"...'my entrepeneur,' who had the NJ Enterprises shop up on Georgia, and they had gone along with the charade, which she knew to be a lie herself. She rarely spoke of it with Nigel and never with anyone else" (234).
"While she was preparing his food in the kitchen, she'd run the cash through the electronic counting machine she kept back there in one of the cabinets. She liked to do that soon as he made the delivery" (234).
"[There is] a hollowness at the core of capitalism. We knew there was some shit in the blood of society in that sense."
—David Simon.
The last quote comes from an interview David Simon and George Pelecanos made in the midst of Pelecanos's work on Simon's series The Wire. Both certainly see something having gone wrong in America, Simon creating a microcosm of this ill in his hometown of Baltimore while Pelecanos makes his hometown of Washington D.C. his microcosm.According to the Washington Post, in 2005, the year the novel is published, "Across the [D.C.] region, there were 466 homicides in 2005, compared with 420
in 2004—a rise of about 11 percent. About half of those slayings have
been solved." Earlier in the book, Lorenzo finds out about Michael Butler and DeEric Green's murder when he "automatically went to Metro's page 2, where they had the Crime and Justice feature, which many called the Roundup and some cynical types still called the Violent Negro Deaths" (159).What the novel dramatizes is one reason for this epidemic of killing. And it makes a case for why it might never possibly abate (according to the Post, in 2012, "The city has an annual murder rate of 2.38 murders per 10,000 citizens, which is much higher than the nation average").
So write a couple hundred words on the following questions:
1. Who's the villain in the novel? Or maybe more specifically, what does Pelecanos argue has gone wrong here in this microcosm of America, 2005? Think about this before you respond—and do not defer to the simple and simplistic "society." Quote from this weekend's reading in your response.
2. In the several times I've read the novel, I've always found Nigel Johnson to be the most compelling character in the book. Who do you find to be the most compelling character in the novel—and why?
1. I think what went wrong in this society was a need to assert an image of control and power. Power is at the core of everything in this novel and its exhibited in many different ways. Pelecanos even says “It wasn’t money that kept Nigel in the game. It was the power, of course, and the fear that he would lose what he had and, once out, be qualified to do nothing else” (235). I took this as Nigel wants the power but he also fears that once this game is over for him, he wont be able to do anything else with his life, that the game has utterly consumed his life. Everyone in this novel wants to show that they are in control whether it be Lorenzo and the key incident, or Rico trying to gain control over a situation like with Rachel and DeEric and Michael, and even Nigel’s mother is trying to present an image of power. She “bragged to her friends at church about her son the business man, my “entrepreneur,” who had the NJ Enterprises shop up on Georgia, and they went along with the charade, which she knew to be a ruse herself” (234). Everyone wants power in this little world, even if they know it wont last or isn’t even true in the first place.
ReplyDelete2. I also think that Nigel Johnson is a very interesting and compelling character. He seems to really have honest concerns about his mother, his childhood friend, his soldiers, etc. He is constantly looking out for others and I think he holds more consideration for others unlike some of the other characters. I also think that Melvin Lee is interesting too. Maybe its just the way that I read his parts of the book but it seems to me that he is very torn sometimes between the right and the wrong and given the chance to do what he wants he would probably try to be a better person. I think he really struggles in the game, trying to balance what he knows is morally right and what his fellow drug soldiers think is right.
1. I think that the principal villain in this society is pride. Rico killed people for no reason other than the fact they hurt his father figure's pride, and later he stabs a innocent woman just because he thought she was trying to do something to Lee. Nigel says that what kept him in the game was "the fear that he would lose what he had" , not anything else more tangible. Rachel was too proud to admit she had a problem, and when she finally did briefly discuss it at the meeting, she wasn't immediately "saved", but there was a sense of relief she felt. She was no longer burdened by this villain. Lorenzo got out of the game because he was able to admit to what he did and forget the game, while some might be inclined to re enter that world because they're too proud to pick up dog shit off the street. Everyone in this novel is a slave to their own pride, and I think the only way any of them can change is if they forget their prides and do the right thing.
ReplyDelete2. I think that Rachel is the most compelling character because she represents both the good and evil in this book. She's a parole officer, making sure former offenders have the support they need, but she's also a victim of her past. She's the only authority figure in the novel that we get know, but she's also making just as many mistakes as the drug dealers in the novel. She's not all bad or all good, and I think she stands out from the other characters in the novel who may be a little too one dimensional.
