Final Comment on the Sopranos
A few people have asked me how my read of the finale of the Sopranos fits in with the themes I explored in “Salvation and the Sopranos,” which argued that season five (and the first part of season six) can be fruitfully considered in terms of redemtion and fate.
I don’t think there’s a neat fit–and I don’t think there has to be. Dramatically, in “Made in America,” Chase wrapped up the overarching theme of the show: the tension (and sometimes the surprising similarity) between old world mob values and the values of the striving middle class. That episode in the life of the Sopranos is over.
But he also wrapped up his series–his baby–also “Made in America.” And in so doing, he gave a gift to the audience who loved the show, and the characters– as constituting its own dramatic world, which parallels in some ways our world. Chase reminded us that it was a dramatic creation, coming in some sense to an end, in that bit on the television about the “talented director looking for a new job.” But he didn’t destroy the parallel world–he just pulled the shades on the window into it.
In my view, his ending was benevolent, toward the audience, the characters, and the fictive world that they inhabited. He told a good yarn. In ending it, he gratified our immediate desire for some moral judgment without foreclosing the bigger questions. Tony isn’t a good man, but he isn’t as bad as Phil. And we had a very satisfying end for Phil, not only did he die, but he was really and grossly squished–almost like a cartoon villain. We cheered. But precisely because it was a cartoonish ending, it didn’t address (and in my view, didn’t mean to resolve) ultimate questions of justice or injustice.
We are like Agent Harris–we like Tony, despite ourselves. And dramatically, we want him and his family to go on– in their world (not in ours, that would be too dangerous). So what does that mean? What are the requirements of that parallel world continuing? Well, it means that Tony can’t die. Then he’s dead in that world, and since he’s the fulcrum, the world dies too. It also means Tony can’t be reformed– otherwise, the dramatic basis of the world implodes. To redeem the major characters is to destroy them, as well as the narrative. It would become something else, something completely different, which nobody would watch. At the same time, there needs to be a way for him to be a good bad guy-maybe cooperating in the government’s battle against terrorism. Finally, for their world to go forward, there has to be both family and Family, intimately intwined. That’s what bringing Meadow and AJ in the business does. After all, he’s killed off nearly everyone else.
So Chase’s ending means these very real fictional characters are continuing their lives in their parallel universe, as we go about living ours. That parallel universe is still, imaginatively, intact. But that means that the questions it raises for our consideration are still there –including my questions about redemption.
Chase lets us abide with our ultimate questions. But in the immediate term, life goes on, both in the real world ( the great director needs a new job) and in the Soprano’s parallel universe. I don’t view that going on as making a nihilistic, or tragic statement about reality. I view that going on as Chase not destroying that parallel world that he created. What he won’t give us, however, is answers to the questions about reality that his constructed, parallel world raises– or, better, that we raise in conversation with his constructed, parallel world. We need to work those out ourselves.
Good stuff!
My own humble analysis is here: http://www.vox-nova.com/2007/06/end-of-sopranos.html
“We are like Agent Harris–we like Tony, despite ourselves.”
That sums it up nicely.
Speaking of the end of Sopranoworld,
among the speculations surrounding the cut-to-black at the end is the observation that it is we the audience who, effectively, got whacked. To paraphrase Bobby, we never saw it coming.
So, for those of us who still require a fix, A&E is rerunning earlier episodes on Wednesday night. Although the profanity and nudity have been expunged and the commercials are annoying, the episodes are otherwise intact and, except for the annoying interruptions, seem to retain their impact.
I assume that, absent the profanity, the episodes are about 10 minutes long? :)
The following is a question to David Chase and his response:
“When you guys get sued by the American Italian Defense Association, or actors from the show are blasted by Italian groups for marching in a Columbus Day parade, how much does that sting?
If you live in the Tri-State area and you pick up the newspaper on any given day, there are stories about organized crime. Those stories involve people with Italian surnames. That’s part of the landscape here; that’s part of the landscape in America. And they would say, well, why do you have to focus on that? Probably for the same reason that when you do Westerns, you focus on the gunfighters. You don’t focus on the guy who owns the dry-goods store because his life isn’t exciting or dramatic. But what I really feel is that they’re asking themselves the wrong question. They should ask themselves: Why does this story of the Italian Mafia and organized crime have such longevity? Why do people love it so much? It’s sort of an inverse badge of honor in some way. The general public has not responded to stories about Russian crime, Chinese Tong wars, black drug-dealing things. And I think those groups should ask themselves: What is that about? Because everybody commits violence. Everybody curses. Any criminal will do that and have topless girls dancing around. So what is it about the Italian story that people are interested in?”
For the entire interview. http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,1168453,00.html
David Chase Speaks out.
http://blog.nj.com/alltv/2007/06/david_chase_speaks.html
Rumor has it that a certain moral theology and law professor at a distinguished university was camped out in France with David Chase…….
MM: “I assume that, absent the profanity, the episodes are about 10 minutes long? :)”
Well. they substitute other, more sanitary expletives, so the show runs about the same length. ;)
Regarding shows past, one of the best scenes occurred in season 3, episode 7, in which Carmela, on the advice of Melfi, visits Dr, Krakower to commiserate about her husband’s infidelity. Instead of holding her hand, he tells her the brutal truth about her life and her husband in no uncertain terms. A recap of the scene can be found at http://www.televisionwithoutpity.com/articles/content/a2076/index-11.html
After agonizing for a while, she resolves the issue by deciding to up her price for enabling Tony’s criminality — beginning with a demand that Tony make a rather large donation to the ‘development fund’ at Meadow’s university.
In a subsequent episode, (recapped at http://www.televisionwithoutpity.com/articles/content/a2081/index-5.html) she confides in her parish priest (a psychologist in training), who tells her to live only on “what the good part of her husband earns” and to “avoid the problem by not “crossing the boundaries” that make her feel uncomfortable. Carmela thinks for a moment, and then decides that that’s something she can do.”
I remain unrepentant for having tuned out the Sopranos after seeing just two episodes. I wonder what this sin disqualifies me from.
Andrew Greeley opines: http://www.suntimes.com/news/greeley/429068,CST-EDT-GREEL15.article
If anyone is still reading this thread, here is more than you EVER thought you wanted to know about the Last Show:
http://www.bobharris.com/content/view/1406/1/