Made in America

"I'm not saying there's nothing out there," Tony tells Paulie near the end of the Sopranos finale, after the superstitious capo describes catching a glimpse of the Virgin Mary in the Bada Bing. "But you gotta live your life."

Which is what the show comes down to, in the end - a wicked man in a wicked profession, who has intimations that something else, something better, might be out there waiting to be claimed ... but in the end prefers living the only life he knows. As Matt Zoller Seitz puts it, "Chase's attitude toward people .. [is that] they are what they are, they rarely change, and when they do, they stay changed for as long as it takes to realize that they were more comfortable with their old selves, at which point they revert." Tony Soprano is a mobster, born and raised - or made, if you will - and a mobster is what he decides to remain; in his beginning was his end.

Complaining about the ambiguous, "life goes on, but you could be killed at any moment" conclusion, Matt notes that "at the end of Anna Karenina we find out what happens to Anna, and it's not because Tolstoy sold out." But we do find out what happens to Tony: He leaves therapy, and with at any chance of getting out of the family business, and at the same time it becomes clear that none of his nearest and dearest will be getting out either. Carmela gave up on escape a season ago; A.J. is bought off by his parents and will doubtless end up a mobbed-up club owner soon enough; Meadow is headed for marriage to a mafioso's son and a lucrative job as a lawyer defending, well, people like her dad. (Her conversation with Tony, where she justifies giving up medicine by describing how watching him hauled away in handcuffs taught her that “the state can crush the individual," is one of the best moments of the finale, not just because he gets off the incredulous line "Jersey?" in reply, but because for a moment you can see him wrestling with the urge to tell her that the Mob isn't worth defending - wrestling and, as always, winning.) The Sopranos was a show about whether the Soprano family, both nuclear and extended, escapes damnation, and the ending answers the only question that matters: They don't.

I should note that the theme of damnation doesn't make The Sopranos a Christian show by any means; it's too dark for that, too despairing in its treatment of its characters, both criminals and civilians. It's not atheistic so much as anti-humanistic: God may exist, and indeed the show contains numerous incidents, from Tony and Christopher's near-death experiences to Paulie's Marian vision, that could reasonably be interpreted as encounters with the numinous. But if heaven is throwing ladders down, human beings are incapable of climbing them, and divine grace is nowhere to be found. This has made it increasingly unpleasant to watch, which in a way is a good thing; it shouldn't be pleasant to watch people choose hell over and over again, and in these last twelve episodes, in particular, Chase did a good job of stripping away the element of voyeurism that often made the show morally problematic. (I like Seitz' point that even the landscape turned hellish: "from the constant desolate winds moaning under every outdoor scene to that meeting of the families that took place in an abandoned factory that looked like the belly of the Nostromo in 'Alien.'") But I'm not sure it needed six seasons to make its despairing point, and while part of me is glad to have had as many Sopranos episodes as we did, I didn't feel the sense of loss watching the finale that I've felt in the last episode of other great shows I've loved. I'll miss the show, but I'm also glad its done. You can only stare into the abyss for so long.

Comments

This is a trerrific epitaph - I think Ross gets the ending just right. I have to quibble though, with the way this take leaves therapy - is it really "the way out"? First of all, I don;t think Tony goes to therapy to find the strength to leave the mafia, or even to look at who he truly is - he's more interested in becoming a better, more efficient mobster. There's just not that much handringing about the profession. Secondly, I don't think that the Sopranos makes psychoanalysis look like the end all be all. As much as she is one of the most mature, thoughtful people on the show, there's no doubt that Mefli took a lot of pleasure in meeting with a notorious villan.
Thus, the whole lot is a sorry mess - which is why we identify with them I guess.

Posted by berger | June 12, 2007 2:08 PM

[Meadow's] conversation with Tony... is one of the best moments of the finale...

Agree 100%.

