Hegemony, Marxism, Banks

Once again, I will make an effort to define the concept of hegemony. Except in this scenario, I will attempt to make a connection of the concept of hegemony as it pertains to the Russell Banks story Sarah Cole: A Type of Love Story. My goal is to consider what a ‘Marxist reading’ of this story might entail.
Hegemony which is a concept introduced by Gramsci can be defined as the social, cultural, ideological, or economical influence exerted by a dominant group. In the context of the Banks story, it is very clear that we can differentiate the two characters; Ron, and Sarah. I will make an attempt to place these two characters in different categories, or classes if you will. Ron’s possesses good traits such as, being beautiful, honorable, educated and hard-working. Sarah can be described as homely, boarder-line in poverty, not so attracted (ugly as Bank describes her). The question here is ‘Do opposites really attract each other’? Marx wouldn’t hesitate to answer this question, with an answer as “No, they do not attract each other.” From my understanding of Marxism, if anything, he seeks to produce a solution to hegemony by not having a dominant group. There should be an equal group (communism) among classes.
After reading this story a Marxist can polarize the intensity of the message behind the story; ‘Hegemony Can and Will Kill’. Yes, in a long shot, hegemony inevitable kills. Living in a system govern by hegemony only kills, and even the solution to hegemony, according to Marx can only be solved with a revolution, which requires a physical change in the ideology that governs the system. Banks support this claim by reassuring the readers that Sarah isn’t actually dead; “It’s not as if she has died; it’s as if he has killed her.” Ron acknowledges the fact that they are eminently different, and it is the difference on a social-economical realm that causes the death of Sarah. The author doesn’t get into minute details. But it is this notion of being different that helps create the existence of hegemony, which in the end, metaphorically speaking, only kills.