So I did a brief review of the Godfather trilogy last night and noted a couple of important parallels with the Arthur legend. First though, we should speculate on who exactly is the Arthur figure in the trilogy (feel free to comment on this).
Personally, I'm voting for Michael Corleone, though I think you could also argue that Vito is the Arthur figure. Why Michael? Here:
1. He's a legitimate heir to "the Family."
2. He's got a thing for pageantry.
3. His right-hand knight--er, gal--is named Kay, and she's pretty cynical about his 'court.'
4. He's free with his money.
5. He's got a soft spot in his heart for his nephew.
Fine and good. Based on this, if we're looking for analogues (which doesn't always work, but it isn't all bad), Kay is Kay, Vincent is Gawain, Connie might be Morgian, Vito could be Merlin (so could Tom Hagen), and so on. Different analogues emerge if you argue that Vito is an Arthur figure.
The interesting part is the presence of a table in so many crucial scenes throughout the entire trilogy. Better still is the shape of the table, and its relationship to power dynamics in whatever scene there is a table. Consider this hypothesis: wherever there is a round table, power dynamics are even, or at the very least, meant to appear as such. Wherever there is a square or rectangular table it can be considered a battle line between opponents. So, for instance, when Michael kills Sgt. McKlutsky and Victor Salazzo in The Godfather, Part 1, they are seated at a round table, signifying the assumed equality of all parties at the table. In this episode of the trilogy true equality exists at round tables where Michael and Kay talk at Connie's wedding (before they are disenfranchised spouses--spice?), and where Michael negotiates his courtship of his first wife, Apollonia, with her father, Signori Vitelli, in Sicily. When Vito meets with the heads of the five families, though, they meet at a long, rectangular table.
In The Godfather, Part 2 Michael 'holds court' at a round dinner table, when Frank Pentangiali points out that he didn't come to Michael's son's first communion to eat--he came to talk business. In the parallel history of the Family interlaced (!) throughout the second episode, Vito sits at a round table over dinner with his best friends, Tessio and Clemenza, and plots the murder of Don Fanucci. When Vito meets Fanucci later, though, it's over a square table. He pays the nice Don, and then kills him soon thereafter. Perhaps the most interesting round table scene in the second film, though, is the one in which Michael debriefs Fredo (SPOILER ALERT--SKIP TO THE NEXT PARAGRAPH IF YOU'VE NOT SEEN THIS FILM) after Fredo reveals his betrayal of Michael in Havana. Michael sits at a round table to debrief Fredo, but the latter is lying on a lounge chair away from the table. Kind of significant, huh? The 'knight' who left (or was asked to leave the table). Could Fredo be a Lancelot figure?
Also in the second episode: Pentangiali's entire monologue about the Family having been structured after the Roman legions. Does that make New York the City of Legions? Willie Cici mentions that when he first joined the Family he "was a soldier."
The third episode is the hardest to read as Arthurian. Let's think of financial legitimacy as the Grail. Michael promised Kay for years that soon "the Corleone family will be completely legitimate." In the quest for this Grail Michael loses all of his 'knights.' It is interesting that many of them are killed, gunned down while sitting at a round table in Atlantic City where, passing around trays of scintillating trinkets, they select whatever their heart desires--and all of this is made possible by the Grail of Michael Corleone's legitimate wealth. One reason I think Michael is an Arthur figure is that his brainchild, the Vito Corleone Foundation, is figure-headed by his daughter, Mary. In effect, Michael goes to war in the business world behind the shield of the foundation, and Mary is, as it were, painted on it.
I've got to hear some thoughts from you regarding this post. Am I imagining this? Is it really there? Is there some other explanation for my finding these things?
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
Arthur Corleone?
Labels:
Arthur,
Corleone,
Godfather,
Grail,
Kay,
Lancelot,
legions,
round table,
square table Gawain
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Well, having only seen the first installment of the series (I know, I know), I can't comment too fully. But you may on to something with those shapes of tables. I'm thinking of an unusually-shaped table I saw in New Haven, specifically designed to be used in mediation meetings. It was neither round nor rectangular, consisting of a sort of teardroppy oblong with rounded corners. I think it was intended to give the illusion of equal footing between negotiating teams of unequal sizes.
ReplyDeleteI wouldn't be surprised if the King Arthur legend influenced Copolla (or Puzo?) in some way. After reading the passages in which Gaherys decapitates Morgause, and then later, when all the brothers gang up to kill Lamorak, I couldn't help but think that some of the factions within Arthur's court operate like modern-day gangsters. To me, there is a disturbing similarity between Morgause's decapitation and ***MAJOR PLOT SPOILER*** the beheading (and bedding?) of the prized racehorse. Not that I want to put Morgause on the same level as an animal (although, in light of Tara's recent presentation maybe that's not too far off). It's just very scary to me that such a violent deed -- the destruction of another's beloved -- can serve as a threat. If that's the threat, how much worse is the consequence? Granted, Gaherys had to get his mom too, since she was shaming them, but moments like these indicate the abuse of power within each group...ultimately contributing to the instability of the group as a whole.
ReplyDeletecoppola. gah!
ReplyDelete