Tag: America

Is Fido a communist? Thoughts on Andrew Currie’s unlikely hero in suburban America.

Irony with zombies
‘Fido’ is not strictly a zombie movie. Yes, its main premise is the story of a domesticated zombie, played by a strictly-grunting Billy Connoly, in a 1950s ‘perfect America’ universe where zombies are the ‘pets’ of mankind. The trick is to simply lock a collar around their necks to surpress their need to eat and create fenced off communities that protect them from the ‘Wild Zone’ where all the remaining un-domesticated zombies live. These communities are perfect in every way (it never rains apparently) and the families living in them look like they came right out of a Norman Rockwell painting. The working 9-5 husband Bill (Dylan Baker), the stay-at-home wife and mother Helen (Carrie-Ann Moss) and the well-mannered skinny kid Timmy (Kesun Loder). Only in this movie, instead of a dog, the pet is a zombie called Fido who starts to wake up from his permanent state of apathy and develops a will of his own despite the collar’s technology. As parts of his humanity emerge, seen through his cravings for a cigarette and appreciation of a woman’s scent, he protects and cares for Timmy and his family, as the ugliness of this seemingly-perfect American community appears. Through an accidental malfunction of his collar, Fido attacks Ms. Henderson, the generic old lady that spies on her neighbours, and before we know it there is a containment problem as zombies spread and death multiply. The head of ZomCom security, Mr. Bottoms, a decorated veteran of the Zombie Wars, succeeds in stopping the contamination just in time but many people are dead and he needs to make an example out of Fido and little Timmy.
The charm of this movie is not just its vibrant palette of colours, its shiny settings or the classic 50s images, like the wife greeting her husband at the door with a three-olive martini while the ham is in the oven. The images of this blissful suburban life are now romantic flashbacks, back to a time where family values were at the core of the American Dream and husbands, mothers and children had specific roles to play, a far cry from some family images we see in the movies today (absentee fathers, drunk mothers, rebellious sons and daughters). There is almost a longing to see a James Dean look-a-like appear at a some point to shake that blinding white smile off everyone’s face and make them act human, because they are as ‘zombified’ as their pets. This is what this film is all about though. It is the zombie that teaches Timmy to stand up to his bullies, it is the zombie that ignites the spark of feminism in Helen, it is the zombie that makes Bill want to be a better father to his son and it is the zombie that transforms this generic, dull community into a lively and human mix of people that have to face their inner demons. Irony at its best and the definitive charm of this film.

Zombies spread the life
When Mr. Bottoms, the illustrious war hero, declares that there is a containment problem within his perfect community, it is as if the film screams at you ‘Sound familiar?’. A decorated Zombie War veteran, risen to politics, protecting a town from a dangerous pandemic that kills people and turns them into heartless, emotionless eating machines? A pandemic whose source, Fido, seems to make women stand up to their husbands (‘Get it yourself dear’ ) and children rebel against their parents wishes. This film brings back memories of old Cold-War science fiction films like ‘Invasion of the Body Snatchers’, ‘The Thing from Another World’ and ‘It Came From Outer Space’ where such contamination scenarios do occur but their consequences are different. Instead of breathing life into a community, the threat tries to destroy all humanity it finds and replace it with pale copies of people, devoid of all emotion and free will. But this was 60 years ago, since then the Cold War has ended and the threat does not come from space but from the all-American home, from the people in power. They talk of perfection, control and safety, attainable only through the use of a gun and isolation.
Fido does not talk, does not actually control anything but through an accidental ‘dinner’, he sets off a sequence of events that show the rotten state of the American family core. However it is not beyond salvation. The solution? Human contact, conversation, sentiment and understanding, something that the status quo forbids in order to contain the zombie virus. In this world, if your mother turns into a zombie, well then she is easy to kill if you don’t love her. If your neighbour tries to eat you, you forget that he gave you 10 extra dollars for mowing his lawn and you chop off his head. Easy, simple and emotionally detached. Mr. Bottoms is a fervent believer in this ethos and is the representation of how America should live in this post-Zombie War world, looking more and more like communist-hunter Joe McCarthy who imprisoned and persecuted any citizen deemed to challenge American values and show left-wing sympathies in the 1950s. Timmy and Fido are challenging the status quo and draw in more people in their movement, until finally the whole town is contaminated. But this illness does not bring the community to an end, in fact it makes the viewer connect with the characters, love them, admire them and cheer for them, because they found their true voice and a lifestyle that makes them truly happy instead of acting like actors in a 50s toothpaste commercial. Helping Fido and Timmy in their quest is Mr. Theopolis (played by the brilliant Tim Blake Nelson), the only human adult in the film that sees through this technicolor sham and does not quite fit in. The cares for his zombie, Tammy, despite her nature and keeps her beside him as a partner, not just a servant. Their relationship is frowned upon by the rest of the town, showing that every community has their black sheep. However Theopolis and Tammy are the perfect example of what the community should in fact aspire to be.

