There had been a vineyard of some extent on the place, but it had not been attended to since the war, and had lapsed into utter neglect.
The de facto narrator of the collection, the white Northerner named John who has bought what used to be a slave plantation. John likes to present himself as a progressive white man who finds slavery abominable and is given to underestimating his level of racist beliefs. With this observation that the vineyard had been neglected, however, he reveals a distinct symptom of white superiority. The grapevine in question has actually been cared to by a former slave for many years and John’s observation of its state is an unintended revelation of a racist attitude toward things being cared for by blacks not actually be cared for at all within the ideological perspective of a dominant prevailing race.
I found, when I bought the vineyard, that Uncle Julius had occupied a cabin on the place for many years, and derived a respectable revenue from the product of the neglected grapevines. This, doubtless, accounted for his advice to me not to buy the vineyard, though whether it inspired the goopher story I am unable to state.
This is the first example of how it is possible that the stories Uncle Julius tells are not just mere entertainment; not just folklore and myth, but rather an indication of wisdom and craftiness. Over time, it becomes more apparent that Julius is manipulating the supposedly superior whites who now own the plantation. In this example, John’s latent sense of superiority is subtly revealed in the implicit interpretation that he is unable to make that statement only because he cannot reconcile being outwitted by a former slave.
Annie had listened to this gruesome narrative with strained attention.
By the second story, it begins to become more apparent that Annie has greater insight into to the subtle use of irony and layered meanings in the stories Julius tells than John, who is more given to address them at face value. This almost throwaway observation is designed to indicate John’s view that she is more gullible because she might actually believe the more outrageous elements of the stories when in fact it later becomes apparent that Annie’s “strained attention” is really due to her critical appreciation of the subtleties at play.
"Dis yer tale goes ter show dat w'ite folks w'at is so ha'd en stric', en doan make no 'lowance fer po' ign'ant niggers w'at ain' had no chanst ter l'arn, is li'ble ter hab bad dreams, ter say de leas', en dat dem w'at is kin' en good ter po' people is sho' ter prosper en git 'long in de worl'."
This quote is an example of the difference between John’s narrative of the contemporary events and the recording of how Julius relates the story-within-the-story that is the core of the narrative. More importantly, however, is how this excerpt works an example of how seemingly homely speech can mask a far more advanced intellect. This moral to the story that Julius has just told is met greeted by John and Annie in two different ways that again reveals the growing chasm between how they respond to the stories. John perhaps unwittingly displays once again his deep-seated sense of white superiority by snidely thanking Julius for outlining the moral lest he and his wife not have been sharp enough to pick up on it for themselves. Annie’s reaction, however, serves to indicate that Julius actually came out as victim in this battle of wits: she takes the moral to heart and decides to give a Julius’ grandson one more chance even though John had already made a decision and told Julius earlier that he would have let the boy go as a worker since he wasn’t dependable. Upon hearing of Annie’s decision, John does not contradict and instead goes back on his word to fire him.
“Julius, I am thinking of setting out scuppernong vines on that sand-hill where the three persimmon-trees are; and while I'm working there, I think I'll plant watermelons between the vines, and get a little something to pay for my first year's work. The new railroad will be finished by the middle of summer, and I can ship the melons North, and get a good price for them.”
This exchange between John and Julius is essential because it reveals that John’s interest in the plantation he has bought is every bit as centered around economic exploitation as the master who owned it when Julius was a slave. The balance of economic trade has shifted slightly in favor of former slaves who now must be paid for their labor, but the power structure remains effectively unchanged since it is whites who employ blacks almost exclusively rather than the other way around. The theme of private ownership and the extended aspects of how that theme can still be applied to ownership of a laborer’s time even after Reconstruction is played out subtly through the fact that John’s deeply economic-based view of the use of the plantation never changes throughout the collection.
“Oh, well, I don't care. Those are mere ornamental details and not at all essential. The story is true to nature, and might have happened half a hundred times, and no doubt did happen, in those horrid days before the war."
In response to a story just told by Julius, John reacts condescendingly once again by thanking him, admitting the story was ingenious and then dismissing it as a “fairy tale.” Annie’s reaction is swift and directed toward her husband. It is the difference between hearing the story of the boy who cried wolf and either getting or completely missing the point that it offers a valuable lesson about the danger of lying. Just as he remains committed to a single-minded vision of the worth of the plantation so does John seem resistant to peering too deeply behind the entertainment value of the stories of Julius lest he find something there he doesn’t want to see.
