There's no text of that letter anywhere. [/QB][/QUOTE]


There's no text of the letter anywhere cause when Kay tried to give it to Tom, he refused it saying that if he accepted it they could prove in a court of law he knew Mike's whereabouts. I wonder if that is a valid legal point?

just resurecting this thread because it has been the subject of a newer one.

It seems that you folks have more of a problem with Kay's "harping" than Michael does .

When Michael asks Kay to marry him, he makes it a point of trust to tell her that the family business will be legitimate in five years. I think it's a goal he aspired to as well. In light of the proposal, his uttering that statement to her has the implication of a vow, a promise, made especially for her. In fact, it was the one confidence regarding his business that he would share with her. Therefore, Kay has every right to ask about it.

And Michael's actions denote that even he believes she deserves that right. When she broaches the subject at Anthony's party, his reaction is not to snap at her, or to reply with stony silence, but to answer her gently with, "I'm trying." The voice is resigned, as if expecting this moment when he would be called to account; and it's also somewhat rueful: he knows he has disappointed both her and himself.

I think someone once wrote on these boards that Kay was Michael's conscience. Other times Michael can rationalize and fool himself into believing that he has already achieved legitimacy. But when confronted with Kay's simple, direct questions, he has difficulty preserving that illusion. Maybe Michael needs -- even welcomes -- Kay's prodding, just as a dreamer needs a pinch -- that small kernel of discomfort -- to prove that he or she is awake and back in reality.

BTW, we only see Kay remind Michael of his legitimacy plan once in seven years. If a guy has a wife who nags him only once every seven years, I bet he considers her a real find .

Well she whined about a lot of other things, like not being able to to go see a show because Michael had to help his father plan the assassinations of the heads of the othe families, and she had a lot of eye rolls going.

Actually, she didn't harp about that. It was Michael who OFFERED to go see a show after Kay harped about him having to talk w/ his father....

Anyway, I'm gonna now do something I once thought I'd NEVER do. Quote from the novel !!!

In their final 'talk' at the close of the book, Tom says the following to Kay:

"...You're mad because he lied to you. Well, he warned you never to ask him about his business. You're mad because he was Godfather to Carlo's boy. But you made him do that..."

Actually, Kay WAS whiney and ungrateful, because much as she loved Michael she could not accept certain things about his life...even though she married him knowing about them. Which is why the rebellious Kay in GFII is somewhat inconsistent with the Kay we see at the end of The Godfather. By the time of the infamous 'abortion', she really should have known better.

Apple

Yeah, but then as Michael is exiting the car she brings up the fact Connie and Carlo want him to be godfather of their baby, he says, "We'll see" she then continues to "harp" about it and he says again, "We'll see" in a little more terse manner. I always visualized him standing there as the car drives off saying to himself, "Jeez, give me a f**** break" before he turns and walks into his father's house.

Actually, here's what happens:

MICHAEL I have to see my father and his people, so have dinner without me...

KAY Oh, Michael...

MICHAEL This weekend we'll go out. We'll go to the city, we'll see a show and we'll have dinner. I promise.

KAY Okay...Oh, Michael, your sister wants to ask you something...

MICHAEL Well let her ask...

KAY No she's afraid to. Connie and Carlo want you to be Godfather to their little boy.

MICHAEL Oh, well we'll see...

KAY Will you?

MICHAEL Lemme think about it -- we'll see. Come on.

******
So...she's apparently disappointed that she will be having dinner without him, he promises the dinner & show and then she nags just a teensy bit about the Godfather thing...on behalf of Connie & Carlo. Not knowing of course, what plans are in store for Carlo.

This harping comes in handy since, as Tom also says during that last conversation in the novel:

"...Actually, it was the right move for him to make (standing Godfather) if he was going to take action against Carlo. The classic tactical move to win the victim's trust..."

So in this instance at least, Kay's harping was to Michael's advantage. Perhaps he didn't think "Jeez, give me a f**** break" after all...



Apple

Wow! Apple is with us! I always said that Puzo made it all fairly clear.
Apple, you are doing so very fine that I read your posts with real pleasure.
Only thing I have to add, since you begun quoting the novel, is that there was no kind of wow, obligation or promise on Michael's side when he proposed to her. She pronounced a very important thing: "I love you. I don't care." (About him being gangster etc.) And only after that he told her about his legitimate plans, just sharing thoughts, and adding carefully " If everything goes right..."

Yes, he did make certain things VERY clear in the novel and for that reason it's interesting that in GFII he allegedly fought the idea of Fredo being killed because of the betrayal to Michael. Luckily, Puzo eventually conceded on the basis that GFII was FFC's baby, not his.

While Tom is explaining to Kay why both Tessio and Carlo had to die, how neither could be excused for their betrayals to the Family, despite Michael's fondness for Tessio and Carlo's family ties...he is also setting the stage for Fredo's punishment (although it is not written until years later). If these two were once and future dangers to the Family, then of course, so was Fredo. And therefore, brother or not...Fredo had to go.

But of course, that's another thread....

Apple

Very good observation Apple---but MAYBE he thought, "Jeez give me a f**** break----HEY wait a minute, Godfather to Carlo and Connie's baby....hmmmmmm"

One of themes I've always been fond of in The Godfather is tradition vs. modernity. I always loved that scene in GFII where Michael seeks the advice of his mother, the "traditional" woman...cleaning, cooking, raising the family AND NOT ASKING ANY QUESTIONS. When Mama Coreleone finally tells Michael "You can never lose your family..." Michael seems to shake his head in disbelief. His mother is a woman of another age and can't possibly understand what he means by the question...Michael then concludes that "Times are changing." And indeed they are.

To relate this to Kay, she personifies the new, "modern" woman's role. She demands fully equal footing in the marriage. She wants to know what's going on. She has a career. Michael would have obviously been much better off with Apollonia (a woman much like his own mother), the traditional Sicilian girl who knows in her blood that you don't ask questions about the Mafioso. So of course this tension, of Kay being the only "modern" woman amidst a sea of tradition results in conflict...which can make a person seem unlikable.

However, I completely agree with notions of Kay's naivete in believing that Michael, a full-blooded Sicilian, could somehow turn his back on tradition. When Kay finally realizes she's powerless to change him in the hotel room scene after Pentangeli's renegging, she even mentions "the Sicilian thing thats been going on for 2000 years." But Michael was quite naive as well, thinking that Kay would quietly go along with his gangster lifestyle as Apollonia or another "traditional" type would have. As a WASPy, modern American, Kay was doomed from the start. This line of thinking really makes you appreciate their exchange in GFI, "You know how naive you sound?/Who's being naive now, Kay?"