Posted by Chris Conway | June 12, 2007 2:21 PM

I agree with the points on Meadow, and of Chase's view that people don't change. The difficulty, near impossibility of change has been one of the strongest recurring themes on the show. A variation on that theme had been the difficulty of leaving mob life - it always ends badly, and once you're in, you're in. That's why for me, the most interesting character haas always been Meadow, who had the intelligence and moral bearings to recognize that their way of life was wrong, and want something more out of life. Her choices avoiding becoming a "boring, suburban doctor" in order to become a mob lawyer (and that's where she's headed, though she may not see it yet), were the saddest part of this last season and the bleakest part of Chase's vision. It also reinforces the sense of self-delusion that's been a theme of the show. Meanwhile Tony goes on (and on and on), Caesar of a diminishing empire. And the ducks have left.

Posted by wph | June 12, 2007 2:42 PM

Great post. Truly.

Posted by mq | June 12, 2007 2:48 PM

To follow on my previous comment, I'll go further. The scene with Meadow is one of the more affecting scenes in the whole series. It's a nice counterpoint with Meadow's other great "moment", in the Season 3 finale, when she came very close to accusing her father of murdering Jackie, Jr. The Tony-Meadow relationship is where the core hypocrisy of the Soprano's lifestyle is thrown into its highest relief. Tony wants Meadow to recognize the emptiness of his life without calling him out on it; he desires both her loving acceptance and her tacit disapproval.

Posted by Chris Conway | June 12, 2007 3:46 PM

Tony didn't leave therapy. He got kicked out. The finale made it clear, during the scene with A.J.'s therapist, that it's only a matter of time before Tony finds another compliant therapist.

This is yet more evidence, as Ross says in his quote of Matt Zoller Seitz: "they stay changed for as long as it takes to realize that they were more comfortable with their old selves, at which point they revert."

Posted by politicalfootball | June 12, 2007 4:08 PM

Excellent analysis. Here are my thoughts:

Tony doesn't die. But it doesn't matter.

He doesn't die because there's a plot nugget that everybody's forgotten about--the family's decision to go out to eat was a last-minute change. So the NY family, Nikki Leotardo, or whoever wouldn't have had time to set up a mafia hit there.

Who would have followed Tony's family there? How could they have known they were headed to a family dinner? It doesn't add up.

Maybe someone else at the diner gets him on the way home. Maybe he gets popped in two weeks. Or maybe he dies in jail.

No matter what, there's no happy ending. There will always be shifty eyes and folks who don't look right. The evil will always be lurking, because ultimately the evil is their own doing. That's the point of the final scene.

So what of the abrupt cut? The scene was a familiar one for Sopranos watchers--a calm family gathering during the storm. In the past, these scenes have been non-judgemental--the show realizes the happy family is based on lies, but it also acknowledges it is important to the characters, and that's that.

I think the cut shows a different attitude--the show if finally saying, "enough of this."

Posted by Alex Parker | June 12, 2007 4:08 PM

I'm sure all these questions will be answered in the next season of The Sopranos.

Posted by Jimmmm | June 12, 2007 4:34 PM

Chase has obviously achieved his end of getting people talking. I am not sure why people assume that the possible fate of Tony is that terrible, or different from his prior life. The fact is that as a boss he would always theoretically be a target for some ambitious subordinate and the incompetence of the FBI (as portrayed), one of the pleasures of the show for me, is such that he would have little reason to regard them as anything but a nuisance. Life would go on much as before.

