Snitching

Bubbles is a well loved character as well as Omar, the man whose self defined vocation is to " Rip and Run". And D, who may always have my heart. We love them. Why? I propose it is for two reasons:

1. Through their 'flip' we get to see a more human side of them. Their character is developed beyond 'the game'
2. They make things happen. Without these characters the McNulty and the rest would be stone walled for leads and advances in the cases. 

Those that play these same roles in the real world face the same harmful ends as Frank Sobatka and D'Angelo. In Alexander Natapoff's book Snitching: criminal informants and the erosion of American justice he addresses the dangers of the regular practice of informants. 


Throughout the series we have seen McNulty object to the FBI's proposition to let off Barskdale and Stringer if they share their knowledge of the congressional money line. Then we see the dock police woman object to the state's attorney using one known criminal to gain more information and offering him a deal. As the show presents the circumstances it is hard to see what other options the police have when working to get to the bottom of something. However it appears that each arrest comes with the assumption that the police can budge on their charges if given what they need. This is demonstrated by Bird's request and then White Mike's demand for a meal, strawberry soda to be precise. This kind of informant and snitching leads to the release of known and possibly violent criminals back into our neighborhoods and communities. Natapoff cites various incidents when these individuals commit new crimes once their released due to this kind of bargain. 


However we seen another kind of informant snitching in the Wire. That is Bubbles' more common pattern; street surveillance. Police set someone out to get in close on an issue by offering them reduced charges but often in exchange for dangerous, risky or compromising work to gain information. Natapoff discussed the case of a woman under drug distribution charges was offered to have her charged dropped if she participated in oral sex with another suspect in order to charge him with prostitution (Natapoff, 4).


The show demonstrates the need for a break through, a criminal insider to 'flip' in order to bust the case open, but how far is too far in the criminal justice system. We can see that Sobatka was killed to due to an unidentified leak, D'Angelo because he couldn't resist his 'family duty' but never put his heart back in the game. However their tends to be a sloppy effort with such an essential component to the progress of a case. 

Natapoff, A. (2009) Snitching: criminal informants and the erosion of American justice. NYU Press, Forthcoming; Loyola-LA Legal Studies Paper No. 2009-39.

Social Organization; clammering for breathe

The ideas of Wilson are lived out by the ship yard boss' son, Ziggy. Ziggy is taking on a lifestyle and occupation that many before him have seen as their only way out  due to the lack of work. But as the opening scene of episode 5 we can see that this young buck is new the the streets. What is unexpected is that Stringer Bell has risen so high on the illegitimate work ladder that he is beginning to appear legit. The dock's son on the other hand is stepping into the dark and scary world of crime. Theses characters' current vocations do not align with their social appearance.

occupation. it's the question of these most recent episodes. Frank Sobatka is fighting to maintain a legitimate establishment. the lack of work, as Wilson, identified is fuel for crime even in the most upstanding people such as Sobatka would appear. While Omar sits on the stand  faced with the question, "what is your occupation?" his reply "I rip and run." This is later turned on him the Barksdale's lawyer. The single most gratifying moment in the series thus far. On his own turf this lawyer is called out, paralleled to a murdering thief in front of the jury. The most powerful collision of worlds, where the 'upstanding' is shown up by the rough and rowdy.

When Kima describes the deaths of the 13 girls on the dock "they had a third of that space, a bathroom to piss in and not enough air" it's as if she is describing the world that each of these characters is living in to some degree. the loss for air is a theme in these episodes as these woman seek what has been told to them will be a better world or how D is seeking an out and instead is strangled to death.

Oh the consequences of self preservation.

After watching three episodes of this second season I am so less convinced of reform, progress or change. The issues that permeate all of human society are so deeply in bedded in exactly what Landsman said; 'self preservation'. The human society is trapped in fear and therefore do all within their means to protect themselves and what they have going for them. In reference to Landsman's insightful contribution it's institutional anomie that drives these individuals to generate destructive relationships with those around them. The normal and accepted approach to life is to protect oneself at all cost. now the one sliver of selflessness is the Union head at the docks, his gesture of kindness to his employee. The error is that money came at the cost of 14 lives and billion dollar human trafficking industry. He appears to have no concept of what is behind 'The Greeks' errands which is discouraging in the grad scheme of progress as such huge crimes against humanity are carried out right on a seemingly good intending man's  docks. But all in the name of self preservation. For the same reason he is ready to fight Valchek over the stained glass window. The strain of not getting the work he believes his staff deserves pushes him to take action he feels entitled to in order to get back. The fiasco has already caused him more harm that vindication which is typical of revenge if you ask me. The show in all honesty is at a frustrating point. I struggle to understand the logic behind some peoples decisions which allows for too much judgment and not enough theoretical understanding.

"He's just a boy"

         I'll be the first to admit that i am not cut out to stomach the content of The Wire. At another time I would have argued that it was dramatization or Hollywood. However life experiences have shown me that man is in fact capable of the heartlessness demonstrated in the but only in response to the brokenness afforded them in life's trauma. In studies done on the re-socialization of juveniles it was found that a perpetrators aggressive response to an offensive statement against their mother was not in real defense of her but in an attempt to preserve their memory of her. for example if an individual is abused or neglected by their mother or if they were subject to witness a shameful lifestyle such as prostitution in the home the reaction is based in their need to preserve her image in their mind. As humans we have a fundamental need to be known and loved. If these needs are neglected to be met by primary care takers, the neglected party is subject to negative impact. With this i consider the Strain Theory. Agnew's article touches on the impact of family abuses. However in the characters of The Wire the writers only let you in on the abusive and neglectful situation Wallace is in and even in that character he grows soft as the pace of 'the game' picks up.
            The exchange between D'Angelo's mom and himself is also startling. What is this high society drug family that the show protrays? In ehr conversation with Avon D'Angelo's mother speaks as if she is in a parent teacher conference. "You do not need to worry about my boy, i raised him right," The absurdity in her statement legitimately frightens me. If we cannot track criminal behavior and the masterminds behind them back to a broken worldview based in abuse or neglect than I will lose all hope in the rehabilitation of criminals. What could posses this woman to raise her son to be a killer, to take lives? Avon brings the viewer in on her stake in it all. "You like that car you drive right? you like this place i bought you? We've all got a lot to protect you hear?" But could the love of money really bring someone to that level?
          It is no mistake that nearly every scene captures the joy and innocence of children. I sincerely appreciate the statement these pan outs make. It is a continual reminder that while this may be the world surrounding these kids, something about the way they see life is just that much more true and right. I rarely feel that when a character looks to kids playing or laughing or running they are scoffing at their joy but in fact longing for a different world. Right before Wallace is taken in his main man glances into the courtyard of the low rises and sees to young boys playing and you can see then that he is remembering life with Wallace before they were in 'the game'. But the look on his face assures you that he has already made his decision. Or the decisions, as he sees is, was made for him. Ultimately what these shots do is remind us not to settle for the corruption we are witnessing on the streets and in the office.