In #28 one of you guys, I can never remember who, observes that The Wire rarely depicts black men trying to go straight. True, but in recounting the few instances there were, you missed an important one: the supermarket security guard who was shot over challenging Marlo's shop-lifting. There is an aside for you. Just because you go straight doesn't mean you won't be a victim.

That being said, I have a bone to pick with this statement:

"Many young black men in Baltimore (or Washington, or Chicago, or wherever) end up in crime, for lack of education, skills, and opportunity."

Are you kidding me? This, I know, is not the forum for a full-scale debate on general social ills, but the 60's called and they want back their apologist political views.

Great point about the security guard! Thanks for reminding me.

Sorry for simplifying all the problems of ghetto America, but I have a sentence to work with. Are you saying that lack of education, skills, and opportunity does not push men into crime? Not all of them obviously, which is hte point of the post, but it makes it much more attractive to a lot of them

The security guard from Season 4 is one, and the custodian killed in Season 1 for testifying against DeAngelo is another if you're looking for examples of how even those men who stay the straight and narrow remain vulnerable to the violence if they cannot somehow escape the environment. If we could see Duquan's life 10-15 years from now, he may well fall into this category. Agreed, though, that there are very few examples of this.

David,

I certainly agree that poverty and its attendant problems are major factors in pushing people into crime. However, as you expressly point out, not all - not most, even - allow themselves to be so pushed. What I therefore take issue with is the apparent exclusivity that you ascribe to poverty as a cause - as though poverty is the only thing that made a poor guy in Baltimore sell dope or rob a store. We are talking about phenomena that reflect not just institutional failure, but frequently great stupidity, greed or downright sociopathy of individuals.

Sasha: We are talking about phenomena that reflect not just institutional failure, but frequently great stupidity, greed or downright sociopathy of individuals.

If we are looking at this issue through the lens of The Wire, we have to consider all the major failures in the show to be institutional in nature. That is the show's thesis. Whether you agree with that viewpoint or not isn't really relevant here; in the universe Simon has created, all examples of wasted lives ultimately result from institutional failures.

To me, one of the most attractive themes in The Wire is that, on a personal level, there really isn't a huge difference between a cop, or a teacher, or a stevedore, or a drug dealer, or a young black college student. We are all humans: almost always greedy, at times stupid, at times honorable, at times vulnerable. Sure, there are variations and shades here, but the underlying truth is that the desires and ideals that drive someone like Marlo are not all that different from those that drive McNulty or, for that matter, you or me.

The takeaway here is that a drug dealer doesn't decide to be a drug dealer because he is too stupid or greedy to want more from life. He is forced into that role by a confluence of circumstances too intricate to unravel: his upbringing, his education, his government, his economy, and yes, his personality.

Rhayader,

I agree wholeheartedly with your last statement. Moreover, that David Simon's views are different from my own takes nothing away from my enjoyment of the show. I enjoy "The Wire" for many reasons, one of which being the manner in which it sends across its message - not the message itself.

My comment is directed not at the show, but at David Plotz, who I believe over-simplified the institutional failure theme. In fact, as central as the decay theme is, "The Wire" posits a more complicated set of causes. Just look at the kids from last season and their respective paths.

I think notice should be paid to the overwhelming number of Black men and women on the show who are not bangers - the cops, teachers, ministers, dockworkers, reporters, in bars, restaurants etc.

Simon and company don't trumpet a fanfare everytime a Black working stiff comes onscreen, but they're there. Sometimes as victims, but most often as just the common law abiding folk going about their business.

Now compare the number of Black extras walking around doing their own thing in the Wire compared to any other show set in any other American city.

It seemed pretty clear to me thats what season 4 was about. You had to make it through the minefield of middle school intact or you were doomed. You had to have support of parents or even a teacher or you had no chance. Namond will make it because he has Bunny while Duquie and Randy who were abandoned had no chance. It was even reinforced in the speech Cutty made that once Duquie was out it didn't matter if he had smarts there is no way back into the system. You must have missed that Plotz while you were complaining about the overly preachy nature of the scene. Oh well maybe David Simon will write you another angry (even though the first one wasn't despite your claims he was furious) letter and you can consider your work here done.

agreed sir biff. in season 4, Namond was the only character in the game and pursuing it. he ended up the only one not consumed by it. Michael, Randy, and Dookie all the good intentions and skills one would need, yet they couldnt escape it.

Yes, this is right on. Did Namond escape the corner because he wanted to any more than the other boys, or because he was smarter or more ambitios? No. In fact, he romanticized and attempted to emulate that mentality much more than his peers.

The reason Namond escaped was that Bunny Colvin took him under his wing. The reason that Michael, Dukie, and Randy did not escape was that nobody was able to do the same for them. Despite their talents and ambitions, they were all consumed by a world of profit, addiction, and institutional apathy.