BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


The Wire Season 1: Crime and Punishment

 
  

Page: 12(3)

 
 
Spaniel
10:07 / 30.10.07
Throughout, I saw a lot of similarities with The Sopranos, notably in the central notion that you can't get out of the game.
 
 
Mug Chum
10:56 / 30.10.07
I would like a convo thread that's basically a remix and repeated beats of quoted passages of other posters and threads.

Just so I won't leave this post just on that, that article on the New Yorker wasn't really all that interesting. It seems almost just ad space for the show, really. Instead of something more like their article on Deadwood (which was a ad piece, in its way), but mostly because Milch could go on more on the act of creation and really go onto his metaphysical (and other cool stuff) meanderings and how they relate to scenes and to the show (and some other specifics which were of interesting to me personally). There wasn't much of anything resembling a social discussion of any kind with Simon or Burns or anybody else (I think there's a video on youtube of David Simon going on more deeply into that territory).

But it had some nice bits on how they create scenes and threads of the show. But overall it's almost biographical on the creator and things you probably already know about the show.
 
 
Spaniel
11:09 / 30.10.07
There is some text due. It got lost somehow, and I've had to add it in an edit.
 
 
The Natural Way
12:08 / 30.10.07
While there might be the odd thematic simalarity, I really don't see that much in common between the two shows. The Sopranos seems to me to be very much based around character - it's central to the show, really - whereas The Wire sacrifices these issues time and time again in favour of plot and the overarching narrative point the show wants to make. It's not to say that the viewer doesn't get to know McNulty et al, but that the action and the focus isn't primarily driven by psychology. As I think someone else has pointed out above, the characters in the Wire always possess the potential to surprise the viewer, simply because they're not as concisely drawn.

By the way, none of this is to say that I think the Sopranos suffers because of its emphasis, just that it's different.
 
 
The Natural Way
15:18 / 30.10.07
Where exactly is the rest of yr post(s), boboss?
 
 
Janean Patience
15:21 / 30.10.07
There was more there earlier, but it's gone. I think the robot's malfunctioning. Someone must have introduced it to an illogical concept like love or friendship.
 
 
Spaniel
15:35 / 30.10.07
I think I might well have asked for a deletion of... actually I can't be bothered to finish this sentence.

My point was that I think Pat's overstating the case when he talks of "the central notion that you can't get out of the Game". I'm not sure that's anything like a hard and fast rule in the Wire - although it's damn difficult, obvs.
 
 
PatrickMM
19:05 / 03.11.07
Having not seen much beyond season one, I can't say whether the inability to get out of the game is the series' central notion, but in season one, it's critical. Wallace's trip to the country, and D's attempt to get him to go back to school are both heartbreaking plot points about the fact that you can't just walk away from the life. D'Angelo's own imprisonment is about the same thing.

The parallel to this is the police bureacracy. While McNulty takes the fall for not playing the game, most of his other colleagues wind up okay, Freamon in particular. But, ultiamtely I feel like Simon's thematic point is that the system is so broken that cops who try to do the right thing get punished and the criminals who try to change their ways are given no support at all.
 
 
nighthawk
03:02 / 04.11.07
Oh yeah, I've been thinking for a few days that I owed this thread a post about Bubs, since he's such an amazing character who we've not talked about too much...

Andre Royo's "Don't tell her, huh?" is one of the most heart-rending deliveries of a heart-rending line ever.


Bubs has to be one of the best characters in The Wire. The scenes in Season 1 where McNulty has asked him to gather information, giving Bubs the usual tip to buy some crack, and Bubs is constantly trying to tell him that he's cleaned himself up - even attempting to return McNulty's $20 to him to show where he's at now - and McNulty's completely oblivious, too caught up in himself and the developments in the case to notice what's going on with Bubs. Its such a key moment for both characters in that series: Bubs because, after he fails to return the money to McNulty, you just know his resolution to lift himself out of the game is going to come to nothing; and McNulty because, however much he learns about himself as a result of Kima being shot, he hasn't changed that much. As Ronnie says to him when they fight outside Levy's office, 'You'll use anyone' - she's right, and quite probably its these character traits that make him good police, but...well, you end the series with the feeling that he'll never realise what he did to Bubs...
 
 
Blake Head
01:04 / 19.11.07
A bit like Falcon I opted for the box set of Battlestar Galactica over this at first, but better late than never I suppose. It wasn’t really what I expected. From what I’d gleaned I thought it’d be a superior quality The Shield: backstabbing and betrayal between two groups of drug dealers and corrupt cops both on the wrong side of the law. Just a bit off the mark then. There are corrupt cops of course, Herc and Carver definitely, Daniels probably, plenty of the higher ups presumably, Polk if he’d had the guts. Prez, Kima and one of the detectives later on are all culpable of unnecessary brutality, and are covered by the others. I don’t know: does the first season ask if you can still be “good police” and take criminal actions? I think it’s fairly clear that you can bend the rules (McNulty) and still be on the side of the angels, but can you break them and keep breaking them and still do good police work at the same time? I don’t know, maybe that’s a bit binary for something as multi-layered as The Wire. As people have mentioned, a lot of the value in the show comes from showing the similarities between the two groups without erasing their underlying differences: the way Avon’s gang operates like a professional business, the bureaucracy and the quotas the homicide unit has, the way loyalty is rewarded and its absence punished. It’s not just that characters on both sides act outside of the law, it’s that there are resemblances in the way they act and also that they’re all operating individually within broken institutions and no one on either side seems to have a clear moral perception that isn't skewed by their environment.

