It is no secret that the film industry in America is extremely competitive with few jobs and thousands
of people desiring to enter the field. "Movies today are expensive undertakings...A run-of-the mill
film that offers only modest expectations of box office revenues still may cost ten to twenty million
dollars...Those in a position to give a green light are few" (Shiller 19-20). It seems logical that
students attending film school- a relatively new phenomenon- would be trained in the necessary skills
to make better films than those people who did not attend film school. However, after completing my
freshman year as a film major at New York University and speaking with successful workers in the
field, it is my belief that this is not so. There is nothing in the area of filmmaking that can't be learned
from a minimal curriculum of books and much experience. The function of a film school, then, is that
of a fraternity- to create a select group of individuals with the sole purpose of keeping others out. In
such a competitive business, it seems an advantage to be part of this film school elite, and only a
select few are chosen by any of the top few film schools.

"U.S. films and TV programs are the chief fare of national systems in most countries...sometimes (it
is) the only perspective provided to world audiences" (Shiller 92). That said, it is perhaps frightening
to take a look at the members who make up this exclusive American film fraternity; they will be in
charge of the images guaranteed world wide domination. While figures are not available through
departmental bulletins, I conservatively estimate that ninety-percent of my freshman class is white
and eighty percent is male. At an estimated cost of one hundred and twenty thousand dollars for an
undergraduate education (not to mention self-incurred expenses for the production of a senior thesis
film, ranging from eight to twenty-thousand dollars plus travel expenses) I would also venture to say
that very few of the white males who attend film school live in poverty. 

In this society, prejudicial racial attitudes appear to be in check- generally inoffensive even if often
grossly distorted. However, I have already witnessed women's bodies reduced to property by more
than one member of a mandatory freshman photography course. As these projects were displayed,
the fourteen males in a class of fifteen people cheered at the sight of women's breasts and smirked at
the idea that females would be willing to allow themselves to be slaves to the white male system that
is film school. Two of these otherwise unremarkable projects were voted by classmates as worthy of
submission to film festivals.

As incensed as I am by the promotion of demeaning images of women in one of this country's most
respected and well-known institutions, I have encountered such attitudes before and I suppose that I
should not be surprised to find that they exist here. What I had not experienced before was a
population of people so enamored by the idea of violence. When freshmen in a film colloquium of a
hundred students were asked to share an original scene, at least seventy-percent of them presented
scenes violent in content. While the professor made notice of this phenomenon, no comment was
made about the brutality present, protecting the same status quo that remains the standard in the
industry.

Violent films are not only thought up by film school students but they are the most popular form of
their entertainment. The gangster film is particularly popular among film majors. Its popularity might
possibly be due to the long tradition of the gangster film in America. However, as it is the films made
in the last twenty years that are given emphasis at NYU, it is most likely the films of Martin
Scorcese, whose subjects are often Mafia characters, that are the basis for their fascination with the
mob. An alumnus of NYU film school, Scorcese remains idolized by the same fraternity that
produced him.

Archetypical cinematic images of mobsters and their activities are so ingrained in the minds of film
lovers that almost any film student could write a scene about the Mafia if asked. With few
exceptions, their scenes would most likely employ what we imagine to be classic Mafia characters
and depict only their most most well known activities. A striking similarity would probably exist
among scenes despite the fact that presumably few of the film majors at NYU have had any firsthand
experience with the Mafia. Their only experience with "real" gangsters has been attained by watching
movies. This is quite ironic considering that it won't be long before these film majors are making films
of their own, perpetuating the same stereotypes they have learned from other people's movies. And
so we see how the system continually feeds upon itself as a truly renewable resource. In fact,
cinematic representations of gangsters run so deep in this country that even the criminals have begun
to adapt to the stereotypes. According to the then U.S. Attorney, Rudolph Guiliani, since the release
of "The Godfather," many Italian-American criminals "began to sound like the characters in the film"
in taped recordings of their conversations. (qtd. in Giordano U.S. News & World Report 1987).
When popular fictional media has such an overreaching influence on both Mafia players and
observers, how can so-called objective reporting of actual incidents not be effected? Let us look in
detail at a few of these journalistic portrayals in print media over the last twenty years. 

Almost twenty years ago, Selwyn Raab reported the murder of a lottery vending company owner,
Arthur Milgram in the New York Times. The depiction of his death, however, takes a back seat to
the journalist's decision to implicate one of Milgram's employees, J.J. Frankel in the murder. As we
are probably not familiar with the event described in the article, it should prove to be good evidence,
representing an average Mafia report about which we have little prior knowledge.

