"Frank Sobotke - sigh, he's a tragic character right out of a Greek play ":including the way they stage his death. Just like in antic tragedy they don't show us his murder, but we see him walk towards his fate. This is all the more powerful. I ache for this character, because fundamentaly he is a decent man. He did wrong but as Beadie says in her confrontation with him "there're different kind of wrong". To me this latter scene is one of the most powerful scene in the whole show, both actors make a fantastic job and I can't watch it without tears welling up in my eyes.
"Valcheck is a piece of work. " With Burrell he is one of the character I despise the most. Both incompetent, except as tortuous careerist and "hitmen" for their chiefs, both dumb as loaves.
"Unlike Stringer, Avon, Omar, D'Angel and compnay - the Sobotkes actually do have options." I disagree. They all have options, choices: Stringer is following studies economic at the university. He is a skilled man. D'Angelo had a choice twice but in the end he rejected it. Wallace had a choice too, he could have stayed with his grand mother and gone to school but chose to come back to the projects, Omar goes in New York but keeps on with his business and comes back to Baltimore,Avon could chose to reform. But like the stevedores they all come back to what they know. It's the same process for all of them. The fact is that reform is hard, the choices offered are often between two hard ones.One of the thing the Wire does very well is to show is that if you want to reform, to change you need help because it's extremely difficult with all the system inertia (and your own) pulling you back. Wallace was left alone with his grandmother,D'Angelo didn't get help when he needed it,the stevedores were ignored for 20 years as the port went decaying... Reform is one of the major (for the individuals and for the system/institutions) theme of season 3 and will be explored in the last 2 seasons too.
What I particularly appreciate in the Wire is how it works on several scales in a geographic way. To explain the local you need to work at different scales. Here both the FBI and the Greeks provide these scales. The FBI provides the state scale. The Federals explain how political decisions (for right or wrong reasons, though the Wire clearly criticizes it) have redefined their mission: war against terrorism and coruption are their new priorities not anymore the drug trafic with an exception for the Columbian drug cartel. But of course these decisions are having serious consequences on the local scale in Baltimore. Is it an accurate POV? Four days ago I've read an article in Le Monde criticizing the actual governement for having put for years long other priorities before the fight against drug trafic, with dire consequences for the cities (populated by poor people and in most part by immigrants) suffering from this plague. The Greeks provides the global scale. Capitalism is not only one who has gone global, crime too, with international networks. And of course, the Wire, in passing, establishes parallels between the two. They are presented without identities or national roots because of two reasons I think: one when seen from a local POV these phenomenons are difficult to apprehend and two there's something real there too. With globalization a new (and very small) social class has appeared. It's made of very rich people living in various metropolis Paris, New York, London.... where they possess flats. The world is their home, they don't really live at national scale anymore.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2011-07-11 08:36 am (UTC)"":including the way they stage his death. Just like in antic tragedy they don't show us his murder, but we see him walk towards his fate. This is all the more powerful. I ache for this character, because fundamentaly he is a decent man. He did wrong but as Beadie says in her confrontation with him "there're different kind of wrong". To me this latter scene is one of the most powerful scene in the whole show, both actors make a fantastic job and I can't watch it without tears welling up in my eyes.
"" With Burrell he is one of the character I despise the most. Both incompetent, except as tortuous careerist and "hitmen" for their chiefs, both dumb as loaves.
"" I disagree. They all have options, choices: Stringer is following studies economic at the university. He is a skilled man. D'Angelo had a choice twice but in the end he rejected it. Wallace had a choice too, he could have stayed with his grand mother and gone to school but chose to come back to the projects, Omar goes in New York but keeps on with his business and comes back to Baltimore,Avon could chose to reform. But like the stevedores they all come back to what they know. It's the same process for all of them. The fact is that reform is hard, the choices offered are often between two hard ones.One of the thing the Wire does very well is to show is that if you want to reform, to change you need help because it's extremely difficult with all the system inertia (and your own) pulling you back. Wallace was left alone with his grandmother,D'Angelo didn't get help when he needed it,the stevedores were ignored for 20 years as the port went decaying... Reform is one of the major (for the individuals and for the system/institutions) theme of season 3 and will be explored in the last 2 seasons too.
What I particularly appreciate in the Wire is how it works on several scales in a geographic way. To explain the local you need to work at different scales. Here both the FBI and the Greeks provide these scales. The FBI provides the state scale. The Federals explain how political decisions (for right or wrong reasons, though the Wire clearly criticizes it) have redefined their mission: war against terrorism and coruption are their new priorities not anymore the drug trafic with an exception for the Columbian drug cartel. But of course these decisions are having serious consequences on the local scale in Baltimore. Is it an accurate POV? Four days ago I've read an article in Le Monde criticizing the actual governement for having put for years long other priorities before the fight against drug trafic, with dire consequences for the cities (populated by poor people and in most part by immigrants) suffering from this plague. The Greeks provides the global scale. Capitalism is not only one who has gone global, crime too, with international networks. And of course, the Wire, in passing, establishes parallels between the two. They are presented without identities or national roots because of two reasons I think: one when seen from a local POV these phenomenons are difficult to apprehend and two there's something real there too. With globalization a new (and very small) social class has appeared. It's made of very rich people living in various metropolis Paris, New York, London.... where they possess flats. The world is their home, they don't really live at national scale anymore.