Other things to add?

Flyboy’s comment on Kima’s character is just perfect:

But Kima is 100% cop, she loves being a cop, she wants nothing more than to be a cop, she is thoroughly immersed in cop culture. Of course she's going to beat on some corner boy who dared to hit a cop. Of course.

I think most shows would have shown the character agonising over her actions, facing some sort of professional review, or would have had someone else, someone less sympathetic be the one giving the beating, to give an idea of how shocking an action it is. And of course it’s not a shocking action, it’s something done in broad daylight with witnesses and the fact that it never comes up again, that it’s shown as incidental, just highlights how powerless, how unprotected the denizens of the Pit are from police brutality, as if they really were just two competing crews.

Just as a thought, if you did want to analyse the show from a more mythological angle, worthy of noting perhaps the reversal in that the good guys are operating from the underground, secretive and badly lit, in a not very clear location (doesn't someone get lost trying to find them?) while the actual criminal activity all takes place in daylight, more or less in plain sight, or is organised in the "upstairs room" of various semi-respectable but certainly visible businesses.

I was a bit unsure about the first few episodes as well, because if I hadn’t been bolstered by the prime Barbelith product stamp of approval, the slow-moving structure and just that hint of hesitancy in the direction and on the part of some of the actors might have been enough for me to go unhooked. To compare it with The Shield again, a bit unfairly because they are quite different, one is episodic an energetic with an overarching plot and abrasively violent and physical, the other novelistic, its strengths coming in the drawn out characterisation, the consequences of violence for both of the groups the viewer observes, it feels at times far more realistic than dramatic. In fact, the verisimilitude of realism in the show was such that I was surprised that the case got as far as it did. The sort of half-success (is that the right thing to call it?) that we have by the end of the season feels about right, but I think the show dangles the idea in front of us that the case could have been closed down before it had really started, with a few small-scale convictions, and it’s convincing because the show has built up the idea that the system in place really isn’t interested in changing things for the better, only keeping up the appearance of doing so. The confrontations with authority have heft because of the feeling that, most of the time, in most situations, you have to do what your boss or the rulebook tells you to, because there are personal and professional complications if you don’t (which most shows, in my opinion, probably don’t highlight so much, in favour of a more melodramatic reality).

Similarly, when Kima got shot I was fairly convinced that the character’s narrative was over, at the outside I thought that the likely complications would mean that if she wasn’t dead she wouldn’t be returning as an active officer, just because that seemed the most realistic resolution to a situation where someone unprotected getting shot multiple times. I’m glad to see her character isn’t dead because I think she’s an interesting character, but it does feel like more of the expected dramatic resolution and (so far) free of consequences than I’d expected myself from the show. And in some ways I don’t think I would have minded if there was that sort of double switch where you have four episodes of build up and then it’s all taken away, the unit broken up and you have to follow characters whose investment in a case has been . Which I guess is somewhat similar to the end of Season 1 suppose: it didn’t feel quite so much like a resolution as phase that the characters had moved through before moving on to the next.

It’s not impeccable. Freamon’s initial appearance is a bit too much self-consciously intriguing loner character, Prez’ transformation is a bit too convenient. When McNulty is needed to blow a gasket and push the Lieutenant (which I think happens two or three times at least?) to get behind the case there’s something forced and artificial about it. There’s a pause – or at least I think there’s a pause – between the character understanding the situation and acting in the manner necessary to push forward the plot. So either it’s an unconvincingly artificial moment of characterisation or acting, or its intended to be a moment where McNulty, even if he doesn’t actually care that much about the case itself, acts out of a mix of a troubled character and an understanding that someone needs to appear to give a fuck, and he’s in the best place to do it, and/or isn’t as concerned by the consequences of putting his career on the line. The thing is, with the quality of The Wire generally there’s a fair chance that I’ll be willing to give it the benefit of the doubt. Can’t wait for Season Two.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
10:12 / 19.11.07
Having been on a full-on Sopranos rewatch recently, I thought I'd just point out some of the major differences between it and The Wire. To put it glibly: The Wire is about how capitalism fucks up people, whereas The Sopranos is about how people fuck up capitalism.

While The Sopranos does offer a critique of materialism to an extent (how people trade their morality for comfort and wealth, and how you can't take those things with you in the end), and while it does sometimes examine the interplay of class, culture, ethnicity and money, it is primarily interested in how these dilemmas affect and are dealt with by its characters. Actual political ideas are often espoused by characters only to tell us something abput those characters that has nothing to do with politics - and there's a pattern in which this is often done as satire, mocking various political convictions.

