"The Godfather": Books That Should Be Taught In School

“The first condition of progress is the removal of censorship.” Nowadays, it is discussed what books should be taught or not in schools. The opinions may vary from case to case, some people think that allowing students to read “unusual” books makes them progress in their level of intelligence and action making, but others think otherwise. The Godfather is one of those books, that in some schools is not taught because they believe it portrays the wrong message to adolescents. James Meecham, wrote an article, stating his opinion on the matter. “Why The Godfather should be banned”, the article of Meecham, defends the position of that this book should not be taught because it distorts the Italian culture, blurs the distinction between criminals and citizens, and glorifies violence to adolescents. However, I do disagree with his conclusion and support on the matter. The stereotypes from The Godfather are not a creation of Puzo but a creation of the audience due to the lack of knowledge of the Italian culture, the novel becomes more realistic without the distinction between criminals and citizens, since it portrays a true image of society, and lastly, violence is only used as a tool to seek personal objectives. Therefore, I do conclude that this book should be taught.

The Godfather is a distortion of Italian culture. This book is a novel, therefore it doesn’t constitute the history of Italian-American or Italian culture. It’s meant to engage the readers, play with their feelings and provoke them. I do disagree with the idea that Puzo creates a stereotype because his book is not meant to educate people on the Mafia or Italian culture subject. The problem comes from the readers. Readers don’t often understand the book purpose and take the book’s ideas to an extreme which results in a stereotype. They will start to view Italians or Italian-Americans as dangerous, merciless, violent, cynical gangsters who are after nothing but just money and their own personal gain. It’s true that Italians were the ones to bring the Mafia to America, however, we can’t label everyone as a mafioso, and as Meecham stated “ very few Italian immigrants, according to historical accounts, joined or participated in mafias”, that would be a hasty generalization. Just making an assumption that every Italian is related to mafia based on a minority is false.

Also, with the popularity that this book had, these stereotypes that people created from the book, changed the movie industry. Producers started to make more emphasis on these stereotypes, consequently, making them worse. Therefore, when teaching this book, teachers, in my opinion, should educate and inform their students on the historical facts and cultural facts about a culture. With the knowledge of “true” culture, students should be able to distinguish the truth from what is false. The Godfather blurs the distinction between criminals and (more or less) law-abiding citizens, which is another untruth about the novel. Meecham supports his statement, by saying there is a difference between someone who makes crime a living and someone who occasionally commits crimes, but what factor distinguishes these two? The law? Certainly not. As a society, we distinguish the good from the bad by putting the law into practice. However, we are not certified if the law is actually right or wrong. For example, in the early 20th century, it was illegal to gamble, do drugs, and have guns, however, in today’s society, all of these are legal. Also, Meecham purposes that a person who just occasionally commits a crime is not considered as a criminal, however, I have to disagree.

In my point of view, it depends on the gravity of the situation. For example, Jerry Wagner and Kevin Mooran, two young men who tried to sexually assault Bonasera’s daughter and with her refusal, they beat her up, where let go by the judges. These two young men did something wrong in the eyes of a lot of people, but they weren’t involved with any type of criminal organization, so, they can’t be considered a criminal same as a mafioso? Moreover, what if someone does such an act because he had a good intention or his actions resulted in good consequences? McCluskey was in the narcotics business because with the money from such business, he could offer a better education for his three children and also because he thought he didn’t receive enough comparing to what he did as a police officer. Also, when McCluskey beats up Maines because he was cutting his wife and his daughter, does it classify McCluskey as a criminal? Therefore, when evaluating something from right and wrong, the intentions and its consequences can have an important role. Furthermore, labeling someone as criminal because they belonged in a Mafia is wrong too. The truth is that many people in the communities would hide and defend members of the Mafia because they did good things for the community, for example, non-interest loans, building hospitals, etc.

Lastly, blurring this distinction makes the book more realistic. Society is not black and white, therefore there isn’t a complete distinction between the two. Learning comes from understanding every perspective on a subject and then making up your own mind. Being exposed to such topics, makes people grow up and turns them in a wiser and thoughtful people because they will realize “How could people talk like that?” “How could people treat each other in those ways?” and that the society is constituted by treachery, power seeking and driven by their own interests. Puzo demonstrates a side of the spectrum often oblivious and forgotten, a side that society tries to ignore, not understand or comprehend. Therefore, the students will understand that there is good and bad in everyone and every society. By being exposed, they will learn how to make moral evaluations on their own. The Godfather glorifies violence to the very people it should not: adolescents. Violence is used as a tool to satisfy the Mafia’s objectives. Nowadays, there are so many other materials that portray gratuitous violence, but they are not banned or whatsoever, for example, video games, movies, and music. Also, the statistics of young people reading books is lower than the last centuries due to the technology’s development, so, this book wouldn’t reach as much as in the last decades. If we had to take everything that can portray even a minor bad message, what would be left? Unrealistic books. Would that be too portraying a bad message? Because starting to limit certain books, sends the idea that some perspectives are not welcomed. Also, Meecham states that this book can make people think that violence can solve their problems, in which results on shootings, is completely false.

The Godfather, in my opinion, is not a sufficient reason to start killing innocent people. On the book, they never killed innocent people, it always had a purpose. Moreover, since adolescents today have already been exposed to such gratuitous violence, they have already began to minor that message. By reading The Godfather, they may learn that gratuitous violence is wrong and that violence is not acceptable unless there is a moral reason for it. In conclusion, after rebooting Meecham’s point of view, I believe this book should be taught in schools, however with some implications. In the early years of adolescence, between 14-16, I do not think the book should be advised since the book has some moments not adequate to this age period, and to fully interpret this book it’s needed a certain level of maturity. But from 16-22, I do believe that this book should be taught in schools because being exposed to the problems and the reality presented makes people more understanding with their own surroundings