Submitted by butterweedstrover t3_101kc3m in television

Important Edit:

The Wire is written with a core message in mind, that institutions are broken. With that in mind it builds its story to reinforce this assumption rather than leaving the narrative open to interpretation.

All the characters who die or suffer therefore die and suffer in service of an external meaning. Their fates might have an emotional impact but they lack emotional depth since the reasoning has no ambiguity and does not require exploration from the perception of each individual viewer.

End Important Edit.

There is this perception I’ve gathered over the years that The Wire is seemingly the most well respected show amongst its peers.

Whenever The Wire is brought up in discussion forums like this one it is praised over and over again with little push back. While other major television shows like Sopranos, Game of Thrones, Mad Men, Dexter, Breaking Bad, etc. will have their names thrown around, no one would get away with calling any one of them the indisputable best.

So naturally I tried searching up criticism of the Wire to see some dissenting opinions and all of them have inadvertently reinforced the notion of this show being the best.

All I could find is people complaining that the show is “boring” or that it’s not “entertaining” enough or some other such thing in the same ball park.

That’s not serious criticism because boredom isn’t a facet of the show itself but someone’s personal reaction, and given the show’s popularity I don’t think it holds much merit. Furthermore these complaints compound the idea that the Wire is a “sophisticated” show. It is deep and literary and requires effort much like a classic novel.

I’m not going to dispute anything. I’ve read a lot of great reasons as to why the Wire is brilliant, and much of it is convincing.

But I still want to try to open the door to serious counter-arguments as to why the show isn’t that deep or insightful or brilliant. Not just some minor quibbles about a subplot in season 5, real issues with the show as a whole.

Feel free to add your own perspective in the comments, I’d love to hear from people who also have problems with it beyond just stylistic preference.

Here is my shot: The Wire treats itself as an evaluation of circumstance rather than an emotional experience open to interpretation.

Narrative in any formats (novel, play, musical, television, cinema, etc.) is not scientific in nature. It is not created with a specific message in mind, it is about reproducing the sensations of reality and not reality itself.

Unlike the scientific method which tries to form a concrete hypothesis, narrative strives at communicating indefinite ideas that cannot be rationally deconstructed or explained.

Due to its obsession with realism the Wire is focused more on reproducing an accurate image rather than reproducing the emotional affect. While the show has a nuanced perspective it boxes itself into a singular meaning that deprives the story of depth. It is complex and intricate for sure, but structurally as a narrative it does not offer the same level of ambiguity required for a dynamic and multilayered story.

PS. I know that sounded harsh but I’m trying to take an extreme position to see if others agree or not.

Edit: Well, thanks for all the replies and everything. Glad to know people feel strongly about stuff, life is too short not to care. Anyways, from reading your posts the main thing I'd like to clarify is the "emotional effect" comment. I didn't mean to say viewers wouldn't have a response to what happens on screen but due to the structure of the show these moments have more implication about the external situation and aren't explored at the same level internally. Like, for example, say are script writer put in a scene of a man beating up a puppy. That can be emotionally devastating (as is reality), but there isn't much more to dig into under the surface.

Edit2: About stories with specific meanings/messages: I just think the better ones are less explicit and have more room for alteration based on interpretation. It gives the narrative more layers than what the author might conceive and gives the story more dynamism.

But of course, tons of stuff have specific messages, that is how oral stories first got started.

4

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

There's nothing here…