This article argues the literary significance of Mario Puzo’s The Godfather and the ultimate justification for its success as both a commercially marketable product and a work of art.  This argument holds much relevance to the paralleled success of The Godfather films.

            There have been numerous analyses of The Godfather since its premier in 1972.  Such a work had never been seen before, and offered much to assess.  It is a story of violent crime, but yet an outlook on the ideals of family and morals.  It is a sort of documentary of its times, but then again still a completely fictitious story.  How then does one classify this film in terms of art and product?

            As Chiampi cites Puzo’s own assessment of his work, he shows that the author created a distinctive critique on America, but that Puzo felt that he had “sold out” when he wrote The Godfather.  He says that given the opportunity again, he could have produced a much better work of literary art.  What then, does this say about the film?  Is the film a work of art, an intimate look into the core of the American dream, or is it a “sell-out,” a built-up product of profit? 

            Francis Ford Coppola would argue that The Godfather is a true work of cinematic expression.  If one looks at the circumstances of the novel and the film, one could say that by collaborating with Mario Puzo on the screenplay, Coppola gave the author his second chance to truly express that which he regretted not fulfilling in the novel.  This is why few critics would dare to sell short this renowned film, and why The Godfather still remains one of the best works of cinema in history.

            Mario Puzo’s The Godfather debuted on bookshelves in 1969, and America has since-then been fascinated with the world of organized crime.  His novel, the basis for The Godfather Trilogy, introduced the Corleone family and romanticized the gangster lifestyle. 

            The book follows two generations of one of the biggest crime families in New York starting from Vito Corleone’s immigration to the United States in 1909 to his son Michael’s taking-over of the “family business” almost 40 years later.  The Godfather Parts I and II align quite naturally with the novel, as Puzo co-wrote the screenplay with director Francis Ford Coppola.  From reading the book, however, one can grasp a whole new understanding of the drama that ultimately made the movies.  There are many powerful messages in the novel for instance that go unmentioned throughout any of the three films. 

            One such case is the scene that unfolds at the very end of Puzo’s narrative.  Michael’s wife, Kay, kneels before the altar in an empty church, “Then with a profound and deeply willed desire to believe… she said the necessary prayers for the soul of Michael Corleone.”  How does such a significant scene simply go untold during the movie?  Nowhere in the film is the audience aware of any sort of dread by Kay for the soul of her husband.  In the film, we are given a feeling of hatred for the path that Michael has chosen.

There are numerous instances of unsaid imagery in the movie that are prevalent in the novel, but it is the job of the writers to show what is believed to be the most pertinent. 

In the article “Resurrecting the Godfather,” author James Thomas Chiampi analyzes Mario Puzo’s, The Godfather, and the themes that are consistent throughout the book.  In addition to this, he compares and contrasts the book with the film made by Francis Ford Coppola, to show the difference in the overall message of these two mediums.  Quoting The Godfather Papers, Chiampi informs the reader that Puzo’s overall intentions of writing this book was financially motivated, and according to Puzo, writing this book caused him to “sell out.” 

Chiampi analyzes Puzo’s writing, showing that the book is a social commentary.  He states that Puzo’s writing shows that crime in America is in response to “alienation and powerlessness.”  In order for one to attain power, Puzo shows that one must revert back to the Italian customs.  Chiampi emphasizes that these Italian customs are conveyed through themes that run throughout the book:  a code of behavior, courtesy and strong family ties.  These are expressed through the characteristics of the characters.  Chiampi points out that Sonny’s spontaneity can be categorized as “American,” while Michael’s demeanor is more Sicilian.

Chiampi believes that a theme Puzo tried to develop was the fact that Sicilian culture is better than that of America, and tries to convey that American society is irrational compared to Sicilian.

One can see that Puzo’s beliefs and character development are conveyed through the characters of the movie, insuring that his overall message is captured by the movie.