Oh, The Humanity!

I've been having a hard time coming up with what to say about Wire 47 since the episode was basically so fantastic that I have nothing to grouse about. The signature moment, on reflection, has to be Chris' savage beating-to-death of Bug's dad. The distinctive thing about the Marlo-Chris-Snoop troika from the beginning is that they've presented themselves, from the beginning (i.e., Marlo's hilarious "what's you name again?" query in the back seat of his car after meeting the girl who was supposed to seduce him and lead him to his demise) as essentially inhuman characters. Chris' breakdown, monstrous as it was, was also human. Killing that dude was more than a job to him -- it was vengeance for some demons in his own past; a murder that, perversely, makes Chris seem more normal and less like the ultimate drug soldier.

It was, however, just that inhuman quality that had made the Stanfield crew so effective. Chris not only lost his head, but violated the corpse-hiding procedure that's been integral to keeping the heat off.

West Baltimore, as we see, is trapped in a spiral. Weak, soft kids like Namond are too week, too human to avoid the game. The strong ones (Michael) resist its temptations better but are also much better prospects who get more attractive offers and wind up signing up at the end. But even the best, most professional among them (Chris) have their moments of humanity and trip up. Meanwhile, the descent of Major Crimes into ineptitude is frustrating, but having seen Marlo rise from the ashes of the Barskdale crew we know perfectly well that Colonel Daniels and a revivified CID will only open up space for a new player if they ever do bear down. Everyone is, in essence, doomed. Which is, it seems, the general POV of the show as we see as well in the Hall plotline.

From the beginning, though, there's been a counternarrative: Prop Joe always wins. He tricks Avon, brings in a ringer, and wins his basketball game. He has an out-of-town "product" hookup facilitated by a smuggler who enjoys protection from the FBI. The Baltimore PD never focuses on him no matter how central he becomes to the Charm City drug trade -- indeed, it's not clear they even know who he is. Marlo comes to him for help as to those fleeing from Marlo. Is Joe just lucky, or has he figured something out nobody else on either side of the thin blue line knows?

Comments

Is Joe just lucky, or has he figured something out nobody else on either side of the thin blue line knows?

"Buy for a dollar, sell for two. Later for all that bullshit."

My longstanding question has been why is Marlo the kingpin and not Chris. Before #47, it seemed that Chris had all the essentials, but wasn't as flawed as Marlo, but I think the revelation of Chris's demons answers that to a degree.

Posted by Pooh | November 20, 2006 2:47 PM

Prop Joe was a target at the start of the 3rd season but they could never get past Cheese(Method Man), remember the whole dog incident? After watching the previews for next week, it looks like Joe is going to meet the wrath of Omar.

What is Slim Charles up to? Is he looking to turn on Joe? And why couldn't he help Brody more? Maybe get him some fresh real estate on the east side with Joe's people or something, it looks like Brody is finally going to see the game catch him. Brody has avoided all sorts of things, from Omar to not having to go to jail because he was operating in Hampsterdam.

Posted by jbou | November 20, 2006 3:00 PM

Never having seen the show (no TV), but having read lots of Wire-blogging and tooled around on the show's website, I'd bet on Prop Joe being the big winner at the end.

Posted by Neil the Ethical Werewolf | November 20, 2006 3:03 PM

I think you could argue that Prop Joe is the neighborhood equivalent of The Greek from Season 2 -- "always business." As Pooh suggests, Joe's success comes from his ability to avoid the minutiae of corner-level dealing.

At the same time, I think he's headed for his downfall this season. As David Simon has noted, Bubs and Omar are the two characters on the show who aren't directly controlled by institutions, and the two who, at least prior to this season, seem to move through the world of the Wire with the most freedom. This used to be true of Joe, but in joining the Coop, he's increasingly connected to every aspect of the game.

Posted by JHB | November 20, 2006 3:03 PM

The no-drop rule was already busted, but nothing came of it.

Marlo told Chris and Snoop to drop a few New York dealers and leave the bodies on the street so the NYers would know what'd happened. They did, NYC left, but major crimes did not revive.

