Someone brought up a scenerio over in another topic which got me thinking. Had Hagen been born an italian, would he have made a good Don? Do you think that he would have done things differenty than Michael? If so, what?

Italian no....Sicilian yes!

Actually thats a great question, and it goes to the whole "nature vs. nurture" issue. Tom was sout in the streets as a kid, and you would think that would have made him a bit more cunning, and then he was raised by Vito, who had to have taught him a thing or two.

I think his legal education and the fact that the German temperament obviously trumped the Irish, made Tom someone who was always looking for ways to mediate disputes. He never understood that in some instances among the mob there is no such thing as a "compromise."

They were different people regardless of ethnicity. Tom was exposed to and participated in all kinds of perfidy, yet he kept his composure and didn't want to "wipe out everybody." Michael, though his persona was pacific, he was a killer at heart.

Tom would have been the other extreme of sonny, as sonny was hot headed and always going for the violent methods, Tom would have gone for reason and caution but would have been easily killed by the other families as they were much more ruthless.

For me the battle of sonny and Tom is the battle of extreme reason or Caution against extreme Violence or emotion. Both on there own fail but togahter make hell of a team.

Emotion got Sonny killed and i think extreme Caution would have got Tom killed.

Intriguing question, DC!
As dt said, is it nature vs. nurture? I think it's "nurture." Circumstance, not country of origin of parents, put Tom where he was and made him what he was. Vito raised Tom not to be his successor, but to be a potential consigliere, or at least a bridge to the legitimate world--a guy whose smooth manner, eduction and conciliatory manner made him a good "public front" for the politicians, police officials (and movie moguls) that Vito needed to deal with. Vito sent him to law school, where he learned the art of conciliation. Vito taught him never to make a threat, etc. I believe that if Tom had been an orphan of Sicilian parents, and Sonny brought him home, and Vito raised him, he'd have turned out the same way because that's the way Vito wanted it.

I think that Tom's biggest flaw was his need for approval and love from his adopted family. The book delves into this a bit more, even describing a recurring nightmare that Hagen has of being homeless and blind, and his only comfort is waking up in Vito's house. This leads to a unquestioned loyalty to his adopted family and a need for their love and approval. Perhaps this stopped him from being too ruthless, perhaps it stopped him from being truly forceful in his advice to Sonny, Vito and Michael. If this same need drove him as a Don, then he would be a weak one.

Great thread.

I think Tom(had he been Italian) would have made a very successful Don.He would have conducted himself along the lines of Vito,therefor gaining Respect and love.Also as a previous Consigliere,he would have used those attributes to stay ahead of the rest.
As for being as cunning as Michael,well no, he didn't have that killer instinct but he would always know whats good for business.

That's an excellent point, SB. People who crave approval often are "too loyal," too ready to approve what the boss says, so they can get approval in return. A consigliere should be the Don's "peripheral vision": someone who can see the problems that inhere in the Don's decisions, and warn the boss--not just simply say "yes."

I don't find any evidence in the novel or the film that Tom sought approval from his adopted family. He looked at Vito as his father and Sonny as his brother. It was all straightforward. They reciprocated and Tom felt comfortable enough to differ with the Don over Sollozzo's proposal and he lambasted Sonny on a couple of occasions. On the other hand, he did not think of Connie, Mike, or Fredo as his family. He didn't think of Mama Corleone as his mother. It says so in the novel and it also says that they had been kind to him, but not loving.

There is that one scene in GFII where Tom says that he always wanted to be thought of as a brother, but I don't beleive that that statement supports any claim that he sought approval.

If he was born of Vito and Carmela then he wouldn't need the approval because he wouldn't be the kraut-mick of the family.

Tom was not ruthless enough. He could have been an okay don, but never of the most powerful family.

If Tom believes that the only thing keeping him safe and warm is Vito's succor then I would think, yes, that he would be very loyal. But I also think that would make him all the more ruthless when that source of comfort is threatened.

Also, he seemed pretty forceful with Sonny. He yells at him on several occasions and successfully gets him to change his mind about killing Sollozzo (until Michael speaks up). I can't imagine Genco yelling at Vito, or dissuading him from a course of action.

Tom certainly favored negotiation to an extreme, but I'm not sure it's because of the reasons you state.

I wonder if Vito recognized Sonny's temper issues and consiously molded Tom into an overly conciliatory man as a counter-balance.

Woltz, you hit the nail o nthe head. Tom operated under Vito's wing, using Vito's approach which was to minimize violence. The novel emphasiszes Vito's committment to reason (rajunah) and using violence only as a last resort.

There actually is a part in the novel where Vito realizes that Sonny is really not suited for the Donship.

Sonny's handling of the furnace men did not altogether please Vito because Sonny handled it as the club, not as a rapier. He was considering making Sonny his underboss and the way he handled this situation was a test. The novel never confirms Vito's ultimate decision.

One of Puzo's most felicitous phrases. I often used it at work to describe my approach to situations vs. my boss's approach--and why I wasn't the boss and she was.

She?

Your boss was a WOMAN?

Aw geez, Edith, next thing you know they'll want the right to vote.

I'm kidding, really.

I think Tom would have been great Don. He is obviously intelligent enough. In part II micheal even gives him control over the Family while he is away.Mike obviously has faith in Tom's abilities. This also explains why Mike kept him out of the inner circle for a little while...he could ensure that Tom could be trusted.

While Tom was the "acting Don" while Michael was traveling between Miami, New York and Cuba, he managed to pull off one of the greatest coups of the Trilogy, namely he compromised Geary.
That was vintage Vito Corleone...mixing brutality with "reason" to accomplish something. This is the only time after Vito's death that we actually see the Corleone family GAIN political influence. He would not have made the deal with Roth in Cuba, but instead he would have consolidated the Corleone's position in Las Vegas, and in the years following he would have been in a position to sell all the Vegas holdings to MGM and the other huge corporations which bought it up in the 70's. In short, he would have made the Corleone family "completely legitimate."

