Five Families in The Novel

Over in the GF Trilogy thread, there was some discussion about there being 5 families in New York or really six, as far as the MOVIE goes.

Well some brought up the book so I pulled out our "Bible" and read several parts in regards to Puzo writing about the five families and the Corleones.

When Don Vito calls the commission meeting to make the peace, Puzo writes that Don Vito arrives, etc. etc. and then writes that the heads of the New York five families were the last to arrive. So obviously, from that we can all agree that there were six familes total in New York. (Actually 7 if you count the Bocchiccios).

However, Puzo gives the reader the names and descriptions of each boss of the New York families but only talks about FOUR of them! The fifth one is a mystery.

Any thoughts?


Don Cardi

It's not so obvious that we can all agree. Is it ever?

What it comes down to is sloppy writing.

Was Puzo sloppy in meaning that there were five other families and naming only four, or was he sloppy in indicating that there were five other families when he only meant there to be four?

Since there's only the one occasion when he has the opportunity to name the family and doesn't vs. all the times that he indicates their existence, I believe that he meant there to be five families in addition to the Corleones.

My logic, to copy and paste, is that since there actually were (and are) five NY families, by including the Corleones as one of the five, Puzo & Coppolla felt that they would be inviting too much comparison and speculation as to which of the five the Corleone family was meant to represent. Since the Corleones were the main characters, I believe that would have been the case. No one would have cared, for example, who Cuneo or Stracci was supposed to be modeled after, but everyone would have been trying to figure out which family head Don Corleone was supposed to be.

But Don Corleone was not supposed to resemble anybody. I believe was the head of a fictional 6th family, whose story was told against the historical framework of NYC organized crime and the five NYC families in the early 1940s, and, as such, he was not meant to be any of those family heads.

We've had many discussions in the past about which of the original Dons Vito Corleone was modeled after, and we've agreed, I think, that he has a few few of the characteristics and personality traits of several different ones.

It was not so much that Puzo was hesitant to have Don C. compared to one of the NYC Dons. It was that he couldn't be compared to any of them.

I agree. But how can he be so sloppy in naming and describing four of them in the commission meeting chapter, and not even mentioning the fifth? Sloppy writing, yes. And how about the proofreaders/editors? Did it slip by them also.

He could have easily made a name up for the fifth family.

The chapter also addresses the Bocchiccios and tells of their settling in New York. But I don't believe that they were the fifth family that Puzo meant for several reasons;
1) They were not at war with The Corleones and Puzo writes that The Corleones were at war with the 5 Families.

2) In the commission meeting chapter, Puzo writes that The Bocchiccio boss arrived at the meeting, and then writes that the heads of the FIVE families were the last to arrive.

3)The Bocchiccios made their living hiring themselves out as temporary hostages whenever a negotiation or a meeting took place between the families. So that in itself tells me that they would have stayed neutral during the war between the families.

In reality, The Corleones were the sixth family and The Bocchiccios the seventh!


Don Cardi

I only got two things to say

1. Couldn't Altobello have been the head of the sixth family? Then that family would have been a neutral family, IMO.

2. I have stated this before, but I still can't figure out why no one has asked Mario puzo all of this. The film came out in 1972, the man died in 1999. There must have been a GF-passionate journalist who interviewed him and asked all the difficult things like this.

And besides, you guys and TB must have been GF-geeks back then too, and I bet you were also thinking about this 'problem' in those days. So why didn't any of you kidnap Puzo and beat the hell out of him to make him talk?

Altobello was a fictional character, a figment of FFC's imagination created for the purpose of GFIII. And Altobello would not have been a neutral family anyway because the Corleones went to war against the FIVE families.

As for kidnapping Puzo and beating the hell out of him to make him talk, well it could not be done. There was no Patriot Act back then.


Don Cardi

Right! I totally forgot about that...

I remember wondering about the identity of the fifth family when I first read the book 30+ years ago.

Unfortunately, there was no such thing as a PC back then, and, of course, no internet or Gangster BB either.

