The Narrator and Makar

The relationship between the narrator and Makar begins as an arrangement made by village authorities, not as a bond freely chosen by either of them. In Makar’s household, the boy finds work and a place to stay, but his position remains conditional on obedience: Makar can return him to the peasants, who may hand him over to the German military police.

Entry into Makar’s Household

The narrator is brought to the head of the village after boys who had been lying in wait for him in the forest finally catch him. The head checks that the boy has no sores or ulcers and can make the sign of the cross. After several attempts to place him with other peasants fail, he sends him to Makar. The sequence establishes the boy’s vulnerability before Makar has even appeared: his future is decided by adults assessing whether he can be accommodated, and he has little control over where he will live.

At Makar’s home, the boy is drawn into practical household work. Ewka likes having him nearby while she cooks; he peels vegetables, brings firewood, and carries out ashes. His tasks give him a place within the daily routine, but they do not make his standing secure. Makar later warns that if he does not return to work within two days, he will be handed back to the peasants, who are preparing to take quotas to the railway station and would willingly turn him over to the German military police. Shelter and labor are thus bound together by an explicit threat of removal.

The household’s routines also reveal the contrast between Makar’s care for his animals and his authority over the boy. Makar keeps a trained wolfhound named Ditko and rows of rabbit cages in the outbuildings, with wire netting separating the animals. He can watch the rabbits all at once, and his frequent inspections show how closely he supervises them. The narrator enters this ordered household as a worker whose daily presence is useful, but whose safety depends on Makar’s decision to keep him.

Obedience, Animals, and Conflict

Makar’s close attention to the rabbits becomes the setting for a sharp test of the narrator’s obedience. He inspects the hutches several times a day, knows the rabbits by name, watches over favored females, and stays beside them when they give birth. One white female—a large, pink-eyed rabbit that had never produced young—was especially precious to him. Yet after repeatedly taking her into the house, Makar saw her become ill and eventually ordered the narrator to kill her. The order contradicted the rabbit’s apparent value as both a rare source of white fur and a possible breeder, leaving the boy unsure how to respond.

Makar usually killed the rabbits himself because he doubted the boy could do it quickly and painlessly; the narrator’s work was to skin and prepare them, and Ewka cooked them. This time Makar insisted that the narrator perform the killing. When the boy hesitated, Makar slapped him and repeated the command. The encounter turns an ordinary division of household labor into a coercive demand: the narrator is expected not only to work but to carry out an act Makar had previously reserved for himself. After the rabbit had been killed, Makar approached in a rage and kicked the boy, who was left disoriented. His dependence on Makar’s shelter therefore offers no protection from the master’s unpredictable violence.

Witness to a Hidden Household Scene

Curious about Makar’s unexpected visit to his room, the narrator climbed onto the rabbit hutch roof and looked inside. He saw Makar facilitating a sexual encounter between Ewka and a buck, and the scene horrified him. The episode places the boy not only among Makar’s household duties and commands but also in the position of an unwilling witness to conduct kept within the home. His access comes from watching at a distance, not from any invitation or explanation, extending the unequal relationship beyond work and obedience.

Narrative Role and Significance

The relationship is presented through the boy’s restricted position inside Makar’s household: he can perform useful tasks and observe routines, but he has little power to interpret or alter what adults decide. The contrast between Makar’s close supervision of the rabbits and the boy’s precarious place among the household’s workers makes care appear unevenly distributed. Makar’s attention to animals does not translate into security for the child living under his authority, and the boy’s access to the household’s private life comes through watching rather than being included. The arrangement therefore remains less a family bond than a fragile dependence, in which shelter and daily work coexist with command, exposure, and the continuing possibility of expulsion.