In addition to the detailed images of violence in The Godfather for which the adaption of Mario Puzo’s story of a successful crime family is famous, the film also has a strong sense of aspiration. This sense of aspiration in The Godfather, and possibly in other gangster movies as well, leads the viewer to develop their own sense of aspiration. Characters like Tom Powers (Jimmy Cagney) in Public Enemy, a film that a later gangster character Tony Soprano in the Sopranos greatly admired, are seen by many as aspirational. Tony admires Jimmy Cagney for his charisma and charm and not for his use of violence. It is true that Public Enemy was intended a be a moral guide warning people to avoid a life of crime and violence, but as David E. Ruth states in his Inventing the Public Enemy, it is more of a guide to aspiration.
Ruth depicts a post-World War I America at a turning point in the understanding of American values and ideals. In post-World War II America, the need for a social ethic of aspiration is seen as crucial, and it’s in this tradition that we should understand The Godfather. Dwight Smith’s the Mafia Mystique demonstrates how Vito Corleone’s success reflects a new age of looking at the world. Smith writes that a functionalist sociological understanding of aspirational values provides a vast amount of historical research showing how men and women construct an understanding of the gangster “to shape values about race, gender, class, responsibility, and sexual morality,” in modern society. By applying the moral stories from The Godfather to their own situation, people attempt to solve their social aspirational problems. Vito, and later Michael, give hope and aspiration to the moviegoer because of their financial skills, cunning, bureaucratic skills, and individuality.
The age that Smith describes is one in which many frustrated Americans consider the achievements of the gangster and, in doing so, attempt to make sense of their own cultural and economic situation in which their aspirational values are being thwarted. People increasingly work in cities and live in urban neighborhoods in which the new car, expensive nightlife, and fine clothes are visible but not necessarily attainable. Vito Corleone and his family, on the other hand, are upwardly socially mobile and successful in the modern urban world while facing the same “challenges and opportunities of pursuing individual goals within and alongside the large organizations of a modern society.” The moviegoer views the movie in which the Corleone family is doing well and through social and cultural explanations they can possibly find out why they themselves might not be doing so well. This is where the moviegoer asks such questions as: should I stick to the conservative norms of moral conduct or act more decisively and, perhaps, aggressively?
And yet, for all its aspiration, The Godfather does, in the end, fall morally short. The film embodies a social ethic of success in which violence is not central to achieving financial success, although sometimes it does happen. When it does happen, it must be treated within the business context. Vito Corleone’s interests are certainly financial. His good use of reason, finesse, and charm are easy to acquire and are more important than power—as Vito says, “a lawyer with a briefcase can steal more than a thousand men with guns.” These skills can lead to a person being more financially successful. And sometimes, financial success is part of a person’s duty to family, an ethical view that can be achieved by most families. Vito’s ruffing-up of Johnny Fontane shows that family should be one’s priority and is a moral outlook that can be understood and put into action by the moviegoer. On the other hand, Vito’s calling for the meeting of the five families after the gunning down of Sonny is prudent because if Michael, his third son and heir apparent, had been killed as well, the Corleone family would be all but finished. But this is also a business decision. Calling for a truce and ending the violence is good business done for the sake of Vito, and his family’s financial gain.
And so, Michael follows Vito’s influence with his very flexible attitude to moral dealings with others, family included. Just like any other agreements and relationships with others, they are needed for the smooth exercise of business transactions. Michael’s later melancholic regret, presumably with having to deal with those who break agreements, is also part of a social ethic. He has his sister’s husband killed for giving information about Sonny to Barzini leading to him being machine gunned to death at the Long Beach Causeway. Fredo worked with Hyman Roth and Johnny Ola leading to a failed assassination attempt on Michael. Fredo broke Michael’s heart, leading to him being killed on Lake Tahoe while saying a Hail Mary. It is business as usual where violence is used only when needed.
Michael has in fact inherited the situation in which trust has been broken. As Michael, later reminiscing with his mother about his father, quoting him saying “You keep your friends close, and your enemies closer” is another example of the morally relaxed attitude of the Godfather.
Still, Vito and Michael Corleone’s flexible ethic is one for the moviegoer to emulate in an ever-changing social world. These are cultural figures that many millions of Americans understood in the later part of the 20th century. Conservative reservations get in the way of social mobility, and Vito and Michael Corleone’s morally flexible outlook inspires people to be more successful.
Christopher Innes
Christopher M. Innes is a social philosopher teaching at Boise State University in Boise, Idaho, USA. He likes to write on all aspects of popular culture with film, TV, and music being his favorite areas.