Posted by Giles | June 12, 2007 5:39 PM

The show was always about Tony's damnation. When Dr. Melphi cut him loose (for reasons of profession reputation and prestiege, selfish reasons), his fate was sealed. He killed Christopher, his surrogate and heir apparent, and the only emotion he felt was relief (killing a potential witness). He is capable of anything (and then, in an orgy of self-pity, blaming his childhood and "borderline personality" mother). Janice is just as ruthless, but usually does not use a gun. Carmella, so tortured by hell in earlier seasons, has made a bargain. Her deal with the Devil gives her a house, a car, charge accounts, and a business (spec houses). Meadow will marry the son of a mobster and fool herself that she is defending the weak (even though she told her father, a mob boss, rediculously, that Italians face law enforcement harassment). A.J. was bought off with a new, leggy girlfriend, a car, and a flunky job in which he can delude himself that he is a moviemaker. I loved the show, especially Paulie and Silvio, but the bleakness of its unrelenting nihilism was sometimes hard to take. Even the "good guys" from the FBI showed themselves to be corrupt. I suppose the show reflected David Chase's feeling (is such a person even capable of a "belief"?) that everyone is working an angle, even those within the law. Humanity is all alone in a cold, indifferent universe. What'dya goin' ta do?

Posted by jmcnulty | June 12, 2007 6:20 PM

Can't add much to the above conversation. However, for me, one of the most interesting and affecting parts of the final episode was the reluctance of Paulie Walnuts to accept his "promotion."

Paulie isn't the brightest candle on the altar, but he's realized Tony may well have handed him a death sentence by promoting him. Yet, in the end, he submits to Tony--"the life" is all Paulie knows and, given that he's in his 60's, it's too late to leave.

Correct me if you I'm wrong, but I think the appearance of Walden Belfiore on the scene is another tip-off that Paulie's days are numbered. Walden is not only a younger, and tougher, version of Paulie, but he's also ambitious. Maybe it's just me, but the "cat scenes" establish that Walden and Paulie have barely concealed contempt for each other and they're going to butt heads in the future on a regular basis. Furthermore, Walden's up close and personal whacking of Phil Leotardo will give him some major "street cred" as well, which he's going to use to his advantage.

In short, the clues provided by David Chase suggest that Paulie has survived...for now, but it will be just a matter of time before he dies (probably not naturally), is elbowed aside by a Young Turk, or simply "disappears." There will be no retirement for Paulie.

Posted by MarkJ | June 12, 2007 6:29 PM

You have smoked yourself retarded.

Talk about taking a frickin' TV show WAY TOO SERIOUSLY.

It's TV.

Cheers. MASH. Larry Sanders Bugs Bunny.

It's TV.

Relax - have a drink. It ain't nearly that serious.

Staring into the abyss indeed. Want to stare into an abyss? Meet me in Camden, NJ.

Posted by Joe Six | June 12, 2007 8:10 PM

Ross: Eloquent and insightful review. For the sake of argument I'll dig into this a bit:

But if heaven is throwing ladders down, human beings are incapable of climbing them, and divine grace is nowhere to be found.

It seems to me Chase is too much the naturalist, too much the pitiless realist, to allow his characters to descend into cartoonish shades of black and white. That would be too easy on us, the audience. We'd be able to say to ourselves in an overly facile fashion: "Thank goodness I'm not like them!"

But of course if The Sopranos' humans aren't quite capable of climbing heaven's ladders right this instant, there are signs that at least some of them may be able to do so eventually. Saint Paul killed a lot of people, too, before his blinding conversion. To wit:

a) Carmella's conscience: we've seen it trouble her before. She may be saying "no" to her inner voice for the moment, but whose to say she's condemned for eternity? Perhaps she's but one more goomah away from renouncing her jewels and Porches.

b) Janice: a wretched, fallen creature in many ways, yet clearly someone who has suffered mightily. Moreover, she's capable of much good, including raising a dead woman's (and now man's) children. Surely this counts for something.

C) Tony's children: they may indeed be taking the easy way out for the time being, but Providence has blessed both of them, too, with a certain moral vision. Knowing the difference between right and wrong may be the first step on the way to spiritual maturity. Granted, they have a long way to go (especially, I fear, Meadow) but they're not totally lost yet -- and they're both still young.

d) Dr. Melfi's decision to stop treating Tony might well be looked at as a moral act. At some point we have to ask ourselves: are we enabling evil? She apparently didn't like the answer.