I assume the plot-reason is that by this point major crimes had already passed out of the hands of people who could have leveraged the murders into a reason to extend the program... but I'm giving the benefit of the doubt there. I kept hoping that shoe would drop, but not yet. Presumably it drops soon, though.

Posted by Dammitman! | November 20, 2006 3:12 PM

It is so characteristic of The Wire that the most brutal act of violence this season was also the most human and understandable. And yeah, that humanity is going to come back and bite Chris in the ass.

Only two episodes left...and I'm steeling myself for whatever heartbreak they have in store...

Posted by Tom Hilton | November 20, 2006 3:16 PM

I was able to get access to some bittorented screeners so I have already watched the whole season- btw you can find the entire season packaged as one torrent bundle now. Awesome TV. My only complaint is that HBO is too cheap to fund a whole season. 13 episodes is only half a season. They have story for at least 26-39 episodes for this season's story arcs alone.

I think HBO is great as a first round funder. IE a VC that can pick a great startup, (tv show) but I think their subscription model and scheduled time slots end up limiting uptake to get to mass market appeal without very very generous Time-Warner cross media marketing synergies. I'm thinking radio hosts chatting about plot details during commuter hour as mock "water cooler" talk, etc.

The Wire is the perfect show for an Internet TV model watch as much as you want whenever you want and discuss on blogs like this. With a cast of nearly one hundred solid actors and actresses they could easily be in continual production of an episode in either a two week or more ambitious one week schedule. We could literally see 26 or 52 episodes a year and still be begging for more.

Matt's recent bloggerheads tv spoke nicely of the beginnings of this new model. Hey Matt you know any Ivy TV people who are interested in making this happen?

Posted by patience | November 20, 2006 3:17 PM

It's pretty clear that the old Major Crimes unit knew who Prop Joe was. And before McNulty made it all Stringer, all the time, they might have focused on Joe. To their knowledge, which is out of date, Joe controls the drugtrade on the East Side, and in the past collaborated with Stringer.

Posted by Nicholas Beaudrot | November 20, 2006 3:24 PM

I think Prop Joe's wisdom is to always make sure there is a higher-profile fish for the cops to fry.

Posted by Eric | November 20, 2006 3:29 PM

Ah, our long national nightmare is over, and Matt has opened up this week's Wire thread. I think Michael is turning into the most counterintuitive character they've launched yet: you totally *want* to like him, and to root for him, but he appears to be jumping into "the game" with both feet, and his shadowed smile at the end of the episode, contemplating his step-dad's fate, was truly disturbing. There was an earlier scene last night, where he is just sitting and thinking about what he has set up with Chris and Snoop, which reminded me of Michael (hey!) Corleone's famous bathroom scene from the first "Godfather", but our Michael seems to have made a much quicker transition to amorality than his namesake.

What really stuck with me last night was how broken up Bodie was at the news of Kevin's killing. Somehow I had failed to imagine that Bodie might actually *like* some of the people who work for him -- although, obviously, if Poot had met a similar fate I wouldn't have been surprised by emotion. It made me think of a historiographical controversy I read about (somewhere in the mists of time) about how parents regarded their children in the pre-modern era. Essentially, one school thought that they didn't especially grieve the deaths of their children, given how common such deaths were, whereas the other school contended that parental grief was as bitter in the past as it is now, when children rarely die. In any event, I think I took for granted that Bodie was indifferent to the lives of those around him, which actually might have been an appropriate worldview but is obviously not how he really feels.

Posted by Charlie Murtaugh | November 20, 2006 3:44 PM

But even the best, most professional among them (Chris) have their moments of humanity and trip up.

That's a weird thing to say. What does professionalism even mean in this context?

Posted by Wade | November 20, 2006 3:59 PM

I think Omar and Joe are on a collision course now. But since Omar promised no bodies, he's going to have to come up with something different.

