Brief thoughts on The Wire: Season 1

Detectives Moreland and McNulty

So I’ve finally watched the first season of the critically acclaimed, proudly low-key HBO crime drama The Wire, which ran from 2002-2008. It is an excellent show, very well made, very compelling and, yes, very deep. I enjoyed it. I especially appreciated that the creators of the show seem to understand that narrative strength lies in characters.

However, it is a crime drama, and its unavoidable adherence to genre conventions meant it didn’t quite reach the depths of other standout dramas of the past decade (The Sopranos, Six Feet Under, Mad Men, Breaking Bad, Deadwood, Big Love*). I understand what creator David Simon is doing – presenting a rich depiction of contemporary life via a crime drama, but when the strongest aspects of a program is the characters, narrative arc and wider subtext of certain concepts, it almost feels like a shame that we have to be presented with the requisite genre devices – the piece by piece puzzle-solving played out from various angles, the lawyer-talk, the flak-jackets etc. Absolutely, all of these are done well, most of the time do not feel gratuitous, and all serve a greater purpose than JUST to show us the procedure, ie. character development happens in these scenes (one that comes to mind is the darkly hilarious scene in episode 4, when the detectives Moreland and McNulty, above, recreate a murder scene saying only the word ‘fuck’ or a colorful variant). It’s just… the writing and acting are so good, I wished it moved a little further away from convention, presented less of the ‘CSI’ stuff and more of the ‘this is what it’s like in Baltimore, and these are the people who live there’ stuff. Because that was where the good stuff was.

But I guess that criticism is a little unfair.  I’m having a go at a show precisely because it is too good for its genre.  Maybe a better angle to take is this: “Hey! You! Yes, I’m talking to YOU, Law and Order, CSI, NCIS, and all of your many spin-offs. Yeah, WTF? The Wire just pwned all of your asses!” Yes, The Wire really does set a new standard for crime drama, and that is no mean feat.

I will check out season 2, maybe it will lessen its reliance on convention and really soar as pure, solid Drama, capitalisation intended.

* I realise an argument could be made that some of those programs are in specific genres – Mad Men and Deadwood are period-pieces, The Sopranos is a gangster show, and the other three are essentially family-dramas – but those shows all try, quite explicitly, to move away from conventions of genre, it is what has made them so critically acclaimed. When I think of those shows, I think of just pure ‘Drama.’ I really struggle to put them in a genre because, really, none of them are faithful to the usual narratives or devices.

Omar Little

Watch this space…

Well I’ve been too too slack here at Mediation Like A Fox the past few months, but that’s about to change!

I’ve finished my coursework now, so I’ll have a lot more time to focus on this blog. I have a few new media opportunities popping up in the coming weeks/months, so hopefully I’ll be inspired by some of the social media happenings I see around.

I’ve recently written an essay for uni about Mad Men, and also one about Google. If you haven’t heard of Mad Men, how’s life under the rock? If you haven’t heard of Google, how are you reading this?

Over the next few days I’ll be posting some of my musings on Mad Men’s third season, inspired by my essay.  The Google one I also hope to adapt to a blog post, but I have to check out some things with it first, so that might take a bit longer.

I hope to get a few more readers, I’ll be posting a lot more and be promoting the blog on Twitter and Facebook and things.

Bring on the summer!

No wonder Google produced Chrome…

Source: Inquisitr

…Cos everyone seems to think Google’s a browser anyway. I agree with Hodson at the Inquisir: this video’s not surprising. But it’s fun.

I’m still waiting for Google Chrome for Mac.

If you’re on a PC I recommend it whole-heartedly.

Steve Jobs: Man of mystery

It has been reported that Apple CEO Steve Jobs has had a liver transplant. Source: Tech Crunch.

The interesting background to this story is that for the last year or 18 months there has been much speculation about the state of Jobs’s health. After a series of health-related issues in the past, without explanation Jobs pulled out of the Macworld Conference early this year, and it was later uncovered this was for undisclosed health reasons. Jobs then took a 6-month leave of absence, citing the increased speculation on his health was becoming a distraction for the company, and that his health issues were ‘more complex’ than first thought. Apple COO Tim Cook was left in charge of daily operations, but Jobs said he would still be involved in executive decisions.

While I’m not suggesting that Jobs is at all obligated to disclose his personal matters to anyone – although the argument has been made that Jobs does in fact have an obligation to Apple shareholders to be open and transparent about the state of his health, given the unusually close correlation between his celebrity and Apple’s business image – I find it especially interesting that Jobs takes the secretive ‘closed shop’ approach that Apple the company has exemplified for many years to his personal issues.

