The Passing of Grandison

In Charles Chesnutt's story The Passing of Grandison, there speaker shows a lot of deliberate manipulation in describing the plot. It seems to kind of associate itself with whatever the current mood of the people in the scene is, almost as if it's not a complete third-person voice that's detached from the characters but instead it's a 2.5-person point of view. The particular aspect that was noticeable for me was the way that the narrator describes the loyalty of Grandison.

At one point, after Grandison and Colonel Owen's first exchange in the events of the story, there's a long elaboration on how the owner feels that makes their relationship look very friendly, respectful and beneficial to both sides. "This was true gratitude, and his feudal heart thrilled at such appreciative homage. What cold-blooded, heartless monsters they were who would break up this blissful relationship of kindly protection on the one hand, of wise subordination and loyal dependence on the other!" The speaker couldn't possibly be more subjective, and is almost unreasonably biased towards the colonel's opinion at the time.

Contrast this with a section from the end of The Passing of Grandison, after colonel has learned of the mass escape undoubtedly led by Grandison: "So much valuable property could not be lost without an effort to recover it, and the wholesale nature of the transaction carried consternation to the hearts of those whose ledgers were chiefly bound in black." Just as the owner no longer feels any sentimental attachment to the slaves now that they've left, the speaker now refers to them in a shamelessly negative and unattached manner. They're described at the end as 'property' in a 'wholesale' 'transaction' instead of slaves who show 'homage' as part of a 'blissful relationship' like the were before they escaped. The drastic change in the narrator's voice is confusing to me, because it ruins the integrity of the 3rd person descriptions. The whole point of having a 3rd person in literature is to show things from an objective view in a situation where each of the characters would have his own opinion, but when the 3rd person doesn't hesitate to put a spin on what's happening, the value is lost. It's easier to read as you follow along with the story, but a lot harder to get the big picture and to understand the author's opinion.