Also, I don't think Bodie was all that upset about losing Little Kevin, I think he was upset because it was unecessary. His nostalgia for the Barkedale days was about the principles and rules of the game. Even when he killed his friend Wallace in the first season, it was because they knew for sure he talked. Marlo will kill based on the mere possibility someone talked (i.e. Andre). He'll take someone out for just talking back. Since Bodie has been around for the whole series, maybe it's time for him to rise up and take on Marlo, and carry on the Barkedale dynatsy. After all, D'angelo was his mentor.

Posted by DTG | November 20, 2006 4:15 PM

A great episode but the fact that Randy is doomed seems a little over the top. Namond was always my choice. Bunny is never really surprised, but he did get an insight into Namond's plight didn't he. About Chris slipping up, since the evil stepdad was not in the game, leaving him out gives the blues some homicide meat. Tracking back from Mike to Chris calls for a lot of tracking, and Mike is not talking. What about Heck and Bubbles. Is Bubbles in for it, or is Heck getting his stripes stript? The previews suggest a lot of stuff for the soup. Only three episodes left, but there is always next year.

Posted by Ernie Fazio | November 20, 2006 4:15 PM

Even when he killed his friend Wallace in the first season, it was because they knew for sure he talked.

No they didn't, Stringer said he talked, which was all that counted for Bodie and Poot. (The fact that String was correct is immaterial - they killed him largely on spec.)

Posted by Pooh | November 20, 2006 4:44 PM

I don't know what Randy's fate will be, but killing him seems a bit too predestined. I'm not worried that the stepdad's corpse will come back to haunt Chris, any more than the much-discussed-at-the-time security guard badge -- he's an addict, a parolee, and he was beaten to death rather than killed gangland style. The fact that he's not in the game will make him actually less interesting, is my suspicion, since his death looks like a pretty random tragedy rather than an atrocity visited on an innocent (as the police misconstrued the death of Omar's female accomplice a season or two ago).

I'm *very* curious to see what happens to Herc and Bubbles -- I'm nervous that the police brutality in the beginning of the episode might have been a foreshadowing of Bubbles's fate at the hands of Herc. Is the consensus among the fans that Bubbles's trick will ultimately result in the complete dismantling of Major Crimes, in response to the wrathful reverend, and the reinstatement of a team similar to that of the past seasons?

Posted by Charlie Murtaugh | November 20, 2006 4:47 PM

Pooh - "No they didn't, Stringer said he talked, which was all that counted for Bodie and Poot. (The fact that String was correct is immaterial - they killed him largely on spec.)"

I didn't mean that Bodie knew for sure. The point is that the Barkesdale crew had a higher standard for following the "rules of the game" than Marlo. Slim has mentioned it, Wee-Bay mentioned it.

BTW - Stringer isn't the best example. He met his end because he broke the rules when he tried to set up the muslim from New York. Still, Bodie was always under the impression that those in charge respected some sort of code, and Marlo doesn't.

Posted by DTG | November 20, 2006 5:05 PM

i don't think randy is doomed, rather he's just going to be ostracized as a snitch, and probably will lose the friendship of michael. someone had mentioned how chris is totally out of place; sometimes i felt like he was just a bad actor, but it seems more likely (i should have given DS some more credit) that his sticking out like a sore thumb (accent, dress, mannerisms) has a reason (doesn't everything on this show?), and it appears it may be related to abuse that he himself suffered. and i don't really see the death of bug's dad coming back on him at all.

i too worry about bubbles. but in my heart of hearts i don't think that he's going to go anywhere. my question is whether this indiscriminate harrassment of the minister will somehow be associated with burrell and his new crime tactics. if the ministers sour on burrell, that could open a lot of doors. but seeing clay/burrell/city council president (wow is she being used/lied to, for all her bravado some serious naivete) makes me wonder if the chips are too stacked against this outcome.

i think with michael, we are seeing an origin story of marlo. heavenandhere had some stuff about this, and i totally agree. michael's steely exterior hides inner pain, but now that he has experienced the ease with which he can exercise power, that may in turn come to act as a shield for a cold, calculating sociopath, a la marlo. we shall see.