Lenin, Guevara, Trotski and Fido
Communism in American cinema, as with its current politics, will never belong on the good side of popular culture. The so-called ‘Third World War’ between America and Soviet Russia lasted from the end of the Second World War, till the collapse of the Soviet block in 1989 under Republican hero Ronald ‘Second coming of Christ’ Reagan. But unofficially, Hollywood never liked ‘lefties’ and probably never will. They will always be portrayed as either eccentric, remnants of the losing side, or just mad but Fido seems to be neither. The similarities between this film and the ones mentioned above is undeniable but the formula is reversed. As the bodysnatchers suck the life out of Americans, Fido retrieves it for them even though he is undead. Is Hollywood changing its mind about Communism? Wishful thinking there I’m afraid since this battle will go on in cinema and American politics for as long as uneducated right-wingers scream on Fox News that healthcare is socialism. No, this is not about communism in the end. It’s about family, it’s about loving your neighbour and it’s about breaking the wall of silence that our society today lives in.
The people in the town are seemingly fenced off from the rest of world, they hardly talk to each other unless it is to improve their social standing, the kids learn how to shoot to kill without a second thought (a nice critique on gun-laws there) and the best accomplishment one could hope for when they die, is to have their heads cut off and to be buried in the cold ground and stay there. All fitting metaphors of the crippling isolation modern society is going through. Emotional detachment, lack of empathy and individualism are all stigmas in today’s world, mostly due to technology, fear, lack of trust and digital networking. All these hinder human contact and increase the chance of living a solitary life while being constantly surrounded by people. In this film, Fido is our saviour. He will accompany you outside to play in the park, he will help you wash you dad’s car in the driveway while you mum makes lemonade, he will help you get the girl, he will save you from bullies, he will want you to be a decent human being to your family and friends. Fido has all the traits of a Hollywood 1950s communist but in fact he is not a revolutionary, he is not a messiah.
He is what we used to be, imperfect in a lot of ways but alive, smoking, drinking, running and biting.

Is This (The Beginning Of) The End Of Prohibition?

Speaking as someone who knows next to nothing about the American lawmaking process – and can therefore be naively optimistic – I’ve had my mental fingers crossed ever since I heard that Colorado and Washington have both voted to legalise cannabis for recreational use. (NB Mental fingers: those things you cross when you really, really want something to happen but you don’t want to have to stop typing.)

Potheads in the two states have been celebrating well in advance of any consent from the Department of Justice, with plans already in place to direct tax money from legal sale of the drug into the construction of schools (oh, to be young enough to enrol in the first real High School) and a range of health programmes including drug and alcohol treatment.

Oregon just lost out on legalising weed – although, with arguably the most liberal initiative of the three states (they wanted unlimited personal amounts and growing privileges), but by far the smallest campaign budget, this outcome is perhaps understandable. Maybe next time, Oregon. I’ve got my mental fingers crossed for you, ‘n all.

Another good piece of pot-related news came in the form of the Mayor of Amsterdam’s announcement (to admittedly negligible surprise) that foreign tourists will not be banned from using the city’s coffee shops. Wasn’t that a lot of worry for nothing – cannabis café owners fretting over the loss of tourism, the Mayor facing the prospect of the city descending into a miasma of dodgy street dealers and shoddy merchandise, not to mention us lot sitting worriedly on the couch in front of the laptop, trying to work out how to fit in another jaunt to Holland before the law came into effect. Worry over, anyway.