I think I'd agree that Chase wanted to end the story on a very dark note. And he's done so, for it's true that the main characters have arrived at an exceedingly dark and dangerous place from a moral perspective. But Chase has devoted too much of the content of the previous eighty-five episodes to demonstrating that many of the characters (even, on occasion, Tony Soprano) haven't completely killed off their consciences for me to conclude that divine grace is wholly absent. Hard to find, sure, but not yet extinguished. And this, at the end of the day, is a more realistic way to portray the lives of these mobsters and their families. Human beings are seldom rotten to the core, even if for some of them the bad outweighs the good by a large measure.

Posted by Jasper | June 12, 2007 10:00 PM

I'd trade the last two seasons of The Sopranos for one more season of Rome.

Posted by Hucbald | June 12, 2007 10:18 PM

By the way, anybody know exactly what Chase had in mind by naming the episode "Made in America"?

Posted by Jasper | June 12, 2007 10:26 PM

By the way, anybody know exactly what Chase had in mind by naming the episode "Made in America"?

Before HBO, the show was originally pitched to FOX with the title being "Made in America" (play on 'made man').

Posted by Steven | June 13, 2007 12:11 AM

"He doesn't die because there's a plot nugget that everybody's forgotten about--the family's decision to go out to eat was a last-minute change. So the NY family, Nikki Leotardo, or whoever wouldn't have had time to set up a mafia hit there."

Very good observation. The ending was great because I didn't want Tony to die, but any concrete ending would have to have been bad for the Sopranos.

Posted by anon | June 13, 2007 1:09 AM

Right you are, Hucbald!

Posted by Giles | June 13, 2007 2:39 AM

I bet DVD sales will be better than if the ending was resolved explicitly. I believe that syndication of the 60s tv series The Fugitive was negatively impacted because Richard Kimble and Lt. Gerard found the one-armed man, whom Gerard ends up shooting. Why watch it when you know how it's going to turn out.

In an interview, Chase said he'd considered doing a flashback episode but dismissed the idea because the Soprano kids can't play themselves as much younger than they are today, and there would be no dramatic tension because we already know that Tony will survive that episode. Leaving the story open ended allows new fans of the show to buy the DVDs and enjoy them as those who watched the original airings enjoyed them, with full suspense.

Posted by Bozoer Rebbe | June 13, 2007 3:13 AM

In the end the judgment of Tony’s came which he worried about. But it came from himself long before the show started and it was fulfilled at that final (beginning) moment. By letting go of the psychological grip of his ego-’made’ reality he submits himself for sacrificing. He affirms his true identity and reaches towards being truly awake. Truly alive within his son. And thus we finally see the real Tony, his true spirit. It is as if he sacrificed who he thought he was to fulfill his ultimate true purpose as a father. Its kind of like the movie that was playing when Tony visited Sil in the hospital: Little Miss Sunshine. You know, the movie with the little girl running to get on that big yellow car (Almost like trying to get back on the bus our mother’s are driving. Hint, Hint). You know, the movie where all the hopeless and depressed family members find their purpose by sacrificing their lives for that little girl. And thus the great metaphors continue to point us to the ultimate reality.

check out my blog for more jakjonsun.wordpress.com

Posted by Brian Monroe | June 15, 2007 8:14 PM

I'd trade the last two seasons of The Sopranos for one more season of Rome.

oh ya

Posted by Fitz | June 16, 2007 12:19 PM

“Anyone who thinks that the rise in mass secularism is "heavily influenced" by post-Marxist deconstructionism among the academic elite might as well be scouring the grassy knoll for shell casings.”

Well, how droll.
Anyone who thinks Marx has not been enormously influential in the development of modern thought (especially among the left) is being either
1) A-historical
2) Subversive rather than honest (or a useful idiot)

Furthermore; to imagine that such an enormously important philosophical system like Marxism simply fall alongside the Berlin Wall would be naive.

