(nin1njn1n^ni!ln wnMnynCrime StorynThe Godfather as Political Metaphorn.-.o^-nby Samuel Francisn•:…;;. • . ‘ ^nf^nin nProbably not since Margaret Mitchell’s Gone With the Windnhas a popular novel influenced Americans as deeply asnMario Puzo’s The Godfather. Appearing in 1969, the booknremains, according to the inflated come-on of its publisher’snblurb, “the all-time best-selling novel in publishing history.” Ifntrue, that claim in itself is no mean accomplishment, consideringnthat Mr. Puzo’s competitors have included such deeppocketednwonderboys of the book trade as Stephen King,nHarold Robbins, and the late Isaac Asimov.nYet the permeation of pop culture by The Godfather is notnmeasured by its publishers’ ledgers. The novel has given itsnname to a national pizza chain, suggesting that even thenteenagers who habitually consume pasta for the masses stillnreadily recognize the literary allusion; and twenty years afternthe release of the first of Francis Ford Coppola’s three moviesnbased on it, the book’s major characters and events remainnfamiliar to millions of Americans. Moreover, the book andnfilms excited mass interest in the subject of organized crime innthe United States and spawned entire new shelves of reading,nfiction and nonfiction, as well as inevitable and innumerablencinematic spin-offs, almost all of which are thin reruns of thennovel’s distinctive characterization of criminal intrigue as delicatenfamily matters. The novel and films contributed tonAmerican colloquialism almost as much as the Watergatenscandal, which was contemporaneous with the first twonmovies. Even today, expressions such as “an offer he can’tnrefuse” and “sleeping with the fishes” remain current, andncommon words such as “godfather” and “don” acquired newnand enduring meanings from the Godfather cycle. Coppolanand Puzo together have turned out almost as many moviesnbased on the epic of la famiglia Corleone as there have beenntrials for John Gotti, though with the third installment releasednin 1990 and its final liquidation of the dwindling bandnSamuel Francis is a nationally syndicated columnist for thenWashington Times.n24/CHRONICLESnyn]n~—–_,_nnnof characters who had not been shot, eviscerated, blown up, orngarroted in the first two films, it is hard to see how even Hollywoodncan come up with any more.nLong dismissed as a cheap glamorization of organizedncrime, a 450-page sex-and-violence wallow in the pigpen ofnmass culture. The Godfather has nevertheless evolved into nonless a classic than Gone With the Wind itself, though it wouldnbe idle to pretend that Puzo’s contribution to literature ranksnwith the work of the more serious novelists in the Americanncanon. The book is dependent on sensationalism, with graphicndepictions of bedroom tussles and physical brutality and anreliance on the improbable that always attends low fiction.nNevertheless, there are in both the novel and in at least thenfirst two Codfather movies consistent, disturbing, and powerfullynpresented themes that deserve closer inspection thannthe literary merits of the book suggest. Read or viewed notnsimply as thrillers for beach and boudoir but as an extendednmetaphor of American and perhaps of human society, thennovel and Parts I and II of the film series rip the mask off certainnmythologies of America and modernity and offer perceptionsnthat may reveal truths that no grand jury and noncongressional subpoena has uncovered as successfully or dramatically.n”Crime,” wrote Daniel Bell, “in many ways, is a Coney Islandnmirror, caricaturing the morals and manners of a society.”nJust as anthropologists glimpse in the cultures of primitivenpeoples persistent truths of human nature and societynobscured by the more complicated institutions of modern life,nso the brutally simple relationships among criminals exposenand highlight similar patterns on which all human social andnpolitical institutions rest. The bloody antics of mafiosi andntheir molls may amuse, titillate, and horrify the readers of thentabloid press, and Puzo’s novel, to be sure, lends them a dignitynthat in real life they neither possess nor ought to acquire.nBut far from merely romanticizing and whitewashing organizedncrime in America, The Godfather uses it as the center ofn1n