Forgive me if I am wrong, since i don't have the book infront of me, but wasn't Stracci based in NJ, which would make the Corleones part of the five familes.

Puzo writes

"There was Anthony Stracci, who controlled the New Jersey area and the shipping on the West Side Docks of Manhattan. He ran gambling the in Jersey....etc., etc."

But Stracci is the first of the "representatives of the Five Families of New York" that Puzo describes, and he ends his description with these important words, which serve to further bolster the case for six families in total:

"Of the five New York Families opposing the Corleones his was the least powerful but the most well disposed."

You could also argue that Cuneo was not a New York City family head either, since he is described as the head of "The Family that controlled upper New York State", and no mention at all is made of any activities of his within the city itself.

Though i know you can't really go off of The Godfather Returns, they do mention 7 families on the commission. Taking into account that the Corleones moved to Las Vegas, that would leave one of the families, more than likely Stracci's to fill the void as the new fifth family. so you would have Las Vegas, the five New York families, and Chicago.

You can stop right there.

Nothing in GFR has any credibility whatsoever as far as just about all of us are concerned.

Winegardner could've named the missing family and written three chapters about them, and it would have carried no more weight than your opinion or mine.

lol only reason i throw that in is because it supposedly fills in the gaps between the movies, which does lend credibility to the book in a very tiny degree as, after michael does make the move to Vegas and in the third movie when they have the commission meeting, I'll have to put the movie in to make sure, but aren't there seven or eight dons at that commission meeting? Obviously five of them are from New York, if I'm not mistaken, Vincent refers to Joey's pal as the ant, which would lead me to believe that there is some ties with Chicago in the third.

As I've posted before: The only families we can go on are the five named: Corleone, Tattaglia, Barzini, Cuneo and Stracci. Yes, there are plenty of references in the novel and film that imply five in addition to Corleone. I believe those references are incorrect due to sloppy writing, and a tendency among Michael, Sonny and Hagen to refer to the New York families as "the five families" in a way that includes their own family generically among the five.

Its a good thing that Turnbull and I are much too old to fight. After we both mised our first punch, we'd probably fall flat on our respective faces.

However, if we were still in the days of our hale and hearty youthfulness, this would certainly be something we'd be fighting over.

Sloppy, to me, means that Puzo left something out. Like the description of the head of the fifth family. That's sloppy writing. Omission.

And the fact that he did it only once - got sloppy on the one occasion when it would have ben suitable to describe the family head - convinces me even more that it's sloppiness we're talking about here.

It's not sloppy to write something in. That, I believe, is intentional.

So take that one occasion of sloppiness, and stack it up against the several examples in which Puzo wrote that there were six families in total...

"Of the five New York Families opposing the Corleones his was the least powerful but the most well disposed."

"For the last year the Corleone Family had waged war against the five great Mafia Families of New York."

"The representatives of the Five families of New York were the last to arrive, and Tom Hagen was struck by home much more imposing, impressive these five men were than the out-of-towners. For one thing, the five New York Dons......"

Those phrases are written intentionally, I believe. They are not sloppy omissions, nor are they references made to the other families by Sonny and Tom in conversation, in which they might refer to Five Families in a generic sense.

That, along with my argument that the Corleones are meant to be a fictional sixth family, given that the novel is set against a somewhat historical backround of mafia history in NYC, has convinced me beyond any doubt.

Turnbull, put up you dukes.

The mind boggles at the possibility.

SCENE: Flashback, the mid 1950's, New York City. Madison Square Garden, its air tinged blue thick with cigar smoke is sold out for the light-heavyweight championship bout between two of Brooklyn's native sons. In the distance you can hear the sponsor's theme song playing ("to look sharp, and to feel sharp, too") as Gillette's announcer, Jimmy Powers, is announcing the combatants.

Powers: "In this coooooornnnneer, representing the Five Families theory, a favorite son from Brownsville.... Turrrrnnbuuuullllll".

Crowd (in unison): "Turnbull's a good man, Turnbull's a good man".

