‘The Wire’: Why it still matters

OP-ED | Carlo Rotella

October 14, 2011|By Carlo Rotella

Omar Little, right, played by Michael K. Williams, robbed and killed drug… (Larry Riley/HBO )

WHY ARE people still talking about “The Wire’’? The final episode of HBO’s celebrated crime series aired in 2008 - ancient history in TV time, but not far enough in the past to qualify for nostalgic revival. And yet the show, created by David Simon and Ed Burns, comes up all the time, especially on campus. It’s on the syllabi of courses in the humanities and social sciences, and the first round of “Wire’’ scholarship is already out, with much more on the way. When I met recently with a group of doctoral students in American literature at Harvard, one of them said, “Well, since this is Harvard, I suppose it’s my duty to ask a question about ‘The Wire.’ ’’

And, in defiance of the view that watching TV is the antithesis of reading a book, this year’s Boston Book Festival kicks off tonight with a panel discussion, “The Art of ‘The Wire,’ ’’ featuring the writer and producer George Pelecanos, Donnie Andrews (the inspiration for the character Omar Little), Fran Boyd (the protagonist of “The Corner,’’ a book and HBO series by Simon and Burns set in the same Baltimore milieu as “The Wire’’), Robert Chew (who played Prop Joe), Tray Chaney (Poot), and Jamie Hector (Marlo).

Some find it surprising, even amusing, that intellectuals are so besotted with a TV show about cops and drug dealers. (Slate ran a piece about it under the headline “This Will Be on the Midterm. You Feel Me?’’) But the infatuation persists, and even grows. Why are educated people, in particular, still talking about “The Wire’’?

Yes, it was an engrossing drama with an enormous cast of compelling characters. Yes, the writers and actors and others who worked on it have gone on to do other interesting things. And yes, people with advanced degrees like to pick up street talk so they can say things like, “Honey, did you re-up on arugula?’’ But none of those reasons seems sufficient to account for the sustained attention to the show.

The key, I think, is that “The Wire’’ was a very rare thing in popular culture: a first-class piece of genre fiction that succeeded as entertainment and also advanced a coherent analysis. And, crucially, the main concerns of that analysis grow ever more timely as we descend into a new decade.

In a time when our government’s ability to act effectively to safeguard and improve the lives of citizens - especially poor people - is questioned, dismissed, and assailed in ways we haven’t seen since before the New Deal, “The Wire’’ feels like a necessary parable.