In fact, thinking about this shows that Michael really did not want to make the family "completely legitimate." If he did, all he had to do was tell Tom to make it happen, and he would have.

I agree that compromising Geary was a great coup for the Corleones. But I think it was Michael's idea--or at least I don't think Tom would have had blanket approval to murder someone without Michael's prior approval. See this thread:

http://www.gangsterbb.net/threads/ubbthr...=true#Post36125

And yes, Michael never really wanted to be totally legit. In the case of gambling, he could have been a totally legit casino owner in Nevada. But was he? Nope! He "owned or controlled three hotels," as Geary noted, but in his Senate testimony later, Michael said that he "owned some shares" in the hotels. Did he want to legitimately buy into the Tropigala? Nope! He sent Neri to muscle Klingman out of his interest. For that matter, he could have made a clean break with the "olive oil business" after moving to Nevada. But did he? Nope! We see him giving orders to Frankie and involving himself in territorial disputes with the Rosato brothers, who are into drugs and prostitution.
Further down the road: "Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in," he complains--immediately after presiding over a Commission meeting.

Interesting thread TB, thanks. The first time Michael meets Geary is at Anthony's first communion, and that very night is the attempt on Michael's life. He leaves immediately, so there would never have been a time when Fredo could have told Michael
that Geary was a regular at his whore house. This leads me to believe that either Tom or Neri learned of this and the plan was hatched. The timing was impeccable with Tom arriving after the murder of the hooker, just as the Senator was coming to.

There is also evidence that this was hatched between Tom and Neri in the shot showing Neri washing his hands in the bathroom and Tom shooting him a look as if to say "He's going to see you stand back!"

Geary's statement to Tom re. the dead hooker: "We done it be-FOE-er," tells me that he was a regular at that brothel with that whore. Given his prominence as a US Senator, the manager likely would have taken due note of him the first time he showed up, and reported it to Fredo. First reaction: Fredo was too dumb to report Geary's presence at his brothel to Michael. But Fredo was just simple enough to see it as something that'd give him bragging rights. Remember how he bursts in on Michael while he's with Sonny's daughter Francesca and Gardiner Shaw, shouting, "Hey Mike, guess who's here? Frankie Five Angels!" I see him bursting in on Michael the first time he learned of Geary's peccadillos: "Hey Mikey, guess who's a regular at my joint? Senator Geary!"

Excellent point (and an excellent scene that should have not been cut). However once Michael left, Fredo could have just as easily bragged to Tom about how that important Senator he saw at the party wa a regular at the whorehouse.

But putting aside whether this was a Michael plan or a Tom-Neri plan, how was Fredo "handled" for this? Tom tells Geary that if it had not been Fredo's place they could not help him, implying that Fredo had the sense to call Tom when the hooker died. I cannot believe whoever planned this murder/blackmail
would have had Fredo very involved.

BTW it seems hookers are exempt from Clemenza's "pain in the ass innocent bystanders" rule. The women who slept with Tattaglia and Geary now sleep with the fishes!

I'm sure that the Corleones would have developed alot of info on people they did business with, especially a Senator. Murdering even a prostitute is not something you do with alacrity. I'm sure they put alot of thought into it. At this point, I don't think Fredo was considered much of a risk.

Had Hagen been 'born Italian', he most likely would've not ended up in the streets, befriended by Sonny and taken in by Vito and his wife, raised as their son and put through law school to eventually become consiglieri to the most powerful Family in organized crime.

Would he have ended up a 'Don' and one day been a rival of his contemporary Michael Corleone? Probably not because his 'Italian' parents might very well have been friends of the Corleone Family. Even if Tom had become Don of another Family, he would not be compared to Michael because Sonny Corleone might not have died due in part to Tom's non-Genco/non-Sicilian lawyer's brain.

CouldaWouldaShoulda.

Here's one more to 'discussion for the sake of...'.



Apple

...And one more CouldaWouldaShoulda for the sake of discussion post that you've taken the time to reply to!




Are you saying that the only reason he wound up in the streets was because he was Irish? That Italians didn't wind up in the streets?

Everyone knows that all Italians know each other personally, that only German-Irish people end up in the streets, and that creative speculation about fiction is just "woulda couldashoulda."

Apple is going soft in the brain. I think she's turning into Cider.

IMO Tom wouldnt have been a good Don because he lacked the ruthless edge that Mike and Vito had. Even when theres a war going on in part 1 Tom is still looking for a peaceful solution.

In part 2 when Mike is talking about wiping out Roth Tom is lagging behind with his cautious nature.

Tom was a good Lawyer, a good business man but no way was he Don material.

There are any number of conflicts within the criminal underworld. If they were all resolved by violence, there would not be any criminal underworld. Most are resolved through negotiation. Tom was made for negotiation. However, his murder credentials are quite in evidence. He was in on everything that Vito that resulted in harm to people and Vito harmed alot of people.

That's very true. And, much as we like to think of regular wars between families (as in Clemenza telling Michael, "Ah, dat's all right, dese t'ings hafta happen every ten years or so--lets out the bad blood"), families would much rather negotiate than fight. Wars are expensive, interfere with business, are dangerous, and enhance the omnipresent opportunities for treachery. Most of the wars we read about in real life are within families, over leadership and territories.

Absolutely!

Most mob hits are over petty, inter-family bullshit. In the history of the American Mafia, there have only been a handful of "family vs. family" wars. But we are suckers for the written word, and love to but into it all.