Powers: "And in thisssss coooornnnnerrr, from Flatbush's Ebbetts Field, the 6-5 favorite representing the SIX Families idea.... Plawwwwwwww".

Crowd (in unison): "Windbag, windbag".

Referee, J. Geoff Malta, replete in his red and white striped shirt is giving the fighters their last minute instructions and warnings as the microphone picks up a few words between the boxers.

Turnbull: "You're going down, chump. You're gonna feel like a 1957 Mercedes-Benz 300SL Gullwing Coupe ran over your head".

Plaw: "Chill out pepper eater, I'm gonna knock you out faster than a Bob Feller fastball from 1946 when he struck out 348 in 371.1 innings".

The bell rings, the combatants jump off their stools and come out swinging. Two big haymakers miss each other and their momentum swings both fighters completely around, knocking them out. They flounder helplessly on the mat as the ref counts them out.

The crowd, too weak from its pre-fight frenzy starts to file out of the Garden amidst cries of "It was Barzini all along" and "Tattaglia's a pimp".

Once again, the issue remains unresolved.

Be-yoot-i-full, SC.

I'm going into training right now

Turnbull: "Amen, Amen!"

SC, you absolutely outdid yourself!

That is hilarious SC

"Counting for the knockdowns at the bell: Judge Artie Idela. Your referee: Ruby Goldstein. Boxing Commissioner: Jim Norris. Running the fight rackets for the Mob: Frankie (Mr. Gray) Carbo..."

I kind've skimmed over the description of the Family Heads just prior to Vito's 'meeting'. Whoever they were, and whatever they controlled...whatever.

I was really more anxious to get to the gyst of the gathering, and Don Vito's speech (much more detailed of course, than the one vocalized in the movie).

What I found MUCH more interesting than the lives of Cuneo, Barzine etc....was the story of how the conference room was obtained via Vito's relationship with the banker.

Apple

While going through the book today to find some quotes to post in another thread, I cam across this one, which I don't think has ever been cited before.

After the assasination attempt on Vito, Sonny says to Michael:

Sollozzo is dead meat. I don't care if we have to fight all the five families in New York.

I'm not looking to revive the argument, altho anyone is welcome to comment of course.

I'd just like to have one thread for the record that can be referred to for all of the relevant quotes.

From what I got from the book the family num five was the Corleone family I didn't see it said five other families I just saw The Five New York Families.

But look back at what Plaw posted, and I posted, quoting the book.


Don Cardi

Just re-reading this thread.....

There are some inconsistencies between the book and movie(s) which we must accept because that is the was they are clearly stated or portrayed.

For example, in the book Mike has two sons; in the movie, a son and a daughter.

In the book, Calo is killed in the car bombing that kills Appolonia; in the movie his death is not shown, and he reappears in GF III.

But regarding the question of the number of families, since it is open to debate in both the book and film, I believe that whatever conclusion we draw for the book, which came first and is the source for the films, should, absent specific evidence to the contrary, apply to the films as well.

Don Carlo Tramonti of Florida
Don Joseph Zaluchi of Detroit
Don Frank Falcone of The West Coast
Don Anthony Molinari of San Francisco
Don Domenick Panza of Boston
Don Vincent Folenza of Cleveland
and some members of The Bocchicchio Family

When we discuss the question of five or six families in the novel, we are generally referring to the New York City families, not those families whose heads Tom Hagen referred to as "the out-of-towners, the hicks".

New soldier here. Nice to find a few others who share my interest in...uh...olive oil.

There's also this in the narrative of the Don's life: "It was Brasi, operating alone when one of the six powerful families tried to interfere and become the protector of the independents, who assassinated the head of the family as a warning. Shortly after, the Don recovered from his wound and made peace with that particular family."

That's somewhere near 1937, and the narrative section runs up to the time that Sollozzo enters the scene. Wouldn't it be very unusual if the number of families was reduced from 6 to 5 during that period (including the 9-year peace), without some mention in the narrative about how that happened?