As suggested by the headline, "Despite Hint of Mafia Tie, Lottery Let Promoter Take Vending
Role," the article begins by talking about the employee whose background is in question. Raab
writes that a "business promoter" was "allowed to become one of the principal officer's of New
York State's largest lottery vending company." The key word in this statement is allowed. The
sentence could have been written any number of ways; what it's really saying is that J.J. Frankel was
hired by this company. However, the use of the word "allowed" implies that there is some reason
why this person shouldn't have been allowed to have the job. It would seem awkward if a friend
informing someone that he had gotten a job were to say that he had been allowed to become a bank
manager or something of that sort. The word allowed is not a natural word to use and offers a clue
into the journalist's bias. 

The death of the company owner is in fact labeled as "gang-style." The owner of the company was
"gunned down shortly before midnight...in a parking lot near his apartment building." As far as one
can tell from the article, there was only one gunman involved in the shooting and yet the reporter has
labeled this murder "gang-style." Because of countless scenes in films of someone or another being
bumped off in the middle of the night just outside their home, it is not hard to imagine that the murder
was in fact Mafia related. The link in our minds is assisted by the author's description of the event
and is then swayed further by our prior thoughts about the activities of the Mafia.

"Dossiers on Frankel maintained by Federal, state, and city law enforcement would've been available
for inspection by authorized staff members of the Lottery Division...The report asserted that Mr.
Frankel's ties were primarily with Charles (Ruby) Stein and Nicholas (Jiggs) Forlano." The inclusion
of the nicknames immediately stirs up images of stereotyped Mafia characters- here, one is Jewish
and one Italian. Images of organized criminals as Italian are so prevalent that it is no wonder that
Joseph Giordano encouraged Italian Americans in 1987 to "[rise] to the heights in all aspects of
society and [overwhelm] the Mafia stereotype." Such a rallying cry would be no less appropriate
today. 

Italian mobsters are considered so normal that gangsters of other enthnicities are considered freaks.
A recent cover story in the Village Voice, touted an interview with "The Last Jewish Gangster." In
only the second sentence, William Bastone writes about this criminal, "Murray Wilson doesn't
appear to be a world-class hoodlum...(he) could pass for your uncle, the funny, roly-poly one."
Written for a community with a large Jewish population, this statement roughly translated says, "He's
not like those Italian Godfather types, he's like one of your slobby relatives." Wilson is also
described as being a "financial wizard." Most of the famous Jewish mobsters we know about are not
the muscle behind their operation but the brains. The Lee Strasberg character in "The Godfather II"
and Ben Kingsley in "Bugsy" come to mind. They are shorter, weaker men who are brilliant with
money- true to Jewish stereotypes . The Jewish gangster in the New York Times article, "Ruby," I
imagine is no exception because of the stereotypes I've been exposed to. The Italian, given the more
masculine nickname, "Jiggs," I assume is much larger than "Ruby" and most likely the more muscular
of the two.

Mr. Frankel, himself, is described as being "smooth and sophisticated" and has "a reputation for
living luxuriously and rides in a chauffeured limousine." By associating him with these other
questionable figures, it is nearly impossible to imagine that Mr. Frankel's wealth was acquired by
legitimate means. The author whether knowing or unknowing of what he's doing, is painting a portrait
whereby the casual reader cannot help but interpret the evidence presented as suggesting that Mr.
Frankel is a friend of the Mafia. "Of significance...is the fact that although Frankel has been engaged
in a number of company operations, many of which have failed, he appears to be able to come up
with new 'financial' means of support to begin another venture at will." The author's use of single
quotation marks around the word financial add emphasis to the word and add a doubting tone to the
sentence. The entire quotation comes from the Liquor Authority's Report on Mr. Frankel and
although it seems to be an objective piece of evidence, we are not privy to the entire report. This
fragment is strategically placed at the end of the New York Times article leaving doubt in our minds
about Frankel' as the very last thing that we read. 

The journalist also points out that Mr. Frankel's father "owned a women's wear store." Although it
provides some background into the life of Mr. Frankel, I'm still unsure of the relevance of this fact to
the story at hand. But doesn't it seem like women's wear sales would be the perfect occupation of a
Mafia teamster? Ironically, at the time of the murder, the Lottery Commissioner was unaware of
previous reports about Mr. Frankel but was just about to begin an investigation of his own into the
official. He had had no reason to doubt Mr. Frankel's integrity but admits that he was going "to make
background checks into Mr. Milgram and his associates mainly as a safeguard because of
long-suspected links between vending-machine companies and organized crime." For no other
reason than the fact that the Mafia has a history of interfering with vending machines and that the
persons involved probably looked and sounded like classic Mafia members (as defined on screen)
the Commissioner was going to investigate.