All this liberalism has been making me feel just a little bit as though I’m living in some kind of backwater, conservative commune, rather than one of the world’s most awesome global cities. While we’ve been resting back in our creaking leather armchairs, passing the brandy and gently chuckling at the antics of our younger cousin, America’s been getting on with surpassing us in some pretty damn important arenas. Britain upgrades cannabis to Class B, America legalises it first for medicinal and then recreational use. America gets Obamacare, while in Britain we’re in danger of losing our internationally-lauded NHS to the fickle whims of privatisation. Our PM reveals himself to be an immoral wheeler-dealer of war machines to the Middle East, while in America a genius businessman fights to use his enormous wealth to develop clean energy for all. Oh wait, that was Iron Man. But you get the point.

But anyway, back to America. What does this legalisation of pot mean for them? Well, I can’t imagine that the Department of Justice is going to roll over on this one, if its initial, tight-lipped “no comment” reaction is anything to go by. Presumably it will cite precedent, and complain of the difficulties in managing a country in which some states allow the use of a drug while other states battle smuggling issues and criminal activity. Or perhaps it will just bring its big federal boot down and yell “I said NO!” Which would be a shame because, as some have already pointed out, this could be a great opportunity to start to address the longstanding conflict between state and federal laws. It seems bizarre that you can do something that’s both legal and illegal at the same time. Personally, I see this as a case of political and legislative stagnation rather than mere precedent, but surely even two states deciding to legalise cannabis evidences a sea change worthy of review on a federal level? At any rate, the Department of Justice needs to make a decision soon – it would be a phenomenal waste of resources if Washington and Colorado got too far into their implementation and were then told it’d all been for nothing.

A much more immediate issue is, of course, the impact of legalisation on drug cartels. Make something legal, regulate it, keep the quality to a certain standard, make it easily obtainable… why would anyone choose instead to buy off some shifty dealer who may well be bulking out the product with sugar or sand in order to turn a profit – someone who, in turn, has to handle the paranoid people one level up, who sometimes deal in much nastier things than weed and occasionally wave a gun in their face? It’s a no-brainer. Obviously the lords aren’t going to be too happy about it, but any savvy street dealer or home grower with half a brain should be looking to capitalise on the change in law and set up shop legitimately. More money, less risk. Another no-brainer.

Ok, so I’m over-simplifying. There are many knots to be massaged out of this legislation, including how to test for “drug-drivers” without accidentally penalising medical marijuana users (though, to be fair, if you have enough in your system to be considered too impaired to drive, you probably shouldn’t be driving). But this has got medical marijuana users understandably worried – will the tests be good enough, will they be fair? It’s something that needs to be worked out and set in place beforehand in order to avoid wrongful arrests, but it shouldn’t be a permanent barrier to legalisation. Calm down, guys. Put your feet up and have a smoke, why not?

Surprising enough as is opposition to legalisation from those who can already buy and smoke legally, it’s as nothing when compared to the support from anti-drugs campaigners. Funny what the promise of funding for rehab programmes can do to a person’s views – but I guess it’s no weirder than a government taxing alcohol and tobacco and then pushing tax money into a healthcare system that provides treatment for diseases caused by the consumption of alcohol and tobacco. Funny old world, eh? I’m not even going to mention the utter hypocrisy of a system that’s been benefiting from the abuse of certain substances while punishing the use of others. Or add my voice to the millions of those yelling that “the war on drugs isn’t working”. The evidence speaks for itself.

Whatever the outcome in the US, full credit to this significant minority of America that has had an attack of rationality and accepted that the legalisation – and, therefore, regulation – of marijuana is the only way forward in the so-called “war on drugs”. You can’t stop people experimenting with drugs – human beings have been getting high for millennia – but you can do your utmost to ensure that personal risk is minimised, in this case by taking power away from criminals and regulating your product for quality. Oh, and did we forget it can be taxed, just like alcohol and tobacco? Legalised weed is an untapped, potentially hugely lucrative source of revenue for an ailing economy. I wholeheartedly wish that British politicians would stop pandering to the sensationalist media and recognise when to act for the benefit of the people. We’ve got Tories running the show now, for god’s sake – surely they of all people should be able to spot when they’re missing out on a fantastic business opportunity?