I disclosed ages ago that I’ve started using a new generation iMac. I do like the way I don’t have to think about computing when using it. At this stage of my life, I’m all about creating content, not learning how to operate, and that’s why Apple products are good for me at this time. With an iPhone, iPod, or Mac computer, you don’t have to configure or set up functionality, not nearly as much as you would with a iRiver, Blackberry, PC or open source OS like Linux. Apple’s systems are Apple’s systems: You use it their way. And it works.

The same philosophy can be seen at Apple’s corporate level. They are the antithesis of open-source, even more so than Windows, which seems to be coming round the idea, albeit slowly, if they want to survive against Apple on one side and Google on the other. Apple’s new product launches are renowned for being shrouded in secrecy. I remember waiting to get my new iMac, it was just before semester started. I wanted to get the new upgraded model, and there were rumours aplenty at MacRumors on when it would be released, but nothing in stone so I really didn’t know whether to hold off or just buy because I was getting really close to needing a new computer. It was annoying and it smacks of arrogance – Apple does this because it can. It has fostered a cult around its objects – fetishises them, if you will – to the point that it just plays with its loyal customers. Yes, the products are good (except for iPods being notoriously cheap and short-lived), so I guess Apple customers don’t care that they are at the mercy of the company.

Another funny story: This week I went to the new Apple Store in Doncaster Shopping Town with my friend to help him buy a new MacBook Pro. My friend’s not so scruffy with computers, and wanted some extra RAM built in. He was tossing up whether to get them to add it in in-store, or whether he should buy some cheaper RAM separately and install it himself. He asked the Apple guy where Apple gets it RAM from, because obviously Apple doesn’t make its own RAM, and the guy point blank wouldn’t tell him. He basically said that if it has the Apple sticker on it, its Apple.  Sure, dude. My friend ended up getting the RAM in-store, to save him the hassle. That’s what Apple does, it saves you the hassle. But at what cost?

If Steve Jobs doesn’t want to talk about his health, that’s fine, I guess. But he should at lease recognise that when your customers are tech-savvy, they’re going to want to know what’s going on, eventually. And what happens when Apple hits a rough-patch, which all businesses go through? Perhaps we will start seeing a different, open, more talkative Apple.

New look

I’ve had a makeover! And by me I mean this blog. What used to be ‘Publishing Like a Fox’ is now ‘Mediation Like a Fox’ and the blog is up and running. Woo hoo!

Basically I’ve wanted to get a blog about media and pop culture up and running for a long time, so I will use the blog already started to get going on some new, fresh content. Its going to be less about web publishing (although I may still have stuff to say about that) and more about new media and culture.

I’ll write about issues in media like digital media, journalism, politics, tech news, new online social movements, film, TV, music, fandom, websites and online media, memes, subculture, audiences, publishing, copyright, ecommerce, current affairs…really anything that takes my fancy. All of these issues interest me, and all of them can be connected and fall under the wide banner of media and culture (which are almost the same thing, some might suggest). Who knows, I may even dabble in some review writing if I feel so inclined.

I feel the most important thing about this blog is that I find a voice and carve out a position for myself on the interwebs. I feel I have things to say, and I want to say them. It is too early to really know the true direction or form this blog will take. The important thing is that I want write something that is interesting, relevant and above all enjoyable.

So I hope readers enjoy this. I’m really looking forward to getting right into it, I plan on making time to post on average once a day about something, even if it’s a small post.

So…

Wow, Obama chooses judge who knows stuff

This Wired article about new Spreme Court Judge Sonia Sotomayor is interesting, as it runs through her experience with cyberlaw.

Looks like she knows more than this judge.

Our website, MelbinNoir, is coming along. I figured out how to utilise the Headline and Feature section, and the category browsing, so that’s good. I’m a bit nervous about the pitch this afternoon, but it should be ok I suppose.

Looking at the other groups’ sites, Chocrocks and UpUrAlley, and I’m pretty impressed. Its looking really good. I like the Chocrock graphic, and how the site seems to be all things chocolate, not just a directory. And I like how UpUrAlley have the ‘new to the site’ thing, which we’ve not figured out yet. I’m looking at some ‘login-log out’ plugins at the moment for Noir.

I was talking to my friend who is a jazz muso, and he didn’t like the name of our site, he didn’t get the MelbIN thing. I’m worried this might be a problem. Still getting the hang of the categories too, at this stage the front page menu is not discrete enough yet, there needs to be a better way of filtering the categories.

Social networks changed my life! And you can too…

***Note: I wrote this ages ago and forgot about it, so I’m posting it now***

These days it seems everyone’s on a type social network site (SNS) described by boyd and Ellison (2007) in this week’s readings. Even the most cynical of us have a Facebook page, or some even Twitter accounts – the latest craze, which seems to take social networking and blogging to its most basic level, which appeals to those who are just wanting to express themselves in a few sentences.

