Today, I received an email from a friend who is rewatching the 5 seasons exclaimed, "why did so and so character have to be killed off." You likely know who I am talking about if you've watched the series. However, he added another comment about Season 3's Hamsterdam, the legalized drug zone, that I want to comment on and bring 'round to how it relates to urban form/evolution:
c'mon. you know the wire. if you like a character too much, he's bound to be killed. It wouldn't be much of a Greek Tragedy otherwise. Even McNulty was effectively "killed" by taking away the only thing he loved doing (thus "saving" him in the religious sense). Even underscoring the point by laying him out on the table.I just rewatched it with Amanda and picked up something new. They were quite obvious in seasons 4 and 5 about emphasizing the cyclical nature and that the kids were each destined to be one of the adult characters. obviously, michael as omar. dookie as bubbles. Randy as stringer, the business head who gets lost in the system. I never really caught who Namond was going to become.Then it hit me. Clay effing Davis. Yeah, Namond "made it out" but that doesn't mean everything was all good. He went into debate club. Clay, politician. In season 4, both used the line "I'll take any em-effers money if he givin it away." Namond becomes as big of a problem, if not bigger than any of the other kids... just like the pain in the A that he is at the start of his role.Us coming to like that Eddie Haskell act of Namond was just a way of the show flipping it on us while we condemn Clay Davis. "How could anybody like that guy?" "What a scumbag!" Well, we fell for it and didn't even realize it. Just turn on the charm. Namond's just getting started taking em effers money.Sheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeiiiitttt.