Max Devore and Mattie Devore’s in-law relationship

Max Devore and Mattie Devore’s in-law relationship is a conflict shaped by Max’s wealth and continuing effort to control his family. Mattie’s wary view of his money—and the conditions attached to his will—makes his death less an end to their struggle than a change in how it is pursued.

Family Ties and Financial Distrust

Mattie is Max’s daughter-in-law through her marriage to his son, Lance. Her account of Lance’s view of his father captures the mistrust surrounding Max’s offers: Lance used to say Max would show a starving dog a piece of meat and then eat it himself. Mattie measures security not by the prospect of a fortune but by whether she can keep her job and provide for Kyra. When the possibility of substantial money is raised, she laughs off the idea that she would eagerly grasp at it.

That response reflects more than skepticism about an inheritance. Mattie has reason to regard Max’s generosity as conditional and potentially reversible, rather than as reliable support. The contrast between his resources and her immediate concern for work and sustenance gives the family conflict a material edge: money is something Max can use to exert pressure, not simply a gift that repairs the relationship.

The Will and the Custody Conflict

After Max’s death, his will makes the conflict concrete. In a discussion with John Storrow, Rogette Whitmore asks whether the conditions of Mr. Devore’s will have been conveyed to his daughter-in-law. John confirms that they have and is asked for Mattie’s response. The exchange establishes that Mattie’s position is being considered in relation to specific legal conditions, even though this passage does not detail her response or reproduce the terms.

The narrator distinguishes the will’s legal document from Max’s continuing intention. Though Max is dead, the narrator concludes that he is still seeking custody. The distinction makes the will feel like an instrument through which Max’s authority persists beyond his life: the family dispute is no longer a contest with Max in person, but his aims remain embedded in the arrangements he left behind.

A Conflict That Outlasts Its Author

Mattie’s relationship to Max thus combines kinship with distrust and practical vulnerability. Her concern that local people might be cold toward her as she returns to work sits beside the larger uncertainty over money and custody; she is trying to secure ordinary stability for herself and Kyra while confronting the consequences of Max’s wealth and legal planning.

The will gives their antagonism an afterlife. Mattie’s skepticism about Max’s promises and the narrator’s recognition of his continuing custody campaign form opposing readings of what his money means: for Mattie, it is not dependable protection; for Max, as the narrator understands his intent, it remains a means of pursuing control. The evidence leaves the precise legal outcome and Mattie’s full response unstated, but makes clear that his death has not settled the conflict between them.