Possibly Don Corleone's "making peace with that particular family" meant absorbing them into his own after asassinating the family head, leaving five additional families besides the Corleones.

yeah possible, but they still say thru out the novel and the movie - the five families would come after us and the corleones would be outlawed, or something.

Did some reading myself, more precisly I finally reached those points in the novel, lol. Anyways...

The war is described as the war between the Corleone Family and The Five Families. Therefore, logically, the Corleone Family must be number six. Who's the unnamed fifth Family then? Well just flip back a chapter or two and you'll find this:

Does it say that family got eliminated? No. Does it say the Corleone Family is not counted among the six, no. Earlier even it says "[there] were five or six "Families" too powerful to eliminate." So, Corleone must be being counted among the six. So, we have Corleone, Cuneo, Barzini, Stracci, Tattaglia, and the unknown Family. Plus the Bocchicchio Family as the negotiators. There, perhaps this will solve the problem. Plus I can finally put that A in logic to use, hehe.

The more I think about it, the more I think the Bocchiccios are supposed to be the fifth of the Five Families, and that Puzo just had trouble clarifying how they could be a part of the war while also acting as negotiator.

Did some more reading, and I have come to the conclusion that it is impossible for the Corleone Family to be one of the Five. Why? It says that as host, Don Corleone was already there before anyone else began to arrive...and the Five Families arrived last. So it's impossible for the Corleone Family to be one of the Five.

And I also don't believe that the Bocchiccios could be counted among the Five, simply because of the way they act as insurance. When Michael went to speak with Sollozo, a hostage from the Bocchiccios was sent to the Corleones. If Michael was killed, the hostage would be killed too, and the Bocchiccios would blame Sollozo. The same happens here. When we are introduced to the Bocchiccios and this system of negotiations, we learn that each Family represented has been issued a hostage for insurance. So why would the Bocchiccios take one of their own as a hostage? Nothing comes of it except losing a member.

Just to clear it up the five families is based off the real five families of New York so yes the Corleones are one of the five families since there are only five Mob families opperating in New York.

still the novel said 5/6 families as stated above. so.....

based off of New York City - you still got Buffalo, NY and Rochester, NY -
http://www.americanmafia.com/26_Family_Cities.html

Some reasons why I've come to think that the Bocchicchios are the probably (not to a mathematical certainty) the fifth of the Five Families:

1. The other New York families seem to have territories in Upper New York State, New York City, and New Jersey. The Bocchicchios seem to fit pretty nicely in there, with a territory in the Hudson Valley.

2. They're given a detailed description in the peace conference chapter, just as the operations of Cuneo, Stracci,Tataglia and Barzini are described. It would have been silly to hold the description of the Bocchicchio operation until the New York dons actually arrived, because the long narrative description of the Bocchicchios at that point would have sidetracked the description of the peace conference.

3. The Bocchicchios are largely played for comic relief, but they are a substantial family. They're not just vendetta artists: they negotiated the terms of the conference. And they're powerful enough that they can project fear as far as the West Coast. Also, from Vito's statements, it seems he respects the Bocchicchios more than, say, the Tataglias.

4. Finally, I think the biggest stumbling block is just the mental dissonance between one family being both part of the war and also negotiator/hostages. But Vito had to make the first step in some direction. Who else could he turn to -- the police? It has to be either an outside family, or one of the Five Families that he trusts.

From the outcome of the novel, it's obvious that the Corleones only have a blood feud with Barzini and Tataglia. There's no reason to think that they wouldn't turn to any of the other families to set up a truce. And from all that is said about the Bocchicchios, it is clear that, if they agreed to a truce, they could be trusted to abide by it. They don't lie.

I don't have the book in front of me, and I have a couple of hanging questions: 1. does the book say that the Bocchicchio negotiator arrived at the conference early; and, 2. does the narrative of the Bocchicchios support their being one of the "six powerful families" by 1937?

These are just some things I think about when I should be working.

So that clears the question up, huh?

That point has been raised before, of course.

The Godfather is a work of fiction, set in the context of Mafia activities in New York City during the 'real life' time period that roughly parallels the time period covered by the book.

