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.