Book Review: Lessons Learned, by Sydney Logan

//
// <![CDATA[

// ]]>

A town reliant on the two pillars of school and church, Sycamore Falls is a profoundly conservative community in the American South, named after the falls that provide a local beauty spot. An English teacher named Sarah has returned to her hometown from Memphis, where a violent incident about which she feels guilty has traumatised her. Going back to live in the house that her grandmother has bequeathed to her, romance blooms when she meets fellow teacher, Lucas, newly arrived from New York City. Their relationship is conducted against the background of events surrounding a troubled student jock called Matt.

Sarah sees Sycamore Falls and the house where she used to live with her grandmother as a place of safety. Her need to return to her roots has taken her by surprise. It’s a response to her witnessing a shooting incident at her former school involving a vulnerable student followed by the end of her relationship with an unsupportive partner. She craves the familiarity of home where she had a special bond with her grandmother, who cared for her after the death of her parents when she was 16 years old.

Spoiler Alert (but not really)
A small town gal returning home from the big, bad city is familiar territory as is a tormented student struggling with his sexuality. I don’t think I’m giving anything away as Matt being gay is kinda flagged up before the reveal, so it doesn’t come as any surprise. He’s the football team’s quarterback and the story begins with him dating the head cheerleader. The author displays a neat sense of the book’s self-awareness. Matt even describes himself as “a walking stereotype”. It’s easy to imagine this as a TV movie, complete with spectacular mountain scenery.

The Sin Bin

When Matt’s sexuality is revealed, the town is divided with many people at school, on the football team and in church ostracising him. His few allies include our romantic pair, Sarah and Lucas. Oh, they disapprove of his ‘lifestyle’, but they don’t think that should affect anyone’s relationship with him or treatment of him. I was waiting for at least one character to come along and say that, actually, there is nothing wrong with being gay, but no one ever does. No one is put forward to offer a counter argument.
All credit to the author for incorporating a controversial social issue in the romance genre, but it won’t go far enough for the more liberal readership. The message is to disapprove of the ‘sin’ and not the ‘sinner’. Even the Falls is a metaphor for sins being washed away.

The only argument to support the disapproval is that the Bible says so, so there isn’t any springboard for a debate. There is a lot of talk about tolerance and unconditional love, ironically also inspired by the Bible. Small town life and life in the ‘big city’ is compared in terms of its capacity for tolerance. The author asks the question, are the ugly attitudes of a small town ever a price worth paying for living there?

In Lucas, Sarah finds her soul mate, as he too is coming to terms with an upsetting incident. He’s left New York under a cloud, despite being cleared of all charges, having faced a malicious and false accusation by a student. When Matt’s problems overwhelm him, Sarah and Lucas are determined to defend him. This new situation mirrors the one in which Sarah’s former student in Memphis found himself and her guilt about failing to save him is a compelling motive to save Matt. Helping this young man represents closure for Sarah and the chance to move on from her past.

This might sound unkind, but Sarah is high maintenance. Lucas has the patience of a saint in dealing with her insecurities and mood swings. She is reluctant to let herself go and trust her feelings. This leads to some tension, which sometimes seems to be heading for conflict but it never comes. I was longing for a blazing row, but instead, Lucas dries her tears and sweetly reassures her every time.

The couple’s bond is cemented in the face of Matt’s life spiralling out of control. He’s a sensitive and thoughtful young man, without being insipid. At the other end of the spectrum, his father and his head teacher are reactionary bullies and respond as if he’s grown two heads overnight.

Future Promise

Sydney Logan has a very good ear for dialogue, both dramatic and light-hearted. She doesn’t go in for elongated descriptive passages, so the pace zips along and you certainly want to turn the page to see what happens. The structure of the story is impressive given this is her debut novel.

When Logan looks at the raw emotions of Matt and the people affected by the fall out, it is very powerful and I would have preferred more of that and less of the domestic bliss of our loved up teachers. There was a bit too much “brushing lips” for my taste, but this is a romance novel, after all. I did find Lucas to be impossibly perfect, to the point of being tedious.

I think Sydney Logan has an assured future as a writer. One of the most moving passages is when Matt’s mother makes a speech defending her son to the church congregation. My wish would be for her to explore issues in a more balanced way in her next book and to do more of what she’s good at – describing real emotions.

