When reading “The Goophered Grapevine” I was intrigued by the narrator who I thought was extremely concerned over his reputation. As he is writing the story in past tense, he protects his reputation by suggesting that he was aware of Uncle Julius’ insincerity from the moment he began to interact with him. When thinking back to his first meeting with Uncle Julius he notes that the way that he ate his grapes made him instantly aware that the “performance was no new thing” (2). I took his wording of “performance” to suggest that he could immediately tell that Uncle Julius was disingenuous. As the narrator’s immediate characterization seems impossible and unsupported, it suggests that he wants to assure the audience that he was not, even for a moment, tricked by Uncle Julius. Additionally, the narrator emphasizes that he recognized intelligence through Uncle Julius’ eyes, supporting his own skilled judgment. He notices “there was a shrewdness in his eyes, too, which was not altogether African” (3). This detail also seems impossible/unreasonable and rooted in confirmation bias as he learns later the Uncle Julius is one trustworthy. Lastly, without any modesty, he speaks to the success of his decision to by the vineyard and the influence it has had in inspiring others from the North to seek opportunities in the South. He claims that the vineyard “has been for a long time in a thriving condition and is often referred to by the local press as a striking illustration of the opportunities open to Northern Capital in the development of Southern industries” (11). His narration suggests that the cunning of the southern man is unable to stop the superior intelligence of himself and others in the North from having success in the South.