I believe that Puzo deliberatly created the Corleones as the 6th family so as not to invite speculation as to which of the actual NYC families they were meant to represent.

As has been stated here many times in the past, the personality characteristics, traits, and methods of Don Vito Corleone seem to be an amalgamation of the other five NYC crime family heads at the time.

Creating the Corleones as a fictional sixth family - in keeping with the fact that the book is a work of fiction - was deliberate.

If Corleone is 6, then who are the other 5?

NEVERMIND, I GET IT. YOUR PROLLY RIGHT.

fuck that ok the five families were as follows in order of power Corleone, Barzini,Cuneo,Stracci,Tattaglia. Those are the five families so get the fuck over it ok everybody?

Well gee....

My apologies -- I wasn't aware that we had a member who was so knowledgeable and so certain of the answer to this age-old question that they felt it necessary to punctuate it by expressing their concern for others and suggesting that everybody "get the fuck over it".

But since I now know that we do, I'll try and be more careful in the future and suggest to everyone else that they do the same.

And, of course, going forward, should any other questions or issues arise whre there seems to be some disagreement, I'll be sure to see to it that they are brought to your attention so that we may have the pleasure of your sharing with us another very complete, articulate, and erudite response.

Thank you for your time and efforts in getting involved in this thread, Toni, and I'm sure I speak not only for myself but for others as well when I say that I look forward to many thoughtful posts from you in the future.

This coming from someone who can't even spell Tony?

Take a chill pill, Toni.

SC I did it Toni on purpose I did it for Antonio I know that Antonio's have gone by Toni spelled T O N I such as Toni Cip. in GTA 3 and LCS read the manual it spells his name Toni.

Well, I guess he (or she) can spell "Toni".

How about if we say "this coming from someone who has no idea when to use a period, comma, contraction, or capital letter"?



Hmmmm.....Doesn't seem to have quite the same impact, does it?

I finally had some time to look at these questions that I left for myself (?):

1. I don't think there's anything that says the Bocchicchio negotiator arrived early; and,
2. The "six powerful families", in Vito's long narrative, are defined in terms of just being too powerful to destroy. Short of Mussolini taking power in the US, the Bocchicchios seem to qualify.

First, mustachepete, let me say (as you must already know) that this is one of two unresolved questions (along with "Who killed the Tahoe assassins?") that I enjoy discussing the most.

That said, I was somewhat surprised (and embarrassed) to realize that apparently I had somehow missed the opportunity to respond to your post which I quoted above.

As far as your Question #1 goes, I'd agree.

There is no reference at all in the novel to the fact that any representative of the Bocchicchio Family may have arrived at the meeting early.

Interestingly, however, I was looking through the novel yesterday morning for the historical references to the Bocchicchio Family and Mussolini and his rise to power and war against the Mafia to see if I could get a handle on the approximate time that the Bocchicchios might have fled Sicily for the U.S. and whether or not that would have been early enough to gave them enough time in America to rise to the level of power necessary for them to become “one of the 5 or 6 families to powerful to eliminate.”

So as I’m looking I came across yet another passage which I don’t believe has ever been cited in these discussions before, which reinforce the idea that there are five other families in addition to the Corleones.

I refer to page 87 of the paperback 30th Anniversary Edition, right before the beginning of Chapter 3.

It’s right after Vito has been shot, and Sonny is thinking to himself, analyzing the situation, trying to figure out who might be lined up against the Corleones, where Luca Brasi might be, etc.

Anyway, Puzo writes about Sonny’s thoughts:

“It was the first challenge to the Corleone Family and their power in ten years. There was no doubt that Sollozzo was behind it, but he never would have dared attempt such a stroke unless he had support from at least one of the five great New York families. (Bold and italics mine).

The key here is that the five families in that statement could not possibly be meant to include the Corleones since, obviously, Sollozzo would not be looking to the Corleones for support in a war against the Corleones, so he must be referring to five other families.

Notice also Puzo’s use of the lower case in “five” and the lower case in “families”, which suggests that he is writing about five separate families, not using “Five Families” as a generic term meant to include the Corleones.

