All the great Victorian novelists with individual differences where similar at least in one fact that is they had command on narration and plot construction. Meredith differed from them because he was not a narrator and hardly pretended to tell a story. It was George Eliot who by the strength of her skill and acumen could bring unity to the structure of their novel. She did not care for the plot construction of the conventional Victorian lines. She worked out her plot in conformity with her ideas giving all kinds of jolts and jerks. The expectation of the readers aroused by the theory of probability of action under a particular set of circumstances. Her plot was intended to follow not a standardised formula but what she conceived to be logical development of the ideas. The stroke of fortune coincidences. Sudden, inheritances long last wills which where the a stock in the trend on the ordinary. Victorian plots were invariably omitted by her in her novels. Her stories are conditioned solely by logical demands of situation or character. It ends sadly or happily excludes hero or omits them, deals with married or unmarried. In fact, the lodge conditioning form of George Eliot’s novels are the same lodge that conditioned those of Henry James, H.G wells, Conrad and Arnold Bennett.

Silas Marner’ has been pumped up with praise for its unified structure and for enter lurking of the two stories. The action of the stories is defined by two narrative thread, the miserly weaver and the story of Cass family and their eldest son Godfrey. The plot is built up by the intersection or the interlocking but not the interweaving of these two stories. These two stories, one of Marner and other of Godfrey have not been closely woven. However, they seem to be compact and interlocking and the stories have been proved effective in unleashed the dominant theme of the novel. The two stories become one in the last but one chapter. The first two chapters of the novel narrate Marner’s life in Lantern yard and his setting down outside the distant village of Raveloe. At the end of the second chapter Marner is completely obsessed with the ideas of hoarding money, gold and silver coins by doing hard labour. And immediately after this chapter the story of the Cass family and two sons, Godfrey and Dunston beings. There is much contrast in the nature of Godfrey and Dunston. The former desires for mental peace and the later has fascination for all i.e evil and smudge. For this he commits robbery at Marner’s cottage. The story is instantly linked with the story of Godfrey and Marner through the criminal acts of Dunston turn in stealing Marner’s treasure each chapter is linked and related. The novelist has not jumbled the two stories, rather the two stories are so nicely narrated that they seem to be one. In chapter V Marner is trying contact contact people for their help in recovering money. Next chapter gives us a picture of village folk drinking their daily beer and indulging in their gossip and conversation. This conversation enables us to form some ideas of the members of the working classes of Raveloe. Society and the characters which differentiate from upper class for the gentry to which Godfrey, Dunston and Mr. Lammiter and his two daughters belong. In Chapter VII and VIII again the two stories are interlinked. Godfrey’s reaction to the robbery is briefly indicated but Chapter IX has nothing to do with first story. It exclusively deals with the class family. Right from Chapter IX to XI two stories are not linked. However, the stories progressed with their natural pace in the different circumstances And situation.



Leave a Comment