 

If you have a Kindle and want to read Lessons Learned, you can grab a copy here.

It’s time to end the drug war

 

According to a fairly recent Gallup poll, 50% of Americans are now in favor of legalising marijuana, a number that is up from the 12% that supported legalisation back in 1969. A growing number of Americans are also in favour of decriminalising the simple possession of all illegal drugs. Growing support for the legalisation of marijuana is so wide in fact, that support now includes endorsements from some very unlikely public figures. It’s hard to believe, but television evangelist Pat Robertson has come out not only in favor of decriminalisation, but for all out legalisation. “Regulate it like alcohol”, he says emphatically. Indeed, we are living in changing times, for it is clear that we are witnessing a monumental sea change in public opinion that has expanded exponentially beyond that of young liberals and libertarians. The common denominator has become such: End the drug war!

Marijuana possession is a victimless crime wherein the only real solution, both economically and morally speaking, is to tax and regulate it as we would any other commodity.  We need substance abuse treatment rather than incarceration. Many people of sensible means now recognise the war on drugs for what it has become: a drain on society both socially and fiscally.  In this time of budget cuts and furloughs, it is time for us to take another look at how we deal with drug use and abuse amongst otherwise law abiding citizens. The costs have simply become too onerous a burden for cash strapped states to endure. Many people want to know why we continue to dump so much time and money into a war that has clearly failed to achieve its objective.

Whilst we have witnessed a sea change in public opinion in the United States, many of our elected government officials do not appear to mirror the needs and interests of their own constituents. President Barack Obama and Vice President Joseph Biden recently came out against the decriminalisation of drug possession while attending the sixth annual Summit of the Americas that was held in Cartagena, Columbia in April.  When questioned on the current status of the drug war, President Obama replied: “I, personally, and my administration’s position is that legalisation is not the answer.” Several South American leaders, however, have highlighted the need for a return to a more pragmatic approach in dealing with drug use and abuse by declaring the need for drug decriminalisation.  This is the type of enlightened thinking that harbours the potential to usher in an era which has long been overdue. It is time to alleviate some of the pressure that has been foisted upon our neighbors and friends that live and die in many of the war torn nation states that lie directly south of the American border. They have quite clearly had enough of what’s not working, and we should support them in this new endeavour to curb the violence that has claimed so many lives.

Though this sea change may appear to be a new and novel idea, there used to exist a time in pre-prohibition America where one could openly patronise opium and tea dens, free of legal and moral retribution. Amazingly, the sky did not fall and though there were addicts, no plague of mass indoctrination to the counter drug culture was exhibited.  This little known history disavows the prohibitionists’ argument at its core, for legalisation does not equate with higher consumption. It didn’t then and it doesn’t now. We only need to look to the likes of Portugal, where all drugs were decriminalised 11 years ago. As a result of this bold move, drug abuse in now down by half. That’s a fact and no one can dispute it.

We have witnessed a direct correlation with the proliferation of the industrial prison complex industry in conjunction with the dawn of the modern drug war. Law enforcement can no longer focus solely on what’s important: public safety.  What the people have been subjected to is a stark increase in violent crime, human rights abuses, and blight in many of America’s impoverished neighbourhoods and beyond. One in 10 African American men in their 30s is incarcerated on any given day.  Blacks and Latinos account for three-fourths of those imprisoned for drug related offenses.  Arrests for drug offenses have increased exponentially since 1980, but I and everyone else knew that already. All that we need to do is to take a look around and there lies the truth in bold neon lights.

I had the pleasure of engaging in a thought provoking conversation with an acquaintance of mine recently. We talked mostly about violent crime, the proliferation of gun homicides, and the seemingly never ending dilemma of violence in our cities. In describing the neighbourhood that he grew up in, he mentioned how there only used to be about one shooting a month, as opposed to what we are now witnessing on the nightly news. The murder rate has statistically become closer to almost one a day in some cities like New Orleans. “It just never used to be this bad; there used to be more black owned businesses, and now we just have all of this shooting going on all around us all of the time; this is because of the drug war”, he stated emphatically. My acquaintance is not a criminologist (nor am I), nor is he a statistician; he doesn’t need to be. He has lived and grown up in the lower ninth ward of New Orleans for all of the 50+ years that he has inhibited this green earth. He has witnessed firsthand the war on drugs, therefore I believe him when he tells me that he knows what he’s talking about.

