Materialism in George Eliot's Silas Marner
After contemplating which theme would be best to illustrate in my paper, in the end, I chose "Materialism vs.Relationships". In certain spots in the novel, it seems, George Eliot attempts to prove that the love of others is ultimately more valuable and fulfilling than the love of money. In my opinion, the actions of few characters could be viewed as materialistic, but I managed to find three: Dunstan Cass, William Dane, and Silas Marner.
First, William Dane, Silas's friend and deacon of the church in Lantern Yard.William murdered the ill senior deacon of the church while watching over him. Silas was supposed to watch over him that night. The next day, when the senior deacon was found dead and his money missing, Silas was immediately questioned and accused. William, of course, didn't defend him. He even married the woman Silas was engaged to. Instead of remaining a good friend and deacon, he chose to steal the senior deacon's money and leave Silas to deal with the consequences.
Now, on to Silas Marner. After fleeing to Raveloe, Silas isolated himself almost completely from the rest of the town, emerging from his home only to sell his weaving or to purchase needed materials. As the piles of guineas he amassed from his weaving grew greater, he grew to love his money with unparalleled affection. He did not need to depend on anyone and those who depended on him were those who bought his weaving.Silas did not give love and he hardly received any. Silas's entire life in Raveloe for fifteen years was devoted to earning guineas, he had become a miser.
After those fifteen years of monotony, Silas's life began to change. His guineas were stolen while he was at the market. Silas returned to his home to find his guineas missing....