53 pages • 1 hour read
Pete HautmanA modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
The dynamics between David and his family provide the main fuel for the novel’s conflict and broader philosophical messages, and David’s relationship with his parents and siblings emphasize the idea that the family unit should function as a support system and should treat each member as an important part of the whole.
This theme is explored primarily through the family’s focus on caring for Mal, for as David explains, “We’ve been checking on him since he was born, and that was ten years ago” (11). David sees his caretaking of Mal as an essential part of life, but he also resents the fact that his parents lean too heavily on his help. Mom admits that she counts on David to watch Mal in the summer because it is “the only time [she] can get any work done” (72). Thus, David’s role in his family is often to relieve Mom and Dad of their duty to look after Mal, and he seldom feels supported in return.
David also shows his support by working hard to ensure that Mal’s needs are accommodated when they walk through the neighborhood. He pays close attention to Mal’s clothing and headphones to provide Mal with the insulation he needs, and David comes to recognize that supporting Mal requires the family to learn more about Mal; as he asserts, “We have to learn Mal’s Rules” (170). Once David recognizes that adapting to Mal’s needs is the best way to help him, Mal makes significant progress in interacting with the world, especially when his use of sunglasses ameliorates his sensory challenges. Ultimately, David’s recognition of Mal’s needs and his efforts to better support his brother result in a happier, more curious version of Mal, who is empowered to explore the world.
Significantly, Mal also supports David in return. When David’s parents attempt to stop David from competing in the eating contest finals, for example, Mal “start[s] screaming ‘Go, David, Go!’” (254). Mal’s two new words are such an important development that David’s parents instead bring Mal to the contest to root David on to victory. After the contest, David’s parents concede that he’s “a low-maintenance” child whom they see as needing less support. However, when David’s parents reassure him that they love him and are proud of him, they provide him with the support he has been craving. In this way, David’s relationship with Mal and the rest of his family helps the novel communicate the idea that family is an important source of support, but that there must be a give and take for all members to feel supported.
One of the novel’s most important lessons can be found in the idea that lying by omission is just as damaging as traditional lying. This dynamic is developed primarily through David’s guilt and stress over his accidental $2,000 charge on his mother’s credit card bill, for his efforts to hide his mistake only make matters worse when his action finally comes to light. The theme is also developed through the mentions of the Jooky dog throughout the narrative, for even the letter of authenticity attached to this disastrous purchase is designed to be a lie by omission.
Even from the beginning, David knows that his decision to hide the $2,000 charge on his mom’s credit card is wrong, for he spends most of the novel wracked with guilt and fear over his mistake, and his entire scheme to win the pizza-eating contest is a desperate attempt to correct his error before it is discovered. The dishonesty that David’s deception requires creates overwhelming stress that plagues him throughout the novel, and he often has persistent, nagging thoughts about his dilemma in the midst of his other challenges. David’s ongoing dread is a direct consequence of lying by omission and attempting to avoid responsibility for his errors.
The internal stress that he feels is illustrated in Chapter 24, for after he intercepts the Visa bill and knocks it behind the bureau, he later admits that his lie is hidden but not forgotten. As he states, “Every time I walk past the bureau […] I think about that envelope and I get a little queasy” (199). David’s feelings of guilt come from his dishonest decision to avoid telling his parents about the charge. Inevitably, when the truth comes to light in Chapter 38, his parents’ shock and disappointment over his dishonesty are a far worse experience for David than any punishment over the initial mistake might have been. As David’s parents explain, “The money’s not the point. The point is that you’ve betrayed our trust in you” (207). The broken trust between David and his parents forces the protagonist to realize that lying by omission carries the same consequences as other kinds of dishonesty.
External events in the novel reinforce this point, for both Derek—Bridgette’s know-it-all boyfriend—and The Gurge, a famous eating competition cheater, engage in lying by omission. For example, Derek misleads David about the gift card prize for the slider-eating contest, later explaining the he “didn’t say it was for cash” (66) when he told David about the $200 prize. Similarly, The Gurge scams David by having Jooky Garafalo sign an ambiguous letter of authenticity that fails to mention that the hot dog is in no way associated with the famous eating contest. Because these morally questionable people use lies of omission, the author drives home the point that all forms of dishonesty are unethical and have serious consequences.
Just as David must learn to mitigate his own urges to be dishonest, he must also learn to pick his way through situations that have no clear and moral solution. While David’s experiences are central to the narrative, several secondary characters also illustrate the ambiguities involved in tricky situations, and in the end, David must learn to make his own choices and do what he believes is right. He often relies upon his parents’ and peers’ experiences to guide his own actions in such scenarios, and even his more questionable choices are motivated by his good intentions.
This dynamic becomes most prominent after David is forbidden from attending the pizza-eating contest finals, for he recalls a time when Dad had to cross a picket line at his own business to save another business from losing a large amount of meat product. Although David’s father supported the striking workers and their cause, he also understood that there were things at risk for other people if he didn’t cross the picket line. David recalls that Dad told him, “Sometimes you have to do the wrong thing for the right reasons” (220). When faced with his own ambitions to win the prize money and correct his mistake of putting a $2,000 charge on his mother’s credit card, David uses Dad’s experience to rationalize his decision to sneak out and participate in the eating contest despite his parents’ prohibition. In this case, his disobedience is not motivated by spite or entitlement; instead, he seeks to fix his previous errors and make amends for his wrongs.
This idea appears again in the heat of the competition as David competes with The Gurge and Egon Belt. After David witnesses The Gurge squirt ipecac on Egon Belt’s pizza, he manages to steal The Gurge’s squeeze bottle and impulsively decides to use The Gurge’s own methods against him. While his act of using ipecac to get The Gurge eliminated from the competition is technically just as unethical as The Gurge’s own actions, the mentors in David’s life support his decision. When David expresses guilt over his actions, Egon Belt reassures him by saying, “You didn’t cheat, son. You took advantage of a situation, turned the tables, and eliminated the real cheater” (270). As a result of David’s unethical decision to use the ipecac on The Gurge, he ironically ensures that the overall competition has a more honest conclusion. Egon’s reassurance indicates that sometimes an unethical action can achieve a more wholesome result.