The Boys from Biloxi

John Grisham

Fiction | Novel | Adult | Published in 2022

A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.

Download PDF

Summary

Background

Chapter Summaries & Analyses

Part 1, Chapters 1-6

Part 1, Chapters 7-13

Part 2, Chapters 14-21

Part 2, Chapters 22-27

Part 2, Chapters 28-34

Part 3, Chapters 35-42

Part 3, Chapters 43-50

Part 4, Chapters 51-59

Character Analysis

Themes

Symbols & Motifs

Important Quotes

Essay Topics

Tools

Beta

Discussion Questions

Themes

Familial Identity and Legacy

The Boys from Biloxi is a legal thriller. However, it’s ultimately a story about two families, the Malco and Rudy clans. Themes of familial identity and legacy are prevalent in the story, starting with the depiction of the families’ histories. Both families are of Croatian descent and have immigrant backgrounds. Both are, in their own ways, immigrant “success stories” (a problematic and outdated label because classifying immigrants into “successful” versus “unsuccessful” can lead to anti-immigrant sentiment). Lance becomes the biggest crime boss on The Strip, while Jesse becomes a successful lawyer, the first local lawyer of Croatian descent—and a legend of sorts: “Jesse Rudy’s success became the source of many proud stories on the Point” (28).

In this story, familial identity is intrinsically tied to the family business. Professionally, both Hugh and Keith follow in their father’s footsteps. Lance explicates this specifically when he sees Hugh getting involved in his clubs as a teenager: “[Hugh] was showing no interest in college and that was fine with Lance as well. The boy was needed in the family business” (102). Meanwhile, Keith picks up Jesse’s “crusade” to “clean up the Coast” (61). For both the Malco and Rudy families, the family business is male-dominated; this helps emphasize the strong bond between father and son in each case. Both Lance and Jesse look to their sons to carry on the family legacy, from the business standpoint. Meanwhile, the narrative suggests, it’s up to the women in the family to carry on the legacy biologically by having babies. The story hints at this other form of familial legacy when Ainsley (Keith’s wife) announces her pregnancy: “When [Agnes; Jesse’s wife and Keith’s mother] heard the wonderful news that she would be a grandmother, she finally broke down. The emotion was contagious, and in an instant the entire family was having a good cry. Tears of joy” (346).

Get access to this full Study Guide and much more!

8,800+ In-Depth Study Guides
4,700+ Quick-Read Plot Summaries
Downloadable PDFs

Although the bulk of the book’s plot centers on the “legal thriller” aspects of chasing and prosecuting criminals (and the criminals dodging these efforts), the author provides constant reminders that the narrative is ultimately about family. Throughout the novel, he mentions major milestones, such as Keith’s graduation from college and his marriage to Ainsley. The announcement of Ainsley’s pregnancy is another example. The author also includes less happy personal anecdotes, such as Carmen’s and Lance’s divorce. By providing these personal insights into the Rudy and Malco families’ lives, the narrative emphasizes that it’s about personal relationships—families and friendships—not just crime.

The Dangers of Loyalty

Lance and Jesse each carve out their own path to success. Their sons then follow those paths, which their fathers have set out for them, attesting to the importance of familial identity, legacy, and heritage. This pursuit of family legacy and devotion to heritage requires great loyalty. Both Hugh and Keith are painstakingly loyal to their families—more specifically, to their fathers. As a result, their friendship suffers. It’s after Keith learns of Jesse’s plan to run for DA (which Keith supports) that Keith and Hugh have their last beer together: “[Keith] acted as though all was well, but he knew that these moments were fleeting. The friendships were about to change, or vanish altogether. […] For him and Hugh, it was probably their last beer together” (108). Familial loyalty, in this case, trumps the loyalty of friendship.

The narrative doesn’t necessarily paint this extreme level of familial loyalty as a good thing, however. Hugh’s story in particular demonstrates the dangers of taking loyalty too far. To avenge Lance’s being sent to prison, he takes out a hit on Jesse, gets caught, and ends up on death row. Hugh may think he’s being loyal, but Lance thinks he’s being stupid: “They talked about everything but the obvious. Jesse Rudy’s death was never mentioned. Lance had not been involved in it, and he was worried that his unpredictable son had done something stupid” (339). The narrative shows that unquestioningly following another person, for any reason—even if they’re family—isn’t wise and can result in poor decision making.

Get access to this full Study Guide and much more!

8,800+ In-Depth Study Guides
4,700+ Quick-Read Plot Summaries
Downloadable PDFs

Nonetheless, familial loyalty seems to be the only kind of loyalty that holds steady in the narrative. Other types of loyalty, such as the loyalty of a friend or an employee, are less reliable. Lance experiences this when Nevin, his managers, and the waitresses who worked in his bars all turn on him. Once he's no longer providing them with cash and protection, their loyalty wanes. In particular, Nevin, Lance’s main henchman, presents a different angle on the dangers of loyalty—the fact that you can’t always rely on someone’s staying true to you. Even a seemingly loyal person can be a betrayer. In the case of men like Nevin, loyalty is bought. Nevin—and others, like Henry Taylor (“Lyle”) and even the sex workers in Lance’s bars—take money in exchange for their loyalty. These people all end up turning. Only loyalty informed by blood ties, like the loyalty Keith and Hugh show their fathers, seems untouchable (at least in the narrative—in reality, this isn’t always true, given that families turn on one another as well).

Morality Versus Legality

As a legal thriller that deals with crime, The Boys from Biloxi inherently deals with questions of legality. Discussions of legality often intertwine with questions of morality. In simplistic terms, people want to believe in the dichotomy of moral/immoral; ideally, a criminal justice system reflects that dichotomy through rules on what’s legal/illegal. However, in reality, things aren’t so “black and white.” Many of the actions the book’s characters take attest to this fact. Jesse is the prime example. He’s painted as the book’s white knight, the good-guy DA who’s committed to “cleaning up” the area and eliminating dangerous crime. However, Jesse takes immoral and illegal actions to meet his goals—for instance, when he traps Lance into a plea bargain. As Joshua tells Jesse at the time, his actions are “ruthless” and amount to “blackmail” (285). The question is whether can Jesse’s immoral/illegal actions are forgivable because they’re (presumably) in the interest of the greater good—locking away a dangerous crime boss like Lance, who’s responsible for killings as well as illegal drug trades and sex work (including of minors—Cindy, the girl who Hugh falls for, is only 15). This conundrum exemplifies how judging people based on “black-and-white,” “good-versus-bad” categorizations of their actions is often too simplistic.

The book also raises the morality versus legality question in its discussion of capital punishment. The author is a vocal critic of the death penalty; however, the novel merely presents the question of whether the death penalty is right or wrong, leaving it open for consideration. The case of Jimmy Lee Gray brings the issue to a head, and the narrative presents two extremes to pose a complex and troubling question. First, the reader learns about Gray’s crime: He raped and murdered his girlfriend’s three-year-old daughter—and admits to other rapes—so, presumably, there’s no question of his guilt. This is an immoral man who has committed a terrible crime against another human being. The question, however, is whether another human then has the right to kill him as punishment. The author complicates this question by portraying a botched execution. Gray unquestionably endures considerable pain when the execution goes awry. Thus, observers who support the death penalty might second-guess their choice. The capital punishment question epitomizes how morality/legality are intertwined because numerous court cases—including a Supreme Court case mentioned in the book—have debated whether the death penalty should be allowed; thus, legal cases are made on the basis of moral judgments.