Posted by looj | November 20, 2006 5:23 PM

Is the consensus among the fans that Bubbles's trick will ultimately result in the complete dismantling of Major Crimes, in response to the wrathful reverend, and the reinstatement of a team similar to that of the past seasons?

I have a feeling it's going to spiral into something much bigger than that--it'll be a weapon for Madame President to use against Carcetti, or (less likely) a pretext for removing Burrell, but one way or another it will have consequences at the highest levels of the PD.

Posted by Tom Hilton | November 20, 2006 5:44 PM

Just to continue my past bitching about the Slate discussion, today Alex Kotlowitz referred to Chris's killing of the evil stepdad as "cold-blooded." Now, our host here could stand the occasional editorial intervention (e.g. when using "i.e." instead of "e.g."), but on his worst day he wouldn't be so sloppy as to use this term to describe among the hottest-blooded killings in the show's history. Which goes to show that Orwell was right to warn against the use of cliches like "cold-blooded," since they tend to lose meaning with overuse. (I realize that citing Orwell is, itself, a cliche.)

Posted by Charlie Murtaugh | November 20, 2006 7:21 PM

Just to continue my past bitching about the Slate discussion, today Alex Kotlowitz referred to Chris's killing of the evil stepdad as "cold-blooded."

That is an astonishingly obtuse thing to say.

On the other hand, I did think the part about inner-city kids' reaction to the show was pretty interesting. It really is the only show currently on television that even tries to depict those realities.

Posted by Tom Hilton | November 20, 2006 7:54 PM

Um, just to clarify--what Alex Kotlowitz said was obtuse. Not what you said.

Posted by Tom Hilton | November 20, 2006 7:54 PM

I didn't mean that Bodie knew for sure. The point is that the Barkesdale crew had a higher standard for following the "rules of the game" than Marlo. Slim has mentioned it, Wee-Bay mentioned it.

This strikes me as shockingly hypocritical of Slim, Bodie, et al. If anything, they had more reason to suspect Little Kevin because they knew he had been pinched.

FWIW, I think the upper echelons of the BPD are going to look like the stage at the end of Hamlet with Rawls dying to slow poisoned death after Burell and Daniels have been dispatched more quickly and painlessly.

Posted by Pooh | November 20, 2006 8:09 PM

Something I find interesting is the tendency, here and on other discussion forums, to contrast Marlo's crew unfavorably to the Barksdales in terms of professionalism, decency, adherence to some sort of code of the game, etc. I think the writers are basically playing us, here, so as to give us moral whiplash later on (Chris's unexpected rage being an early examle, perhaps). The idea is being floating that killing Kevin was something the Barksdales would never have done -- of course, the Barksdale leftovers *would* think that, but is it true? Basically, Kevin fucked up (by working through Randy), and the Barksdales knew how to clean up loose ends like that. Recall the crew that shot up Kima in the first season, along with the strip club manager dude -- as I recall, Wee-bay was put on the case of killing all of them, just to clean up the mess they'd left by -- totally unwittingly! -- shooting a cop.

The difference is that the writers deliberately humanized the Barksdales, by showing us their lives outside the game, and they've deliberately avoided doing so with Marlo's crew. (I don't know if there has been a *single* non-business scene with Marlo -- even his seduction in the club turned out to be a set-up for assassination.) Just as intended, we've filled in the empty space with "this page intentionally left blank," assuming that Marlo and his people are soulless, amoral killing machines. Which they may be, only no more so than the Barksdales (and especially, perhaps, the up-and-coming Barksdales of 10-15 years before season 1).

Posted by Charlie Murtaugh | November 20, 2006 9:37 PM

I think there might have been one scene with Marlo and his pigeons. And your point is well taken, Charlie, but there were some differences between the crews. Avon seemed genuinely upset that Stringer ordered a hit for a Sunday. Maybe that was just part of their power struggle, but it didn't seem that way. Can you imagine Marlo caring about that? And there was also the scene where Cutty retired from the game, and in response to (something like) "he used to be the man," Avon said, "he a man today." Again, I'm not sure Marlo wouldn't have had Cutty killed. Ultimately, it's going to be hard to make one murdering drug crew seem significantly more moral than another, but the Marlo crew does seem more nasty (if only because they've figured out a way to short-circuit the more murders=more police reaction).