The notion of an underground organization, inaccessible to most of America, that is able to gain
strategic advantage over ordinary citizens is appealing to film school students for obvious reasons.
The subtle parallels between these groups are made blatantly obvious by Barbara Malmet, a popular
film professor in the Tisch community. In repeated lectures to the freshman class, she has
encouraged us to form our own "Film Mafias." While artists working together might be thought of as
collaborators, the connotation of the word Mafia includes not only the working together but the
bumping off of a competitor as well. In effect, these elite "Film Mafias" create even smaller, more
insulated, competitive groups of individuals; films created become increasingly based on atypical or
inaccurate personal experience and sensationalized news reporting. With minimal liberal arts
education requirements, NYU film students will not be the most educated people to graduate from
college. Whether or not they are knowledgeable about the world, we will learn about life from the
movies they create. Speaking about the creations of affluent white males, let us now turn our
attention to Fortune magazine for the last Mafia article. 

It's a 1987 story of "smuggling and extortion...Last year 27.2 million passengers...(were) easy prey
for pickpockets, baggage thieves, or drug dealers seeking a stream of couriers." The most interesting
thing about this special report, "How the Mafia Loots JFK Airport" is that these crimes have
certainly been committed before even by petty thieves. Recently, for example, there was a major
crackdown on baggage handler thieves who were taking items from suitcases and reportedly, they
weren't connected to the Mafia in any way. The trafficking of drugs which is just a dirty business
when carried out on the local street corner is suddenly romantic and conspiratorial in this article
which attributes all of these crimes to the hand of the mob. While there is not reason to dispute the
facts of the article, the relevance to the life of the businessman who reads Fortune is questionable. 

While the story may be true, there might not be any practical reason for the average rich man to read
this article except for its "entertainment value." The story is unveiled by Roy Rowan like fiction, cluing
us in to all the details of the crackdown on the criminals like in a crime movie. The story begins:

"The seat belt signs flash on. Over the intercom comes the pilot's voice: "We have started our
descent into John F. Kennedy International Airport." Descent indeed. Few passengers realize that
America's gateway to the world is a hotbed of larceny and prime turf for the Mafia."

Having attended a year of film school, this sounds suspiciously like any number of movie pitches I've
heard. But this is non-fiction. "The airport's sheer size explains in part why it is such a bull's-eye for
stealing, smuggling, and extortion." The journalist's emphasis on the enormity of the airport certainly
gives us the impression that the Mafia must be pretty large and powerful to be able to take the place
over. The image of the mob as a minority with the power to take control of our businesses is perhaps
what lends the Mafia its allure. To a comfortable businessman, this article is as fun to read to read
around the house as it is for kids to listen to ghost stories around a camp fire. 

There are definitely moments of reading the article that are like watching a movie: "Finally the FBI
developed enough information to put bugs in Manzo's home, tap his phone, and photograph the
comings and going of his Mafia friends." This is reminiscent of movies like "The Firm" and "Dick
Tracy" where the mobsters are eventually caught by some elaborate scheme to spy on them. Even if
we should be aware of their activities on the street, do we really need to know exactly how they
were caught? The term "Mafia friends" which Rowan uses in this phrase is also quite patronizing and
sarcastic. He also throws the word "cronies" around in his article. He concludes by saying that "the
Gambino crime family may be taking over the turf vacated by the jailed Lucchese mobsters." As one
of the last points of the article, this leaves us with a feeling that the Mafia is out there as this
uncontrollable force. Whether this is true or not, their almost mythical status in American society is
kept alive by an article such as this one. 

We read an article such as this one and even if we weren't originally interested in the mob, our
curiosity is perhaps aroused. The next time a Scorcese movie like "Casino" or "Goodfellas" comes
out, maybe we're interested enough to pay to go see it. As long as movies like these are made, we
will be interested to read the articles and vice versa. This is not an unusual instance of American
filmmaking presenting stereotypes on screen; similarly negative images of women and all minorities
have been and continue to be propagated on film. Looking this closely at the Mafia allows us to see
how this system of privilege plays a part in creating an unrelenting cycle of detrimental images. And
there is no solution, such a system will remain as long as world culture is dominated by American
commercial interests- and that appears to be forever. 



                                  Works Cited:

Bastone, William. "The Last Jewish Gangster." The Village Voice 23 April 1996: 34.

Giordano, Joseph. "The Mafia Mystique: Joseph Giordano on Italian-American Stereotypes." U.S. News & World
Report 16 February 1987.

Raab, Selwyn. "Despite Hint of Mafia Tie, Lottery Let Promoter Take Vending Role." New York Times 1 March
1977: A1.

Rowan, Roy. "How the Mafia Loots JFK Airport" Fortune 22 June 1987: 54-60. 

Shiller, Herbert I. Information Inequality: The Deepening Social Crisis in America. New York: Routledge, 1996.