Would it not make sense that, since the book is a fictional story, the mysterious sixth family represents the REAL New York mafia? I know that you can draw similarities between the others and real life families, but since the sixth is hinted at but never described (nor is their part in the war mentioned in depth) I always thought it was supposed to represent a real "Family" of New York.

I subscribe to the "five families INCLUDING the Corleones" theory, but I still find it odd that the meeting explicitly says that there were five OTHERS besides Don Corleone. Until I read that part I just assumed that "The Five Families" was a generic term for all of them. I'm not so sure now, though...

Creating an anticipation matched only when Kay heard Michael's car door slam in the Corleone driveway....

If I were determined to prove that there are five and only five families, I would respond that the phrase "such a stroke" worked to generalize the rest of the passage, so that it doesn't refer specifically to this situation where the Corleones happen to be the targets.

On page 95, Sonny also says, "I don't care if we have to fight all the five families in New York", but it's always good when the narrator says it, too.

I agree that there's justification for the historical backdrop of NYC's five Mafia families, but as I've said many times in the past....

I think that Puzo deliberately made the Corleones a fictional sixth family so as to avoid speculation as to which of the actual five families the Corleones were meant to represent.

That's the point: As a fictional sixth family, they are not meant to represent any of the actual NYC families.

And, strangely, from the very first time I read the book - way before the movie came out, that's the way I figured it.

Five NYC families, and here's a story about a fictional sixth family and their interaction with the "real-life" five.

And if I were determined to prove that there are five families in addition to the Corleones, I would point out the 8-10 references throughout the book that clearly and explicitly refer to five additional families, particularly the passage on page 281 at the meeting of the Dons, when Puzo writes of their arrival and states

The representatives of the Five Families of New York were the last to arrive and Tom hagen was struck by how much more imposing, impressive THESE FIVE MEN WERE than the out-of-towners, the hicks....

What could be clearer and more definitive than that?

Clearly, Puzo is writing about five other men besides Don Vito Corleone.

All of that evidence vs. the one single piece of evidence that argues against a sixth family:

Puzo's sloppy failure to name or describe them in the same scene.

I hope not. That would get us up to TEN families.

If the Bocchicchios are supposed to be the sixth, then they did get a long description in that chapter, it's just shifted by a few pages. Cuneo and Stacchi don't seem to have defined roles in the war, either, which was probably a good thing for them in the long run.

I was poking around on Amazon, and saw a review for a books on tape version with Joe Montegna. It apparently left out about an hour of material that's in the book, including the descriptions of the other warring families. So anyone who listened to the books wouldn't know what the heck all the confusion is.

Agreed.

Reviving old questions:

In the description of the peace conference, it is revealed that "When Michael had gone to meet Sollozzo, a Bocchicchio had been left with the Corleone Family as surety for Michael's safety."

Before meeting with Sollozzo, Michael asked Clemenza about the "hostage." Clemenza answer includes, "he is an important man in the Families."

If you subscribe to the theory that Puzo used "Families" as a collective term, then the Bocchicchios are included in it. And at least one of them is "important" in the underworld.

The Bocchicchios were important because they provided an important service to the other families. But they weren't one of the Five Families. The novel provides the needed detail. Puzo wrote that the Bocchicchios dominated a local garbage collection racket. But they were basically small-time. "A streak of stupidity ran through them," he wrote. Also they were "straight from the shoulder people who knew how to bribe a policeman but were unable to approach a political bagman" (I'm approximating those quotes).

SPOILER:

The hostage and negotiating business they created was based on the fact that, if the representative of the side that hired the Bocchicchio hostage were killed by the other side, the victim's Family would kill the hostage. Then the Bocchicchios would take their revenge on the other side. They were so simple-minded that nothing would deter them. "A Bocchicchio hostage was gilt-edged insurace," said Puzo. But the hostage business is hardly the stuff of one of the Five Families.
The story of how the Bocchicchios helped Vito to bring Michael back from Sicily is, IMO, one of the best, if not the best, backstories in the novel that never got into the movie.

