Funny... while reading this analogy (which you stayed "in character" with throughout - never actually equating "fruit" to "human"), all I could think about is a farmer/harvester of actual plants/fruit here on Earth. Here on Earth, the plant actually creates its fruit for itself, either as the vessel and nutrients for its offspring (seeds), or to entice some roaming animal to eat and deposit the seeds elsewhere so that they avoid competition with the parent plant. The plant, therefore, has absolutely no responsibility to the farmer/harvester - indeed, it does not know nor care that he exists!
Also, the farmer/harvester on Earth has no actual control over the plants... nor whether or not they reliably produce anything. He, therefore, must remain grateful to the plants, regardless how much work he puts in. This is due to the fact that they produce for him, even as they do not even acknowledge his existence - because he can't do the work of creating fruit on his own!
Lastly, the plants do not need the farmer/harvester in order to produce. Sure, he artificially buoys their continued, comfortable survival, but the plants would grow, with or without him. Perhaps not as well, or not developing fruit as bountifully... but there would be growth, and there would be fruit. The farmer/harvester however? He very much needs the fruit of the harvest - without it he is lost come the next sparse season.
Funny thing about analogies that don't quite fit.