And one thing about Bodie's upset: at the beginning of the episode, he advises Little Kevin about how to put Marlo at ease. Isn't it likely that he feels partly responsible for Kevin's death?

Posted by ogged | November 20, 2006 10:54 PM

On the other hand (I'm re-watching the episode right now), Snoop wants to kill Randy, and Marlo says no. (He opts for spreading the word that Randy is a snitch.)

Posted by ogged | November 20, 2006 11:03 PM

Your points are well taken in turn, Ogged. I do think that the Barksdales mellowed with age, but at the same time I'd guess that they were a lot like Marlo when they were starting out.

By the way, has anyone here read "Clockers", or seen the movie "Fresh"? Two very good early/mid-90s takes on "the game", the latter in particular.

Posted by Charlie Murtaugh | November 20, 2006 11:26 PM

If one were to describe the general plot of Fresh it would sound horribly contrived but it's just outstanding (although I wonder how it will hold up now that I've seen 47 hours of the Wire in the last six months).

Posted by djw | November 21, 2006 12:49 AM

Another thing that would've most likely been against the Barksdale code would be killing an innocent "taxpayer" in order to set up someone like Omar.

Posted by brett | November 21, 2006 2:31 AM

Charlie: Richard Price, the author of "Clockers", is one of the writers for The Wire this season. (He co-wrote "Home Rooms" and "Corner Boys".)

Also, regarding Marlo vs the Barksdale crew: David Simon has said explicitly in a couple of interviews that Marlo and Chris' story is as close to an origin story for Barksdale and Bell as he's ever going to write. The difference between the two duos isn't bloodthirstyness or humanity, but time, maturity and learning. (With Prop Joe, oddly enough, turning out to be Marlo's teacher.)

Posted by Doctor Memory | November 21, 2006 2:56 AM

Another thing that would've most likely been against the Barksdale code would be killing an innocent "taxpayer" in order to set up someone like Omar.

I think that's wrong. The Barksdales certainly killed taxpayers when they found it necessary. Obviously, when they went up against Omar they chose a different approach; but it didn't work and Marlo's trying to learn from their mistakes.

Supporting some of the sentiments here, I think the idea of a "Barksdale code" is something a bullshit myth they tell themselves simply because they'd been playing the game for long enough to start spinning those kinds of self-justifying narratives. And now, sure, the Barksdale vets have lots of nostalgic notions about how things were better in the old days but it mostly plays to me as nostalgia for a time when they were more important players than they are now in the Marlo Era.

Posted by Matthew Yglesias | November 21, 2006 9:15 AM

matt's right; there wasn't much of a barksdale code, and any implication by them that there was is probably, as he put it, a self-justifying narrative, the sunday truce notwithstanding. as someone mentioned, bodie says they killed wallace because they knew he snitched, but in fact it was only because stringer said he did. the fact that stringer was right doesn't retroactively make his reasoning justified. while our impressions of the characters (marlo vs. avon, etc.) incline use to believe this purported higher moral standing of the barksdale crew to a degree, their actions don't necessarily support it.

remember in d'angelo's trial in season 1? they tied up all the loose ends. they killed the security guard woman who had even lied under oath at the trial, and then bird killed gant, which led to omar becoming involved with bunk. both of those people were not in the game, although obviously gant had testified and both were involved in barksdale dealings to a degree.

i'm not sure if i'm with the marlo/chris as avon/stringer origin idea, despite what simon says. remember, stringer was chided by avon for never having killed anyone (leading to the d'angelo revelation), while we've seen chris kill like 10-20 people this season. avon was a talker, a passionate guy in a restrained way. marlo is neither of those things. so i'm not sure. obviously i'm inclined to take david's word for it.