I wonder if there was or is such a Mafia family.

I wonder, too.
"Felix Bocchicchio," the family member who was instrumental in getting Michael home, is the name of a guy who was mixed up in the fight rackets with Frankie (Mr. Gray) Carbo.

I brought up this subject when I first joined the Board years ago. The answer I got was that Puzo used the term Five families as a general reference and did not mean that there wer five families in addition to the Corleones. I accepted that the Corleones were one of the Five Families. Yes, in the novel there are plenty of references to the Five Families by the Corleones. But, again, I accept that Puzo used that term a s general reference to include the Corleones.

Here's a little nugget I gleaned for the GF1 transcript at http://www.thegodfathertrilogy.com



Who was "Carmine Corleone?" There's no reference to him in the novel...is there? Perhaps this was the intentional reference to the sixth family designed to clarify in the movie something FFC himself may have also questioned from the novel.

tony b.

Despite what the transcript says, what Vito says is "Carmine Cuneo." And later in the film, Michael lists "Cuneo" as among the dead heads of the Five Families.

But that's the movie. In the book, six families are named and described: Corleone, Barzini, Cuneo, Stracchi, Tataglia, and Bocchicchio.

Right about Cuneo. But I will never buy that the Bocch are a sixth family.

Using that argument (of the Families that are named) why not include the Molinari Family?

The Bocchicchios are not one of the Five Families.

...and are not introduced at the Don's convention.

Perhaps I should have said, "Six New York families...."

The Bocchicchios do, in fact, receive about as long an "introduction" in that chapter as the Stracci, Cuneo, Barzini, and Tataglia families combined. It's just shifted by a few pages within the same chapter.

Related question: beyond the Five Families, the book says that ten other families were represented at the peace conference. "The South", Detroit, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Boston, and Cleveland were represented, while Chicago was not. In the movie, Vito suggests that Kansas City was represented.

It's more an historical than a literary question, but who would likely have been the other three representatives?

A family from New Orleans (probably not included in the "South" designation - which was mostly for Florida) may have been a possibility. Since the novel states that Cuneo controlled upstate New York it may, or may not include ALL of New York State (like Buffalo, which had a real life Family). St. Louis may be just a guess as well.

Philly, Pittsburgh, Buffalo, Dallas, or New Jersey.

Oh yeah... I forgot Philly... thats almost a definite.

Little Nicky wouldn't like that very much, SC.

The fifth family was the Throckmortons. They had a monopoly on polo ponies and Steuben chrystal. They controlled memberships in the elite tennis clubs and the sale of smoking jackets, cigarette holders, and leather toilet seats. They were invited to the wedding, but declined because the wooden chairs were rentals.

You're confusing the fifth NEW YORK family with the fifth NEWPORT family. The Throckmortons made the fatal error of appointing an Anglo who was not a Saxon as consigliere, and they were wiped out in the Inbred War of 1948.

The main objections to the Bocchicchios being the sixth family all seem to be subjective: they're played for comic relief, they're too small to be a powerful family, their role as peacemakers means they couldn't take part in the war. Is there anything factual (not necessarily historical facts, but just the facts of the story as set out by Puzo) in the book that is inconsistent with the Bocchocchios being the fifth of Five Families?

Thanks for clearing up my confusion. We ethnics are easily confused.

In answer to your Bocch question: Puzo never mentions the Bocch except in their capacity as unforgiving hostages.

[/quote]


In answer to your Bocch question: Puzo never mentions the Bocch except in their capacity as unforgiving hostages. [/quote]

Well, they also have the garbage hauling business. And then they're involved in the scheme to bring Michael back home. You have to wonder how the negotiator/hostage business could have been so "lucrative" when everybody was at peace for ten years.

What's unusual is that neither Stracci nor Cuneo seem to be mentioned in the book, beyond a paragraph apiece in the peace conference chapter. The Bocchicchios get probably ten times that much attention.