Tompkins, Jane. Ways of Reading: An Anthology for Writers. Ed. Bartholomae, David and Anthony Petrosky.
Boston: Bedford Books of St. Martin's Press. 584-601. 

Gambino The First Boss of the Gambino Family was Salvatore D'Aquila, he was the Boss of Bosses until he was murdered in October of 1928 and was succeeded by Frank Scalise who remained in power until 1931 and after him came Vincent Mangano was boss from 1931 to 1951. Albert Anastasia took over after Vincent in 1951 and ruled until his murder in a barbershop in 1957 by the Gallo brothers. Carlo Gambino brought back the Gambino name when he took control in 1957 ruling until 1976. Paul Castellano succeed him. Castellano was Carlo's second cousin and when Carlo was on his deathbed he thought to choose Castellano to be the next boss. In 1985 and his bodyguard were assassinated. Orchestrated by Gambino capo John Gotti.

Genovese Genovese family's first boss was Giuseppe "Joe the Boss" Masseria. He became the Boss of Bosses after the murder of Salvatore D'Aquila. Masseria ruled until 1931 and was succeeded by the future legend mobster Charlie "Lucky" Luciano. He was in power until he was forced to leave America for Sicily in 1936 because of his crimes. Frank Costello came after Luciano until Vincent "Chin" Gigante shot Costello in the head in 1955. The next boss of the family was its namesake, Vito Genovese. He was the head of the family for four years until 1959. A three man "ruling council" then headed the family. This consisted of Tommy Eboli, Jerry Catena, and Mike Miranda. They were in power until 1972, and then Frank "Funzi" Tieri took over. Funzi was boss for nine years, but he died in 1981 and Phillip Lombardo became the boss. After only a few weeks in power he was replaced by Anthony "Fat Tony" Salerno. He became the family's boss from 1981 till 1987 when he was jailed for racketeering charges. Vincent "Chin" Gigante replaced him in turn.

Luchese Gaetano Reina who was in control of the family until 1930 first led them. From 1930 to 1953 Gaetano Gagliano who was on the original National Commission of La Cosa Nostra headed the family. Then in 1953 Gaetano "Thomas" Luchese gained control of the family and ruled until 1967. Carmine Tramunti took over the family after Luchese's death in 1967. He ruled for seven years until his imprisonment on murder charges. Anthony "Tony Ducks" Corallo became the new don. He stabilized the family and was head for twelve years. He died in 1986. Vic Orena ruled the family next until his incarceration in 1992. After him came Vittorio Amuso, who currently is imprisoned awaiting trial on RICO charges. The acting boss of the family is currently Joe De Fede.

Colombo Joe Profaci was the first boss of the family the originally bore his name. He ruled from 1930 to 1962. His only problem was when a lieutenant, Crazy Joey Gallo, launched an all out war on him. Gallo, had very little support though and he lost the fight. Joseph Magliocco took over after Profaci's death, but he died in 1963. Joe Colombo then became head of the family and quickly became known around the city, until 1971 when he was shot at an Italian-American rally. He was in a coma for seven years, but died in 1978. Joseph Yacovelli ruled then for two years. Then Joseph Brancato was in charge for five months in 1973, but was jailed and gave up the family to Thomas DiBella who negotiated with the remaining members of the faction of the family headed by Crazy Joe Gallo. DiBella was disposed of by Carmine "the Snake" Persico. Gennaro Langella who was in power until his death in 1987 replaced him in turn. The acting boss is now is Andrew Russo the nephew of Persico.

Bonnano Cola Schiro was the first boss of the Bonnano family, he remained the boss until 1930, when Salvatore Maranzano succeeded him. Maranzano was the boss of bosses until the other mobsters grew weary of his power and a few of them including Charlie "Lucky" Luciano conspired against him in 1931 and then murdered him. Then after Maranzano's murder, Luciano formed the National Commission of La Costa Nostra. Joe Bonnano became the head of the Bonanno family after Maranzano's murder; he was the boss until 1964. After this he became the first boss to break the omerta or vow of silence by writing a book about his life as a boss of a Mafia family. Frank LaBruzzo was the don for the next two years and then came Gaspare DiGregorio who had a two year ruled also for two years. Paul Scianna was in power from 1966 to 1969. A ruling council of Phillip "Rusty" Rastelli, Joseph Zicarelli, Joseph DiFillippi, and Natale Evola were then in control of the family for three years. Evola then became sole boss for a year followed by Rastelli who was boss from late 1973 to 1974, but was incarcerated on racketeering charges. Carmine Galante was boss until his murder in 1979. Rastelli then got out of jail and resumed control of the family. Rastelli was imprisoned again in 1989. He was last known boss of the family.