So while the failed experiment of alcohol prohibition has hopefully been left to the dustbins of historical reference, the idea of prohibition itself has not officially been dealt its final death blow, for it continues to proliferate despite the massive change in public opinion. It is easy to naively assume, however, that we are moving ever more close to achieving the objective of a post-prohibitionist world, for public has made it clear what the trajectory of the 21st century should entail. Though we have witnessed many signs of hope that appear on the surface to indicate that we are in fact moving ever closer to the decriminalisation of drug possession, it is clear that the opposing forces are as strong and as determined as ever.  As of 2012, 16 states, along with the District of Columbia, have legalised medical marijuana and 14 states across the county have decriminalised the simple possession of small amounts of cannabis.

At the federal level, a very different approach has been taking place under the Obama administration. Thus far, there have been more than 100 federal raids on medical marijuana dispensaries across the country, an impressive track record that makes the efforts of Obama’s predecessor pale in comparison.  So while the public perception of the war on drugs continues to evolve, it appears that there are two very distinctive and opposing forces currently at work. In the meantime, gross injustices continue to be foisted upon many of our nation’s poor and un-connected in what appears to be a feckless war with no end.

America has the highest incarceration in the world, beating out such countries as Iran, China, and Germany.  Among the 50 states, Louisiana is ranked at number one, with the highest incarceration rate in the United States, and thus the world. This shocking statistic seems to coincide with the observations of my acquaintance from the lower ninth ward, for he lives in one of the most dangerous places in the world where it is an exception, rather than the rule, not to have a brush with the law. The blight in some neighbourhoods that has resulted is simply unfathomable in a country that claims to be as advanced as ours. Something clearly has gone wrong, for instead of progressing into the 21st century with dignity, it is clear that in many ways we continue to revert backwards. The drug war is largely responsible for this disparity; it’s time that we end it once and for all.

 

The Philips Light bulb: A 20-Year Idea

When somebody has an idea a light bulb bursts into life above their heads so everybody knows about it. Ok, not really, but what if we could create a light bulb that lasts for 20 years? Think about it, if you had a 20-year light bulb for every room in the house then by the time you have to replace it your kids will have left home. And that’s one less task to be dealing with.

But the future is already here because a 20-year light bulb has gone into production in America. The Dutch electronics giant Philips is the creator of this and has set its new invention for release on Earth Day. It was originally created as an entry for the Bright Tomorrow competition, which aimed to find an alternative to the 60-watt lights that will be phased out in America by 2014, and are already completely out of production in Europe.

The bulb is a change from your normal source of light, though, because it doesn’t use any filaments. Instead, it uses light-emitting diodes (LED) to light up a room. And it’s these LEDs that have created the long-lasting qualities and hefty price tag associated with this bulb.

LED light bulb

In America you can expect to fork out the equivalent of £37 for one of these bulbs. Even though it seems to be quite hefty, it’s probably a good idea in the long-run because you have to remember that it’s £37 for 20 years. Now that’s good value.

And yes, I can already hear many people commenting on the fact that new bulbs in general tend to have very cold and sterile glows. But this 20-year light bulb was created to keep the warm glow and be more energy efficient.

The only issue is that we’re not sure how well this is going to go down with an average person as the only reason Philips won was because it was the only entrant in the competition. So really it won by default.

On a side note, I’m not sure whether the fact that it was the only entry means that Philips is the only firm capable of creating this sort of device or whether it’s just because most people couldn’t care less. I sincerely hope that it’s the former.

Nevertheless, if it works then expect to see these LED bulbs in houses all around the world quite soon. Let’s just hope that it doesn’t demonstrate the very worst of a cold and heartless modern world.

The Wire: Season One Review

To say The Wire beats every other ‘cop show’ in the public domain would be an understatement. It eclipses them in every aspect.

Firstly, we shall state, it is not a ‘cop show’ at all. It is more comparable to a series of books that illustrate exquisitely and in such detail ‘the condition of man in the 21st century’, through the issues faced by largely poverty-stricken, inner-city Americans.