Puzo presents that level of detail about the Bocch because they otherwise have no explicit or assumed role in the novel. Also, it's an interesting departure from the usual and customary story about Mafia families. Stracci and Cuneo, however, fit the usual and customary mold of Mafia families, so one can make certain assumptions about their nefariou activities that realy don't require more than a paragraph or so.

In fact, Puzo goes out of his way to say that the Bocch had a streak of stupidity, their lack of adeptness at traditional Mafia endeavors, and their embrace of what is essentially a passive criminal role.

It's interesting that if Puzo had simply written: "To arrange the peace conference, the Godfather called upon the head of the Bocchicchio Family. The Bocchicchios had a territory in the Hudson Valley, and controlled the garbage hauling business there. They were traditionally called upon to act as intermediaries in time of war" then few would question that they they were the sixth family.

The full quote from Puzo is that the Bocchicchios carried a strain of stupidity, "or perhaps they were just primitive." It brings to mind the passage where the doctor sees Vito as an ill-dressed peasant, while conceding that that peasant carried a bit of folk wisdom with him.

One of the recurring themes of the book is that IQ is not everything, and can sometimes be an impediment. The Bocchicchios "are clever enough to make a good living" and that's really all the brains that they needed in their world.

Plus, it was a very interesting story. GF wasn't an elegantly written novel (to say the least), but Puzo was a wonderful storyteller in the great Italian tradition--and the Bocchicchio family and how they made their living was a great story. IMO, their story, and Neri's background and how the Corleones recruited him, are the best backstories in the novel.

Correct on all points TB. I thought the lamest part of the book was the Lucy Mancini in Vegas section. It just semed like filler.

It was filler. And as I've posted before (ad nauseum), the sole purpose seemed to be to allow Puzo to describe Lucy's operation. Evidently a woman he knew had the operation, and Puzo interested himself in it. He was unable to resist passing his knowledge along to us. I don't know what was more annoying--having to wade through all that Lucy-and-Jules crap, or knowing that the only reason they were in the novel was to serve as his vehicle for giving us a lesson in female surgery.

One of the reasons that the movie version of "The Last Don" was so much better than the novel was that the movie minimized all that Hollywood BS that Puzo put in the book. Ohh, how boring!

Puzo died just a few years ago, right? In all the time since the novel was published did anyone ever ask him why he included all that female plumbing stuff and which was the fifth family? Surely, someone did.

I'm sure the "five or six families question" must have been asked at least once. That would have been by Coppolla. The screenplay pretty decisively made the Corleones one of five and only five New York families.

It well could have been asked at some point, but the great majority of people who interviewed him would have either given the book one quick read, or else read it after seeing the movie, and so they never really considered six families.

I did hear Puzo talk about the Mafia in Sicily being a source for his stories. I've thought the Bocchicchio might have been a way for him to introduce some of that information.

New grist for old business:

The Five New York Dons enter the conference room, and Tom sees, "five stout, corpulent men."

Ten pages later, Vito rises to address the conference, "a little thin from his 'illness'".

Well, those instant transformations occur elsewhere. Guests arriving at Connie's wedding "so exclaimed at how well [Vito] looked in his tux that an inexperienced observer might easily have thought the Don himself was the lucky groom." But before the day was out, Vito was at the hospital to visit the dying Genco, and Dr. Kennedy observed "the short, heavy man in an awkwardly fitted tuxedo."

Puzo's Don from the South, Carlo Tramonti, is a pretty fair representation of Carlos Marcello (New Orleans) and Santo Trafficante (Tampa)

I think at that time there would have been more East Coast representatives invited. Perhaps someone from Philly, a separate New Jersey Family and maybe someone from Pittsburgh or Pittstown.

Just a guess...

Another one, about the first conviction of Felix Bocchicchio:

"The clan did not ask help from any of the Families or Don Corleone because Felix had refused to ask their help and had to be taught a lesson...."

Don Corleone isn't part of "the Families?"

Yeah, it's another example of why there's so much back-and-forth about how many families there were.

godfather?
I do not find these family
lost [url=http://www.dvdsetpro.com/Search.aspx?keyword=lost][/url]