“Ross is on the right track by discussing the phenomenon in terms of a backlash against the religious right. Secular Americans never had any motivation to view themselves as a discrete interest group until religious conservatives from various denominations began to band together against "secular humanism."”

If you re-read above you will notice I don’t challenge Ross’s critique. At this stage the secular priesthood (that Ross indeed identifies) has inculcated enough true believers that they are now reflectively defending their belief system, just as the religious were.

“But really, secularism as a mass suburban phenomenon is primarily a side effect of widespread college education and the increasing openness in our culture.”

The effects of a widespread college education that details the same contempt for faith, and indeed is openly regarded as epitomizing that contempt. This is to say nothing more than the secular seminaries are having a real effect. Yet another confirmation of religious believers critique of the secular Kultercamph.

“Until relatively recently, churches were the primary social network in small towns and urban neighborhoods alike, and behaviors that churches frowned upon were marginalized to the fringes of public life.”

How recently is “relatively recently”? Pre 1968 America was a mass consumer society. To say that behaviors that are frowned upon were pushed to the margins of public life is to say nothing about whether they ought to be pushed to the margins of public life. And neither is it to say that Frankfurt School Marxists did not succeed it pushing those same frowned upon behaviors to the center of public life (they even call it a sexual revolution- to pick but one example)

“Americans now have access to broader social circles, scientific knowledge, hundreds of pastimes and vices that churches frown upon, and an entire media spectrum full of news and entertainment within which religious programming remains on the fringes.”

Once again, this catapults us from what? (the middle ages) into modernity. Broad social circles, pastimes and scientific knowledge have been around for quite some time. A more focused and determined secular front has not.

“I think what bothers religious conservatives so much is that the changes pushing churches to the margins of our culture are simply the product of choices within a free market and an open society.”

“There must be an eeeevil lefty conspiracy at the root of this, right?”

It’s not a conspiracy it’s a consensus. To ignore the power of ideas at work among the secular elites and those elites power in shaping mass opinion is to ignore the breadth of human history.

It not a question of whether elites rule, but which elites.

“When presented with a liberal education, and a libertarian mass media, many Americans simply stopped looking to their churches for answers... or, perhaps more importantly, for their social life.”

“To the limited extent that "class conflict" plays into this at all,”

The master/slave dialectic is the one ascendant paradigm among the left. It manifests itself in every understanding the left has of history. Its scope includes Men/Women, Black/White Rich/Poor, Straight/Gay…. Am I the only one to have gone to college? Does no one know of the popularity of “critical studies” and its origins? Is the Lefts golden trinity of “Race, Class, and Sex” expected to have no effect on thought outside the world’s English departments?

Posted by Fitz | June 16, 2007 12:30 PM

jrmbix bxwa dwcuyajm arqjisefu oenimy zqaes qxlsfu

Posted by erndwuacy zuyeocx | August 8, 2007 1:37 AM

clintonia participatress suberization beetlehead acephalus archcheater subtorrid receptaculite
http://www.johnhaycigars.com >John Hay Cigars
http://www.botanical.com/botanical/mgmh/b/bryeur76.html

Posted by Stefan Collier | December 17, 2007 11:14 AM

The reason it doesn't matter if Tony dies is that he's already dead. Clichéd but true.

Watching The Sopranos was like getting 6 years of Rigoletto. If you are an opera fan, you're already familiar with looking on as the irredeemable meet the inevitable.

There is something Shakespearean, too, in Chase's unapologetic darkness. In particular, Carmela has the same moral opacity as Emilia in "Othello."

Finally, throughout the series, the grimaces Edie Falco & James Gandolfini wore nearly unrelieved from beginning to end was perhaps the signifier of just how hard it is to lead a double life. To me, the always looked ready to explode - or implode. I think that we saw the face of someone concocting lies in real time, then nearly believing them.

What a grand guilty pleasure it was.

Posted by julie | February 12, 2008 8:33 PM