The Wire, on the other hand, is a political polemic primarily about institutions and their effect on people. It's not that the two shows don't sometimes work the other way around: yes, The Wire often shows how people make professional/business choices for purely personal reasons, and The Sopranos shows how the institution that is "this thing of ours" impacts on and traps individuals (and also sometimes draws parallels between the structure of a more legitimate job and one in organised crime - the pyramid structure, etc). But I get the feeling that the difference is in where the responsibility is put for why the world is as it is. David Chase is saying: things don't change because people don't change, because they're trapped by their own psychological make-up. David Simon is saying: things don't change because people can't change them, even if they try, because they're trapped by their broader circumstances.

If fans of The Wire often seem keen to stress its superiority to The Sopranos, I'd say that might be because The Wire is less well known and has not been recognised with awards, etc, even though it has received a lot of positive critical attention. Or maybe they just like it more: I do by only a nose, but I think the two shows have different enough sensibilities that a person could be a fan of only one of them.
 
 
Spaniel
11:26 / 19.11.07
Great analysis. Really puts flesh on the bones of my frequent, deeply glib assertion that the Wire is sociology and the Sopranos is psychology.
 
 
Axolotl
11:56 / 19.11.07
I've just finished series 1 (and made a start on series 2) and I'm just absolutely blown away. The characterisation is just absolutely incredible. I really can't think of a better series I've watched in the last 10 years.
 
 
PatrickMM
05:13 / 20.11.07
but I think the two shows have different enough sensibilities that a person could be a fan of only one of them.

I don't think that's true, I love them both, in different ways yeah, but they're pretty close thematically. It's in the perspective and the personal/sociological divide that they separate.

But, I can certainly see your point about why some Wire fans are quick to criticize The Sopranos. It feels like an injustice that two shows of roughly equal quality should have such a wide gap in viewership and media interest. I'd argue that the later seasons of The Sopranos have actually become more Wire like, sprawling and theme based, with lesser focus on episodic storytelling. The later seasons also remove a lot of the glamour from the criminal enterprise, another thing in common with The Wire, where no viewers are envying the people caught up in the drug game.
 
 
HCE
06:11 / 20.11.07
I think flyboy's saying that he can see how somebody might be a fan of one, but not the other.
 
 
Disco is My Class War
03:17 / 07.06.08
As usual, I'm coming to this a long time late. I just started watching Season One a couple of days ago, and am already hooked, can't wait to watch the rest. But already I think Milton is spot on about the differences between the Wire and the Sopranos. On the other hand, I would possibly correct Boboss's friend: the Sopranos is psychoanalysis, not psychology. Everything is about the family/Family -- and the capitalist structures in the Sopranos mimic or play on family dynamics. (I want to talk about how the Sopranos also mirrors the old Italian/European political forms, city-states with Princes, and in that sense it's also a meditation on Machiavellian politics, the collision and combustion of surviving feudalist economies with postmodernity. But this is not a Sopranos thread. However, this explains precisely why psychoanalysis is the structure in which it's possible to think the Sopranos: feudalism literally depends on the family as the legitimation of political power.)

Meantime the Wire comments on a different mode of capitalist production, one where even the black market is completely subsumed within a (post) fordist production line. Avon Barksdale doesn't retain sovereignty over the Projects because of the legitimation of family, it's because he's good at the game (at least that's how it seems, in Season One). And being good at the game means knowing the laws of supply and demand, how to make your cash reproduce itself faster, playing on the weird contradictions of capitalism. Like that conversation he has with D'Angelo in Episode Three about how the product is bad and that makes people buy more. This meditation extends to a consideration of work and institutions. In Barksdale's operation, everyone is expendable (except for maybe Stringer): the drones are completely replaceable because their roles require no specialisation. I like how they set up the chess metaphor when D'Angelo teaches Bodie and Wallace how to play, but what I liked most about it was the contradiction: is the point of the game to knock down your opponent's king (thus according yourself total sovereignty, but also ending the game) or for a drone to ascend to power, continuing to reproduce the terms of the game? But this also mirrors the terms of work in most offices: the drones are expendable, doing a job anyone could do, and the higher up you get, the more you have to demonstrate your ability to do things no-one else can. It's all about the individual.
 
 
grant
14:12 / 07.06.08
In Barksdale's operation, everyone is expendable (except for maybe Stringer):

Actually, having only recently finished S1, I kind of think Barksdale is a brand Stringer is marketing under. I'd have to watch again to solidify that impression, although I suspect it gets made clearer in (what are to me) future seasons. I think even Avon is expendable, as far as the system goes. He's practically an invisible person with a recognized name.
 
 
HCE
19:20 / 23.06.08
I miss Barbelith.
 
  

Page: 12(3)

 
  
Add Your Reply