For me, this episode slows down the narrative in order to focus on character development. Notable is the use of excellent writing to make the characters of DiAngelo and Bubbles sympathetic.
The two main plot lines (initiated last week) develop as below:
- The police force's troubles deepen. Particularly when the Prez shooting incident leads Daniels to a meeting with the Commissioner who orders a raid, seen by everyone as premature.
- To balance this, the drug dealers start to experience problems too. The supply is running out and when a re-up does come, a secondary problem - in the magificent form of Omar - manifests itself.
A point about Omar, who becomes a favorite character for most viewers (including one Barack Obama!). Here his character does not appear well-developed. He's missing the smooth lines and daring authority. (This appears to be common in The Wire: Stringer Bell's character at this stage is also undeveloped despite a number of appearances already)
Sideline plot developments include Daniels' 'dirt', Rhonda and McNulty's illicit romance and Keema's sexuality. Some of these go on to provide important plot lines, others don't.
The majority of this episode's power comes from the beautifully crafted dialogue, which really comes into its own. I couldn't resist transcribing the wonderful chess-game scene between DiAngelo, Bodie and Wallace, partly, I must admit, to know what it would feel to write such great dialogue.
D. Now look - it's simple, it's simple. See this? (kisses the king). This the king pin - aight? He the man. You get the other dude's king, you got the game. But he tryin' to get your king too. So you gotta protect it. Now the king, he move one space, any direction he damn choose, cuz he's the king. Like this, this, this. (demontstrates). Aright? But he ain't got no hustle. But the rest of these motherfuckers on the team, they got his back, and they run so deep, he really ain't gotta do shit.
B: Like your uncle.
D: Yeah. Like my uncle.
Now you see this? This the queen.She smart, she fierce. She move any way she want, as far as she want. And she - is the go-get-shit-done piece.
W: Remind me of Stringer.
D. And this over here is the castle. 'S like the stash. He move like this and like this (demonstrates)
W: Dog, stash don't move man.
D. Come on yo, think. How many time we move the stash house this week? Right? And every time we move the stash, we gotta move a little muscle with it, right? To protect it.
B: True, true, he right. Aight. What about them little bald-headed bitches right there?
D. Aight these right here? These are the pawns, they like the soldiers. They move like this: one space forward, only. 'Cept when they fight, and it's like... or like this. And they like the front lines, they be out in the field.
W: So how do you get to be the king?
D: It ain't like that. See the king, stay the king - aight? Aything stay who he is. Cept for the pawns. Now if a pawn make it all the way down to the other dude's side (flicks pawn off the board on Bodie's side) you get to be queen. And like I said the queen ain't no bitch. She got all the moves.
B: Aight. So, if I make it to the other end, I win.
D. If you catch the other dude's king, and trap it, then you win.
B: Aight but if I make it to the end, I'm top dog?
D. Nah yo it ain't like that, look, Pawns man, in the game, they get capped quick. They be out the game early.
B: Unless they some smart-ass pawns. (Sits back, satisfied)
D: (Half agrees, half gives up)
Friday, October 30, 2009
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
SEASON 1: EPISODE 2: "The Detail"
Structurally, this episode is wholly different to the first - and naturally so, since it serves a different narrative function. Having exposed the characters and really just hinted at possible threads in W1.1, here two definitive plot lines are laid out:
- A weakness in the character of DiAngelo Barksdale emerges. The concept of 'weakness', though, is reversed here, and it's actually his humanity that looks set to be his downfall as he cries over the murder of Gant, most likely committed on his behalf by his Uncle.
- Ill-discipline and lack of efficiency rule at the police HQ. Although this plot-line appears at first to be a side-commentary on the state of the force by David Simon, it serves as a useful and key narrative counterbalance since if the force was in good, working order the Barksdale Organization would be broken down far too quickly to sustain the whole series.
This binary opposition is instructive - the narrative tension is built, two dominos leant together. It's hard to tell at this stage which way the structure will fall and the tension gives a permanent, low-frequency momentum which works away below deck, propelling the narrative along.
On a critical, micro-level note, the scenerio whereby Bunk and McNulty guilt DiAngelo to tears and a written 'apology' to Gant's family, was for me a rare narrative 'slip' in the screenplay, as this weakness is inconsistent with DiAngelo's character as seen before or subsequently. Faced with the writer's brief: "DiAngelo Barksdale must show fatal weakness when interviewed by police," I wonder whether there's a smoother solution.
