Duke—Valentine Michael Smith

Duke and Valentine Michael Smith are housemates whose relationship turns on a difficult distinction: Smith is gentle toward those he trusts, but Duke cannot safely assume that gentleness means harmlessness. Duke’s initial disgust at Smith’s apparent cannibalism gives way to a wary affection, while Jubal Harshaw presses him to treat trust not as a casual sentiment but as a serious commitment. Their relationship remains poised at the threshold of water-brotherhood: Duke stays and considers the offer, but the evidence does not show him accepting it.

Uneasy Coexistence

Duke’s first response to Smith is rejection. He asks when the household will get rid of the “ghoul,” connecting his objection to the belief that Smith’s people practice cannibalism. Duke says he will eat in the kitchen rather than share the table with him. The quarrel is not simply about food or household routine: Duke is trying to withdraw from the company of someone he regards as revolting, and in doing so treats that judgment as grounds for exclusion.

Harshaw refuses to let Duke turn the kitchen into a refuge from the household’s shared table. He distinguishes Duke’s ordinary choice to eat there for convenience from refusing to eat with Smith because he considers Smith unfit company. Harshaw makes the issue a matter of hospitality and prejudice, and warns Duke that he can be uncompromising when someone under his roof attempts to dictate who belongs at his table. The confrontation makes Duke’s attitude explicit, but it also establishes that Smith’s place in the household will not depend on Duke’s approval.

Gentleness and Danger

Duke believes Smith would never hurt anyone. He calls Smith gentle and says that, although the cannibalism talk makes him feel sick, Smith is merely a savage who does not know better. Harshaw challenges this confidence by explaining that Smith’s gentleness is real but conditional: Smith is friendly with people he trusts, yet can become immediately dangerous if he does not trust them or believes that one of his water brothers is being harmed.

To make the difference between appearance and knowledge concrete, Harshaw recalls mistaking a young coral snake for a scarlet snake. He already knew how to handle venomous snakes, but the danger lay in not knowing what this particular animal was or what it could do. He applies the lesson to Smith: an apparently ordinary, clumsy, eager-to-learn young man is also far more capable than Duke supposes. Harshaw’s warning is not that Smith is malicious; it is that ignorance of his capacities, combined with a perceived threat, could have fatal consequences.

Harshaw gives Duke a specific hypothetical. If Duke had struck him during their argument and Smith had been present, Smith might have killed Duke before Harshaw could intervene. In Harshaw’s account, Smith could regard such a response as necessary if he believed a trusted person was under attack, even while feeling regret about wasted food. The example turns the earlier dispute from a question of manners into a matter of practical safety: Duke’s confidence in Smith’s gentle temperament does not amount to understanding the conditions under which Smith might act.

The Choice to Stay

After hearing Harshaw’s warning, Duke decides not to leave. He says he understands that Smith could be dangerous if provoked, but does not intend to provoke him; he also admits that he likes Smith in many ways. This is a real change from his opening demand to get rid of Smith. Duke does not abandon his reservations or claim to understand Smith completely. Instead, he separates his dislike of the subject of cannibalism from his growing personal regard for Smith.

Harshaw then proposes a way for Duke to express that regard: he can offer Smith water and become his water brother. The suggestion carries obligations beyond friendliness. Harshaw cautions Duke not to make the offer as a gesture he does not mean. If Smith accepts, Harshaw says, he will trust Duke utterly; Duke must therefore be willing to trust Smith and stand by him even if circumstances become difficult. The bond is presented as mutual reliance, not a convenient way to reassure Smith or calm a household dispute.

Duke answers that he will think about it, and explains that this is precisely why he has not simply agreed. Harshaw accepts the hesitation but urges him not to wait too long, anticipating that events will become rough. The exchange leaves Duke’s decision unresolved: he stays in the house and voices affection, but no water-sharing ceremony between him and Smith is shown here.

Meaning and Limits of the Relationship

The relationship’s central tension is the distance between liking Smith and being prepared to trust him on Smith’s terms. Duke’s initial reaction places Smith outside the circle of acceptable company; Harshaw’s defense of the shared table first insists on Smith’s right to belong in the household. The later conversation moves beyond tolerance toward the possibility of a reciprocal bond, but makes clear that good intentions alone are not enough. Duke must understand that Smith’s commitments and responses are shaped by trust, and decide whether he can answer them with an equally serious commitment.

Water-brotherhood thus serves as the possible culmination of Duke’s change, not an accomplished fact. He has moved from wanting Smith removed to choosing to remain and acknowledging that he likes him. Yet the invitation ends with deliberation rather than ritual, preserving the difference between guarded acceptance and a pledge of unconditional mutual support. The relationship’s significance lies in that unfinished choice: Duke is no longer simply rejecting Smith, but he has not yet crossed the threshold Harshaw describes.