Mark Bowdon's article on David Simon and The Wire in The Atlantic has started an interesting conversation over whether or not the cynicism engendered by the show is productive of change (the activism thesis) or destructive of hope (the nihilism thesis). Mark Bowden takes the latter view, arguing:
The Wire is ultimately premised on our inability to engage in self-help, and in particularly the inability of the black poor. It is about their lack of agency, and their status as eternal victims. Though compellingly drawn, so compellingly drawn as to move yours truly to tears, this is nothing new. Moreover, this view of human beings trapped in a cage of dysfunction transcends ideology: it strengthens the hand of paternalists of the left and determinists of the right. In that regard, the show is frankly destructive. I’m struck by how many of my friends believe they have more refined moral sensibilities because they watch and swear by The Wire, as though it gives them a richer appreciation of the real struggles of inner-city life, despite the fact that they are exactly as insulated as they were before.Matt Yglesias, for his part, while mostly agreeing with the nihilism thesis, denies that that show is meaningfully political in these terms at all:
Simon believes that we are doomed, and political progress requires us to believe that we are not. But aesthetically it's an extremely powerful conceit. And at the end of the day, it's a television show not a treatise on urban policy. If some viewers are taking it too literally as a statement of truth, that's on them much more than it is on Simon.Best of all is an appearance in the comment thread by someone claiming to be David Simon himself, arguing (as I would) that the show is productive of change insofar as it is a devastating critique of the contemporary state of America itself and the place that the unchecked capitalist drive has taken us. There are alternatives to unchecked capitalism, after all, even if we've convinced ourselves there aren't. But I'll let the person claiming to be the man himself speak for himself:
Writing to affirm what people are saying about my faith in individuals to rebel against rigged systems and exert for dignity, while at the same time doubtful that the institutions of a capital-obsessed oligarchy will reform themselves short of outright economic depression (New Deal, the rise of collective bargaining) or systemic moral failure that actually threatens middle-class lives (Vietnam and the resulting, though brief commitment to rethinking our brutal foreign-policy footprints around the world). The Wire is dissent; it argues that our systems are no longer viable for the greater good of the most, that America is no longer operating as a utilitarian and democratic experiment. If you are not comfortable with that notion, you won't agree with some of the tonalities of the show. I would argue that people comfortable with the economic and political trends in the United States right now -- and thinking that the nation and its institutions are equipped to respond meaningfully to the problems depicted with some care and accuracy on The Wire (we reported each season fresh, we did not write solely from memory) -- well, perhaps they're playing with the tuning knobs when the back of the appliance is in flames.Exactly so. I'm quite glad Season 5 is here.
(UPDATE: I've just posted this on MetaFilter, where there will undoubtedly be some more excellent commentary soon, and perhaps, if we're lucky, some vitriol.)
Posts
|