Alfieri however, virtually radiates a calm, articulate manner. Arthur Miller uses non-colloquial language with no hint of an accent. Alfieri also speaks with a greater use of metaphors and a greater descriptive flourish than other characters: “I will never forget how dark the room became once he looked upon me… his eyes were like tunnels.”
Through his excellent choice of dialogue and stage directions Arthur Miller paints a picture of Alfieri as a man of intelligent upbringing: “And now we are quite civilised, quite American. Now we settle for half, and I like it better. I no longer keep a pistol in my filing cabinet. However my practice is entirely unromantic…”
The manner in which he speaks is formal and businesslike, appropriate for one who has studied law his entire life. In his first conversation with Eddie this is demonstrated fully. Eddie is somewhat of a nervous speaker, stopping mid-sentence and generally being uncommunicative (Eddie: [Takes a breath and glances briefly over each shoulder] – Eddie: “All right- [Glances to Alfieri, then down to the floor]).
This entire contrast is somewhat odd.
Alfieri is an older man, and has only lived in New York for half his life. As far as we know, English is not his native tongue. Eddie, however, has lived in New York his entire life, and speaks no Italian in the play.
In theory Eddie should be the more confident speaker, however Alfieri eclipses him at his own language. This may be a difference in the standard of education they both received, however it could also underline a point Arthur Miller raises several times during this play.
Several times in the play, where a comparison between the two nations occurs, the characters will ‘side’ with one of their heritages. Alfieri himself demonstrates this best, when in his introduction he speaks of the people in the neighbour hood being “Quite civilised, quite American.” The emphasis on civilised showing that he considers Italians to be an inferior people.
The characters in the play who have lived in America for some time (Eddie, Beatrice, Catherine, Alfieri) all denounce their Sicilian roots, preferring to show the ‘polite’ American facet of their personalities.
It is only the immigrants introduced halfway through (Marco and Rodolpho) who will stand for their country: “You think we have no tall buildings in Italy? No electric lights? No wide streets?”
It becomes apparent that the more American of the characters are openly quite ashamed of their Sicilian roots. Contrasting the above, even the immigrants (Rodolpho in particular) seem eager to “Become Americans” so they can live in the fabulous land of opportunity.
Alfieri overtaking Eddie at the laters native tongue shows just how attractive the American dream can appear, even causing one to forget ones language in desperation to fit in.
The entire play seems designed to do this: to demonstrate the destructive power and outright lie of the ‘American Dream’.
At the very start of the play, in Alfieri’s introduction he describes New York as “A gullet swallowing the tonnage of the world”. This is quite an unpleasant metaphor to describe something that American spin-doctors would describe as a beautiful process. Arthur Miller likely chose this metaphor very carefully, as it reflects on his true views of America at the time, a garbage can, full of the dregs of society that the rest of the world did not want.
These feelings of disgust at modern American society flow through the play, making their presence known without ever clouding the development of story or character.
Eddies entire fall from grace is hurried along by one major factor. Marco and Rodolpho moving into his house and Rodolpho’s blossoming relationship with Catherine is the catalyst in Eddie loosing his sanity. If it had not been for Marco and Rodolpho falling for the tales of the workers paradise where ordinary men could make their fortunes, events would have never progressed quite so drastically. However, the characters seem for the majority of the play unaware to the negativity displayed towards America, and seem perfectly happy with their lifestyles there. To contrast this completely it is the characters themselves who speak out against Sicily.
Another significant theme in the play is that of law and order. Arthur Miller again highlights the differences between Sicilian and American justice, just as he does between the lifestyles. Despite all of the prior negativity towards the Sicilian lifestyle the characters displayed, the themes of justice in the play are of a very Sicilian style. After Eddies betrayal of Marco and the subsequent fight, Eddie in his insanity possesses a desire for blood which seems reminiscent of the so-called “street justice” of the Italian Mafia, as opposed to the calm and structured judicial system of the USA. He demands “I want my name! Marco has my name!”
Then Marco himself shows the differing styles of law enforcement with the phrases: “In my country he would be dead now. He would not live this long” and “All the law is not in a book.”
This second point is most interesting. It shows more about Italian law and culture than most writers could deliver in an essay. In Sicily people are less ordered. The lifestyle is slower; the people take far more time over both their jobs and leisure activities. They place far more importance on living life to its fullest, so it would make sense that any effort to disrupt a life would be dealt with harshly. This does not necessarily entail a lengthy jail sentence. The feelings of the community towards an offender are often seen as punishment, and simply being humiliated, an action which Americans would brush off, would be viewed as a serious punishment. This is where Marcos comment is important. In Sicily, the law is often in the hands of the community rather than a higher authority. In America, a grand democracy where everything is structured and ordered, matters of law are entirely in the hands of the Federal justice system.
This is clear to understand. In America, the characters lives are geared towards working and money, seeking material possessions. The generally stricter society of the Americas has resulted in a stricter judicial system, one that Marco and Rodolpho cannot grasp: (Marco, when hearing that Eddie cannot be punished for betraying him) “I do not understand this country…”
Once again however, Alfieri sways the balance with his words. He counters Marco with the statement: “The law is only in a book, there is no other law.”
Alfieri is again siding with his American beliefs, although in this case the difference is far less clear cut. As a student and teacher of American law living in that country, Alfieri is obliged to speak the law of the land, unclouded by personal beliefs. Despite this we are given the impression that in this instance, Alfieri is speaking to Marco as a fellow human being, not a lawyer, and it is here that his apparent decision to ignore his culture is shocking.
But just as we are lead to believe Alfieri is completely ignorant of his Sicilian heritage, he speaks to Marco, in the tone of an older, more world weary man giving his final advice: “This is not god Marco, only God makes justice.”
Now we begin to see Alfieri as Arthur Miller likely intended. He is both Sicilian and American, a lawyer and friend to Eddie Carbone, a character and a Narrator of sorts. His roles in this play are numerous and complex, all playing across one another like a jigsaw.
But it is clear from all we have seen that Arthur Miller did not intend Alfieri as a character, rather a statement. Millers’ apparent lack of decision about Alfieri’s true role is deliberate, as he is a metaphor to appeal to all people who read or watch with play.
As Alfieri watches over Eddies self destruction he maintains his professional distance, regardless of how he feels, he is “Powerless to stop the events running their own bloody course.” This shows just how distanced from his clients Alfieri feels, and corresponds with his earlier statement that he cannot relate with the people: “The people in this neighbourhood lack glamour. After all, whom have I dealt with all my life? Longshoremen and their wives, the petty squabbles of the poor.”
But then we see how American Alfieri has become, and how the struggles between his heritage and his home have left him a walking paradox, and Arthur Miller’s statement becomes apparent.
Alfieri is not watching from ‘the bridge’ as earlier stated. He is the metaphorical bridge from the title, the link in-between two cultures.