Don Corleone's motto was "Every man has only one destiny." No matter how many times I read the novel; I am always amazed at Puzo's brilliance in weaving free will and destiny in the novel. Puzo is subtlety showing how these ideas are inter-connected, and they cannot be separated from each other. The Corleones are caught up in this whirlwind, and they cannot escape from it...Or can they? Despite the Corleones being a part of the La Costa Nostra; Puzo hints that the Corleones could have easily not be a part of this world. They could have easily been law-abiding citizens and lived normal lives. This is what Vito deep inside really wanted, but Puzo showed that both his own choices and circumstances made him into the Godfather just as his son Michael eventually became in the novel and films. Vito Corleone was born and grew up in a violent country Sicily, and his father was murdered, which lead Vito to come to the United States. However, he did not stop getting involved with the Mafia until Clemenza asked him to hide the guns from him in Little Italy. Now Vito could have just given him the guns, and he could have say no Clemenza about getting the carpet from his "friend." After they get the carpet, Vito could have stop right then and there, but he had to support his family, so he continue to steal in order to provide for them. The point of no return for Vito was murder of Fanucci. After he pulled the trigger, Vito was now on the road to fulfill his destiny as the Godfather. As for Vito's children, their destiny was connected to what their father did, but they still had a choice except for Sonny, who saw his father killing Fanucci. As for Fred, Vito saw that his second son could not make good choices for himself, so he decided what his son destiny would be. Connie is a matter no consequence for Vito because she would never be a part of the "Family Business." Lastly Michael, who made the choice of not wanting to be a part of the Family. Michael choose to defile his father's wishes by joining the army and serving his country. Michael wanted to be a mathematics professor, however, his father being the Godfather and being a part of the Mafia indirectly prevented Michael to have his own destiny away from his father. If Michael never went to hospital and stop his father assassination attempt or lost his temper and got hit by Captain McCluskey would he killed Sollozzo and McCluskey? Even after the shotting, Michael's technically still had a choice of not wanting to become his father and becoming a part of the Mafia if it was not for the death of his first wife in Sicily. It seemed in a sense that both Vito and Michael became the men mostly threw the part of outside forces then their own choices or not. This was Puzo at his best.

Webster defines "destiny" as: "A predetermined course of events often held to be an irresistible power or agency." That scarcely defines either Vito or any of his sons. All of them had choices, all of the time.

Vito came from a culture in which injustice limited choices. He had no choice about leaving Sicily. I'd argue that he didn't know that the package Clemenza tossed him held guns, nor did he know that he'd be particpating in the theft of the rug that Clemenza promised him. Other than those, it was all choices: Fanucci did him an injustice by forcing his nephew into Vito's job, but Vito could have (and did) suck it up. But no one forced him to participate in the dress heist--he could have found a legitimate job. And when Fanucci demanded a cut, he could have accepted it as part of the cost of being a criminal in that neighborhood, instead of killing Fanucci. And even afterward, he chose to take over the neighborhood rackets that had been neglected since Fanucci's death. That's not destiny as defined by Webster.

Michael had even more choices. It'd take too much time to list all of them. But start with his original choice:

He was right to conclude that Sollozzo woud try again to kill his father. But he himself unintentionally suggested a non-lethal way to protect his father, when he said to Tom: "We have newspaper people on our payroll...they'd love a story like that" [of a dishonest cop who got mixed up in drugs and murder]. The Corleones had been doing business with McCluskey for years. They could have leaked the story of McCluskey's corruption and his alliance with Sollozzo in the attempted murder of Vito. Given Vito's prominence, the newspapers would have given sensational treatment to the story of McCluskey's collusion with Sollozzo in the shooting of Vito and pulling the police guard off of Vito. The police commissioner would be forced to put 24/7 guards around Vito's hospital. He'd have to hunt down and probably deport Sollozzo, and suspend McCluskey "pending investigation." Or one of the judges on the Corleone payroll could have ordered a grand jury investigation of McCluskey's corruption.

Result: Sollozzo and McCluskey would be neutralized, Vito would have been protected, and there'd be no Five Families War of 1946. Michael could have gone back to college, married, lived happily ever after as a legitimate guy.

And there would have been no Godfather Trilogy.

Very good points you made TurnBull. Both Vito and Michael had free will, and they did have choices that would have resulted in both of them living legitimate lives. They choose to become criminals and cold-blooded killers. You are correct that both Vito and Michael could have made the right choices but then there would have not been a novel. This raises some interesting questions what was the Corleones's destiny? Did they have a destiny within the framework of the novel?

I've always maintained that the underlying theme of the novel and the film trilogy is: Crime doesn't pay. You could say that when Michael chose a life of crime, he was destined to be undone by it. While he constantly won battles, he lost the war, big-time. All the tragedies of his life--Sonny's murder, Appolonia's murder, his divorce from Kay, his murder of Fredo, the murder of his beloved daughter--were related to his criminal career. While (as I posted) he could have chosen out of a life of crime, he didn't--and the violence that dogged his life was an inevitable (or, if you like, predestined) result.

It's interesting that Puzo speculates that, alternatively, Vito could have eventually owned his own grovery store, but he would not have become the great Don. Of course, I don't recall that Puzo states that being just a grocer his greatest crime would have probably been cheating a customer instead of murder and mayhem.

The idea of destiny in the book is very well used to rationalize the Corleones becoming gangsters.

The Godfather novel and the film (I) remind me of the ancient Greek tragedies. Everyone is trying to do his best but in the end they are hit by higher forces (Gods, destiny...).
When we look at the beginning of the novel, Puzo lets us see the Corleone children.
Sonny: He is supposed to be the next Godfather but he doesn't have the brains. In the end he's dead.
Fredo: No brains, no guts. In the end he's the outsider of the family.
Connie: Everybody loves her, she celebrates her wedding. Her husband becomes a traitor, so she becomes a young widow.
Tom: Smart and capable, but because he's Irish he's not intitled to inherit the "olive oil business". Being a consigliere is as high as he can get, at least inside the empire.
Michael: Smart and capable, but he tries hard not to get involved in the crime business. But then, his father is being shot, which changes a lot. (Technically, he at that point he becomes the protagonist of the story.) He's trying to be strong for the family. "But by being strong for his family he lost it." (Michael thinks this about himself in the film pt.II) In the novel the tragedy is underlined in the end by his wife lighting candles in the church for the soul of her husband who became what he never wanted - a criminal monster.