Each episode opens with an epigraph denoting the crux of that ‘chapter’s’ particular issue.

The producers, HBO, have a penchant for fantastic programming and although the medium of television is saturated with meaningless, shallow offal, HBO often deliver quality. Their flagship shows like The Sopranos and Six Feet Under display this and The Wire in some aspects outclasses even them.

The term Greek Tragedy is applicable to the show. It deviates from what America and the UK regularly seek for amusement. This is due to the belief of the writers (in particular David Simon) that life is a tragedy and viewing it as such holds power; the power to grant perspective and inspire honesty.

Largely down to the commitment of the writing, directing and casting teams, this show erupts beyond the confinements of contemporary entertainment.

To exemplify this we need look no further than the show’s head writer David Simon. A former reporter for the Baltimore Sun, he knows the city in which the series is set. The importance of honesty and realism are clear from the dialectal nuances in the script writing, imperfect characters, inclusion of real ‘ex-players’ from Baltimore in the cast, flawless cinematography and phenomenal soundtrack.

A quote from Simon himself illuminates us as to the core themes of the show:

‘The point of view is middle-management, and labour is diminished and the institution is paramount.’

Now we have context, we can move onto the specifics of season one. The preliminary response to the first episode may well be, ‘too many characters’ or ‘Christ that was dry’. If you have never watched it before and have those feelings after the first episode, DO NOT LISTEN TO THEM.

A large part of the show’s appeal is the plethora of characters presented to you. Being spoon-fed stereotypes happens far too often so when a show credits the viewer with being intelligent enough to invest and infer things about characters it is not only refreshing but rewarding.

In short, season one introduces us to the Baltimore Police department and a successful drug dealing racket. The focus within the police department in this series is directed towards a detail, headed by Lieutenant Cedric Daniels, with the primary investigators being Detective Jimmy McNulty and Detective Kima Greggs. The unit was set up after said drug racket beat a murder trial for one of its mid-level workers. This character’s name is D’Angelo Barksdale, he is nephew to the boss, Avon Barksdale who works alongside lifelong friend Russell ‘Stringer’ Bell.

We follow closely the two characters of D’angelo Barksdale and Lt. Daniels as the show cleverly draws parallels between them. The similarity is striking and thought provoking in that it rubbishes typical good guy, bad guy standpoints via the twinned pressures Barksdale and Daniels face.

Throughout the season Daniels is subject to the morally conflicting demands of his investigators, especially McNulty who represents the disillusioned, unstable labourer, and his politically driven superiors, Major Rawles and Deputy Ops Burrel.

Similarly, Barksdale is faced with opposing stresses. He must school and do right by his younger dealers such as Wallace, Bodie and Poot to ensure smooth business. However the hierarchy sends down confusing orders which compromise the already wavering morality of D’Angelo.

As a result, D’Angelo’s story is the most intriguing. Departing pearls of wisdom to his underlings such as an explanation of labour in America using a McNugget analogy and outlining how trapped all players in ‘the game’ are utilising a chessboard; he captivates you as a viewer.

Chess:

Mr. McNugget:

We are given multiple other fascinating characters to follow including an addict and police informant named Bubbles. His daily strife on the streets adds to the already incredible sense of place and supplies a terrifically tangible perspective of the game.

Bubbles fishing:

Other ancillary characters such as Freamon, Herc, Carver, Pryzbylewski, Bunk for the police further the feel of the politically motivated department in their own exciting ways. One character who could not go without a mention though is homosexual stick-up boy Omar Little.

Omar’s profession of robbing drug dealers means he is not only dangerous but incredibly likeable. His morality and ‘code’ of living are dubious but respectable, as is his intellectual prowess in planning robberies and setting up those he dislikes. He is affected markedly by the actions of others, in particular Barksdale’s organisation; his story is another of great profoundness.

Omar comin’!:

 

All of the characters not elaborated upon are spectacular in their own right and only by watching will the message truly embed itself in your mind.

‘The Wire’ season one is compelling and leaves one with an insatiable appetite for more. It is simply a beautiful work of art and one with a vital message.

No wonder it is studied at Harvard.

http://www.law.harvard.edu/news/spotlight/civil-rights/ogletree-race-and-justice-the-wire.html