to hug O'Brien, but she "stiffens and turns to pick up her papers," looking "pensive" (276). The last bit of the novel is a journal entry months after the trial, and Steve records that he still wonders what O'Brien saw that day, why she was so tense. These thoughts bring Steve back to seeing himself as a monster. It becomes clear that though the story appears to be about the crime, the real mystery to be solved is whether or not Steve is a monster. It's as if that claim never got proven true or false; it's up to readers to analyse Steve's actions, the actions of others, the crime, and the verdict in order to come to a decision.

-Kayla Loos

A Quick Summary of "Monster" Without Giving Too Much Away

Monster by Walter Dean Myers is about a young, African-American guy named Steve who is on trial for murder. It is evident that Kathy O'Brien, Steve's lawyer, is not fond of Steve and has little faith in him winning the case. The whole book has an interesting format; most of it is written like a film script while pieces of it are written as a journal that Steve keeps in his cell. The prosecutor, Sandra Petrocelli, regards Steve as a monster due to his supposed affiliation with the crime. Her dislike and distrust of him is evident throughout the book. At first, it feels like Steve may only be a monster in Petrocelli's eyes; as the prosecutor, it is her job to prove him guilty. Despite this, as the novel progresses, readers regard the emotions and opinions of other prisoners on trial, of the other lawyers involved, of the judge, and of Steve's parents. The different points of view noted throughout the book make not only the reader ponder whether Steve is a monster, but also Steve himself.

-Kayla Loos