Posted by looj | November 21, 2006 9:41 AM

Dr. Memory -- thanks for the info re Richard Price. I must have heard that somewhere, and forgotten it. And awesome name, BTW.

Posted by Charlie Murtaugh | November 21, 2006 10:03 AM

I like how Chris almost always says to his victims, to comfort them, that they know he will do it fast.

Wallace was tight with Bodie and Poot - that is part of the difference in that killing.

Posted by theCoach | November 21, 2006 10:35 AM

I agree that this episode was fantastic. Some very dramatic turns in this one.

Charlie Murtaugh, I think that the police brutality at the beginning was actually to set up the savage beating at the end of the show. That kind of violence is not typical for The Wire, and I think it was a way of preparing the viewer for the savagery at the end.

Also, I think that the Bubs-Herc storyline is going to end badly for Herc, with no real ramifications for Bubs. Herc gets dressed down by the new boss, then fucks up again within the same show. He is toast.

It almost seems like The Wire is going to reverse itself from past seasons and show the "real poh-leece" getting into key positions and the incompetents and schemers getting the boot. Lester gets to head Major Crimes? Of course, all those "real poh-leece" could get within one step of the key positions, and get knocked down again. That would be more in keeping with the show.

Posted by Lame Man | November 21, 2006 11:02 AM

Back to the whole "code" thing. I never meant to imply that any of the street dealers are moral or ethical. Their code is just a set of rules that govern their world, like the list Namond and the other kids came up with in class. Even if they aren't written, everyone knows them implicitly. One time Omar said "A man's gotta have a code", or something like that. Omar's code certainly isn't good enough for Bunk, but it serves as a basis for respect. So yes, on one hand, the Barkesdale code is a bullshit myth, but it's their bullshit myth and it serves a purpose.

My only point was that Marlo's rise seems to have disrupted the balance. His loyalty only extends to Chris, Snoop, and maybe Michael. Towards everyone else, it's about domination. Remeber what Cris said to Bodie: "Why's not in your vocabulary anymore" (not a sign of respect).

I think this will lead to Marlo's downfall eventually. It certainly did for Stringer. It would be great to see Bodie's character develop even further by taking his place.

Posted by DTG | November 21, 2006 5:15 PM

The game is the game. Nobody thinks twice about scamming or expunging somebody else for selfish or survival reasons, and even a civilian's 'innocence' buys them nothing--witness the wet UPS delivery. Bunk might as well give Omar carte blanche to blast away as there's a vaguely Robin Hood aspect to Omar insofar as his victims seem to truly deserve it.

My fear that the general election would derail Carcetti's plans hasn't happened but, as with Prop. Joe on the east side, Clay Davis seems to be the survivor who always winds up profiting. So I still fear something bad coming from that direction.

Posted by christon | November 22, 2006 12:55 PM

Just popped i to say new viewers keep forgetting that Omar's "man gotta have a code" line was actually first said by Bunk to Omar during season one. That's all. Good night.

Posted by TDS | November 22, 2006 4:23 PM

remember in d'angelo's trial in season 1? they tied up all the loose ends. they killed the security guard woman who had even lied under oath at the trial, and then bird killed gant, which led to omar becoming involved with bunk. both of those people were not in the game, although obviously gant had testified and both were involved in barksdale dealings to a degree.

I had not forgotten about those taxpayer killings, but as you point out those victims had interfered with Avon's business and were threats to it. For a criminal enterprise that would be a practical part of your business. I don't know that they were above it, but they never killed anyone completely unwitting and uninvolved as a ploy (atleast that we saw). I agree that their code is essentially self-mythologizing bullshit, but with a grain of truth.

I think this will lead to Marlo's downfall eventually. It certainly did for Stringer. It would be great to see Bodie's character develop even further by taking his place.

I think this season has shown that Bodie really doesn't have leadership capabilities to be the boss. If anything it's showing someone who's tiring of the game and not sure how to escape it.

Posted by brett | November 24, 2006 12:11 PM