Of corse, there’s a backlash to any new practice, and SNSs certainly have their enemies. I have a few friends who are not on FB, mostly men (but also a few females, who seem to be more weary-of than anti-FB), who seem to be very cynical about the power of SNSs, and quite judgemental of the users.

Indeed, there does seem to still be, in some parts of the community, a real anti-tech mentality. Perhaps it is a throwback to old ideas of cool and geekiness. Perhaps people see the reliance on computers as a sign of the apocalypse.  There’s no doubt, I believe, there is still a fear of technology out there, the idea that computers are taking over, humans are losing their autonomy and uniqueness, that the computer will one day enslave us all and rob us of that thing we like to call humanity – yeah, because humans are so pure and innocent without computers. Sci-fi and movies like Blade Runner, The Matrix and Terminator have a lot to answer for.

Personally, I find people who can work with computers are generally quite ‘cool,’ and SNSs are used by many people to connect and reconnect with friends – quite the opposite to the stereotypical isolated socially awkward computer user of the 1980s-90s.

I’m always a little disappointed when someone says they are not on FB – how can I keep in touch with them?! Phone?! Please, I hate talking on the phone and messaging is wearing thin. There is really, for me, a shift towards Facebook becoming my primary source of communication with people. And I love it, it has changed my life. I’m now in direct contact with one of my best friends who lives in Geelong and I rarely get so see.

Of course, I’m a Facebook girl, I don’t get Twitter. I suppose its good for those people who want a blog but dont actually want a blog. I have a Twitter account, as you can see on the right, but I rarey use it. I love the status update function on FB as it lets me see how my friends are going, but using the status as a broadcast tool is, for me, a little strange.  If I have something to say to the world, I want to say it through a blog, where I am less resticted than 140 characters. But that’s just me, clearly people love it.

Well, not all people. Here’s a link to the story I talked about in class, where the internet film fan community got all huffy about Twitter use in the cinema. They were annoyed as it threatened the romamce and sanctity of the movie-experience. And if its one thing I learned from my thesis, its that you don’t mess with the ‘aura’ of the film experience for a cinephile. Tweet responsibly people!

Random musings over now.

wordpress templates

Here are some wp template directories I found handy:

Free wp themes

Dzine Blog

And a CSS one:
Free CSS templates

Although, editing the CSS of the one our group chose is getting tricky – I’m struggling to link to the front page and finding where the blog actually is…sigh.

Linky goodness

I quite liked this article at the Inquisitr responding to Nick Cohen saying the BBC is more trustworthy than bloggers. Haha, good one Cohen.

And one I should probably use: Wired’s Eliot Van Buskirk reported on a new Mac OS App called ‘SelfControl’ that blocks your access to “time wasing” computer activities like checking emails, Twitter and Facebook. There’s probably a whole post in there somewhere about snobbery and social networking, what constitutes ‘real’ behaviour and what is just ’silly online stuff’, but I’m sure you’ve heard enough out of me.

Design, web narrative, and a little bit ‘o post-structuralism

I quite enjoyed this week’s readings, and especially found myself nodding along with Mark Bernstein’s A List Apart article. I found myself agreeing wholeheartedly with his argument that narrative was an important ingredient in creating a working, interesting, engaging website. In a practical sense I really feel he has a point, although he did remind me of some of the theories of Roland Barthes, like the ‘death of the author’ and non-linear texts. Barthes’ very influential post-structuralist ideas were expanded upon and applied to hypertext theory by George Landlow. He used them to describe how to read digital online, hyperlinked texts, arguing that it was a realisation of Barthes theories. The argument is that when a user browses the web, there is no set linear narrative, they can click on which ever link they like, a ‘choose your own adventure’ thing where there are many different outcomes.

While this, in theory, seems to ring true about the Internet, I think Bernstein’s article shows that there is a clear intention of web intent makers to give websites a ’story’ – a beginning, middle and end. In most cases the story is used as a selling tool, in the realm of websites being marketplaces. Which we of course know they are. Like many Utopian visions of the Internet, the idea of free hypertextuality – where readers can roam freely without the constraint of traditional conventions – is a myth. Designers play with our eyes, enticing us to certain parts of the page, making some links easier to find or more attractive than others. I often find that with some websites I have trouble seeing where to ‘log in’ – its often hidden in a corner or perhaps on another page like through the ‘are you interested.’ It sometimes make me wonder of the creators really want participants to the site. Like active users would just create more work so they discourage it. But that could be me and my conspiracy theories again.

I wonder if this debate is really real, or just in my head. Is the Internet really a free network of links where we as users are free to roam where-ever our little hearts desire? Or are we subconsciously funneled onto certain parts so we can ‘read the narrative’ of a website and use its services or products the way the designer wants us to. Is Foucault’s biopolitcal theory of mass-management based on probable statistics at work on the Internet, the seemingly last bastion of the free? Have I lost the plot? Where did I put my shoes?