An interesting technique is the laying of a seed for a much later plotline, as Daniels appeals to State's Attorney Rhonda Perlman for better quality manpower in his detail, and calls her 'Rhonda, darling', very pointedly. This scene may have been inserted into the script at a late stage, once that plotline had been established. Satisfylingly, the hint is left here, and there are no further romantically-charged scenes between the two for some time.
- A weakness in the character of DiAngelo Barksdale emerges. The concept of 'weakness', though, is reversed here, and it's actually his humanity that looks set to be his downfall as he cries over the murder of Gant, most likely committed on his behalf by his Uncle.
- Ill-discipline and lack of efficiency rule at the police HQ. Although this plot-line appears at first to be a side-commentary on the state of the force by David Simon, it serves as a useful and key narrative counterbalance since if the force was in good, working order the Barksdale Organization would be broken down far too quickly to sustain the whole series.
This binary opposition is instructive - the narrative tension is built, two dominos leant together. It's hard to tell at this stage which way the structure will fall and the tension gives a permanent, low-frequency momentum which works away below deck, propelling the narrative along.
On a critical, micro-level note, the scenerio whereby Bunk and McNulty guilt DiAngelo to tears and a written 'apology' to Gant's family, was for me a rare narrative 'slip' in the screenplay, as this weakness is inconsistent with DiAngelo's character as seen before or subsequently. Faced with the writer's brief: "DiAngelo Barksdale must show fatal weakness when interviewed by police," I wonder whether there's a smoother solution.
An interesting technique is the laying of a seed for a much later plotline, as Daniels appeals to State's Attorney Rhonda Perlman for better quality manpower in his detail, and calls her 'Rhonda, darling', very pointedly. This scene may have been inserted into the script at a late stage, once that plotline had been established. Satisfylingly, the hint is left here, and there are no further romantically-charged scenes between the two for some time.
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
SEASON 1: EPISODE 1: The Target
Watching for a second time as this episode rolls out the key players in this epic game, it's like one of the first to turn up at a great party where old friends just keep arriving, full of news and stories to tell.
McNulty's opening episode at the scene of 'Snot's' miserable death is a true David Simon anecdote. The futility of Snot's situation and inevitability of his death - he compulsively steals the pot of a Craps game on a regular basis before ultimately his 'friends' can't abide it any longer and shoot him to death - evoke a key theme in the story. (I only realised this on a second viewing, and after David Simon points this out in one of the seminars on the Season 3 bonus DVD.)
Everything bursts open in the courtroom. A high-pressure situation is created when Judge Phelan, Jimmy McNulty and Stringer Bell bring the worlds of politics, police and the Barksdale crew to the same point in space-time for just a few tense moments, before the resulting explosion sets The Wire's universe in motion. The Big Bang metaphor is hard to avoid, and it's interesting to reflect on how such a simple scene can contain so much potential narrative. Having established Judge Phelan's air of resignation as yet another clear-cut case is defeated by Bell-Barskdale's machinations, Jimmy McNulty's savvy understanding of the significance of the situation and Stringer Bell's wordless authority at the back of the courtroom, the balance of power is laid bare. Are these three tensions the show's most fundamental themes?
We'll see. Some other key narrative themes exposed in this episode are:
- McNulty's curiosity leads him to stir shit.
- Apprenticeship / seniority and hierarchy (In the Barskdale crew this is clear as DiAngelo is clearly subservient to Avon and Stringer, ditto Jonny to Bubbles at the other end of the deal. In the police, hierarchy - 'chain of command' - is much less clear cut.)
- Vice and the discipline of the gang compared to the chaotic personal lives of the police (especially Bunk / McNulty)
Most characters are introduced at the correct time to meet the needs of the story. For example, we meet Rawls immediately after the (unseen) meeting where the Deputy embarrasses him after Judge Phelan followed up McNulty's info about Barksdale. Interesting exceptions are McNulty (introduced pre-titles for the 'Snot' anecdote), Herc, Carver and Keema (the bust happens before the main storyline has established itself. It's an interesting scene which briefly throws us off the scent. Herc appears initially as an impressive tough-guy cop, his weaknesses being exposed by Keema at the end of the scene.
Returning to McNulty's scene with Phelan after the trial. This must have taken some writing - since it sets off a key tension in the side story of Jimmy McNulty. Did McNulty press Phelan, or did Phelan press McNulty? "Why do you give a fuck?" vs. "Who said I did?"
I get the feeling that if you could write the courtroom and the McNulty / Phelan scene, the rest would follow. But could you write those scenes without knowing the rest of the story? Probably not. And that's the beauty of the narrative for me - it seems to write itself as events unfold according to fate's whim (as in Hardy), yet it would be quite impossible to write the first line of the first scene without having some kind of essential grasp of at least the first series in its entirety.
Anyway, that's it. The ball is rolling, inexorably down the hill.
I've got a diagram of how all the different groups of characters meet and relate to each other. It's interesting. I'll scan it in and post it another day.
McNulty's opening episode at the scene of 'Snot's' miserable death is a true David Simon anecdote. The futility of Snot's situation and inevitability of his death - he compulsively steals the pot of a Craps game on a regular basis before ultimately his 'friends' can't abide it any longer and shoot him to death - evoke a key theme in the story. (I only realised this on a second viewing, and after David Simon points this out in one of the seminars on the Season 3 bonus DVD.)
Everything bursts open in the courtroom. A high-pressure situation is created when Judge Phelan, Jimmy McNulty and Stringer Bell bring the worlds of politics, police and the Barksdale crew to the same point in space-time for just a few tense moments, before the resulting explosion sets The Wire's universe in motion. The Big Bang metaphor is hard to avoid, and it's interesting to reflect on how such a simple scene can contain so much potential narrative. Having established Judge Phelan's air of resignation as yet another clear-cut case is defeated by Bell-Barskdale's machinations, Jimmy McNulty's savvy understanding of the significance of the situation and Stringer Bell's wordless authority at the back of the courtroom, the balance of power is laid bare. Are these three tensions the show's most fundamental themes?
We'll see. Some other key narrative themes exposed in this episode are:
- McNulty's curiosity leads him to stir shit.
- Apprenticeship / seniority and hierarchy (In the Barskdale crew this is clear as DiAngelo is clearly subservient to Avon and Stringer, ditto Jonny to Bubbles at the other end of the deal. In the police, hierarchy - 'chain of command' - is much less clear cut.)
- Vice and the discipline of the gang compared to the chaotic personal lives of the police (especially Bunk / McNulty)
Most characters are introduced at the correct time to meet the needs of the story. For example, we meet Rawls immediately after the (unseen) meeting where the Deputy embarrasses him after Judge Phelan followed up McNulty's info about Barksdale. Interesting exceptions are McNulty (introduced pre-titles for the 'Snot' anecdote), Herc, Carver and Keema (the bust happens before the main storyline has established itself. It's an interesting scene which briefly throws us off the scent. Herc appears initially as an impressive tough-guy cop, his weaknesses being exposed by Keema at the end of the scene.
Returning to McNulty's scene with Phelan after the trial. This must have taken some writing - since it sets off a key tension in the side story of Jimmy McNulty. Did McNulty press Phelan, or did Phelan press McNulty? "Why do you give a fuck?" vs. "Who said I did?"
I get the feeling that if you could write the courtroom and the McNulty / Phelan scene, the rest would follow. But could you write those scenes without knowing the rest of the story? Probably not. And that's the beauty of the narrative for me - it seems to write itself as events unfold according to fate's whim (as in Hardy), yet it would be quite impossible to write the first line of the first scene without having some kind of essential grasp of at least the first series in its entirety.
Anyway, that's it. The ball is rolling, inexorably down the hill.
I've got a diagram of how all the different groups of characters meet and relate to each other. It's interesting. I'll scan it in and post it another day.
Untangling a great yarn
With apologies for adding to the expanding universe of words that are and will continue to be written about The Wire as more and more people succumb to the prosyletising of obsessives like me, The Wire untangled is my attempt to understand what this, surely the greatest television series ever made, teaches not about modern police work, drugs, politics or the dangers of drinking by the train tracks - but about storytelling.
For me this 60-hour epic has to rank among the the greatest works of narrative fiction. With Tolstoy's scale and Dostoyevsky's dystopianism, it's surely only a matter of time before someone much more qualified than me performs proper literary analysis on it. Nevertheless, if you'll excuse me, I'll write my blog anyway. It's a bit like the way children pick apart dandelions. The desire to understand my subject and how it works is there - but I'm mainly doing this because it's a fun thing to do.
And of course an excuse to watch the series again. This time, though, I'll be listening really carefully.
For me this 60-hour epic has to rank among the the greatest works of narrative fiction. With Tolstoy's scale and Dostoyevsky's dystopianism, it's surely only a matter of time before someone much more qualified than me performs proper literary analysis on it. Nevertheless, if you'll excuse me, I'll write my blog anyway. It's a bit like the way children pick apart dandelions. The desire to understand my subject and how it works is there - but I'm mainly doing this because it's a fun thing to do.
And of course an excuse to watch the series again. This time, though, I'll be listening really carefully.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)