1. The big problem that I’ve gotten from reading the book seems to be the endless, inescapable cycle of violence, poor choices, and bad circumstances. This is a product of the poor economic and social opportunities for these lower class neighborhoods. When you’re born into this type of neighborhood with the circumstances that most of these people have, you don’t really have a chance to amount to very much. People have kids at a young age, they aren’t equipped to take care of the kids properly, they can’t shelter the kids properly from the bad environment, the kids have bad influences and role models, and the kids run with the wrong crowd. They commit crimes, which ensure that transition into a better life would be near impossible. They either go to jail, die, or hang around long enough to become bad influences on the next generation. This behavior that’s instilled at a young age is too difficult to overcome in most cases. Very few people are able to actually get out. Lorenzo seemed like the most likely candidate to succeed, but his new way of thinking is slowly slipping away to reveal what’s really underneath. After he speaks to the policeman about Rachel’s stabbing, he decides to take matters into his own hands. “ And someone, thought Lorenzo, needs to pray for me too. While they’re at it, pray for the motherfucker who did this to my friend”(226). He’s slipping back into the cycle. Rico Miller may deserve whatever’s coming. Or maybe he doesn’t. Maybe he’s just a product of the cycle. Either way, I can’t imagine that this will end well for anyone.
ReplyDelete2. I suppose it would either be Lorenzo or Rico. I’m interested to see what happens as Lorenzo drifts further and further from the new life he’s tried to create. It’s also very interesting every time Rico is in a scene. Something (bad) is going to happen when he appears. He may not be the deepest character around, but everything does seem to be revolving around him.
1. As those before me have expressed, there is no clear "villain" in this novel. It is not so simple that we could say, "Rico is the villain because he kills people," and it would be ridiculous to do so. In my personal opinion the issue that causes the violence and hate that we experience in this novel is a lack of faith in the system. Now by saying this I am in no way advocating that if everyone would play by the rules the world would be a great place, but it does seem that the culture in the book makes a decision to break the rules of the game and take a path that has no trust in the school system. In their lives the information and knowledge that they would gain through education just isn't prevalent. All the members of this community put their trust in what they've experienced since they were young, and in this case that trust goes into the drug game and. This is one of many causes of the vicious cycle that we are exposed to in Drama City. At one point in this reading when Lorenzo investigates what turns out to be the location of Rico Miller's attempted murder of Rachel Lopez, Pelecanos writes, "Kids rode their bikes around the residents and police like buzzards waiting on the kill." Kids in this society are exposed to violence and drugs at an extraordinarily young age, and this only perpetuates the cycle of violence.
ReplyDelete2. The most compelling character in the book would probably be Michael Butler. This is mostly just because he creates the closest link I feel we, as privileged high school students, have to the characters of the book. He is around our age, and has dreams of being an astronaut and visiting France. It seems to me that the moment when he gets shot was the most shocking to me. We know his hopes and dreams, he is our age, and without so much as a thought he is killed by Rico Miller.
ReplyDelete1. For me, the villain of Drama City, is the sense of need for power and a strong image in the community surrounding so many of the characters in this book. Rico Miller shows this need for a strong image just by staying so loyal and clingy to Melvin, always trying to impress him. However, it does get out of hand: “Lee walked to the BMW and stood by its driver’s-side window. Miller’s white T-shirt was streaked and splattered with blood. His eyes were electric and alive. ‘What happened’ said Lee, a sense of dread hitting him like a slap in the face. ‘Thought I told you to stay put.’ ‘Law came for you, Melvin,’ said Miller. ‘I took care of it, man. For you” (220). This is just so poignant here because you see how much Rico cares about Melvin here, and how much he wants to impress him and just how far he will go to do so. It’s shocking how much he is willing to do to please Melvin and obviously here, he ends up seriously injuring Rachel.
2. The most compelling character is definitely Rachel Lopez. The way she interacts with her parolees and juxtaposed to how she treats herself and the men she sleeps with is so interesting. Her relationships with people like Eddie Davis or Lorenzo show who her true family is at this moment in her life, yet she can only access her memories of her family when she is in complete control of someone else, which seems to be when she is sleeping with unknown men from faraway places. As Jenny said, Rachel does represents both some good and some bad in this book. She's part of laying down the law through her job, yet it seems as though she pays no attention to it on her own time. She is two dimensional in this book, not just one-sided like some other characters in this book.
1. My sense is Pelecano exposes the senseless violence that goes hand in hand with this drug world as the main problem. We see that even small conflicts between gangs such as DeEric Green and Melvin Lee erupt into fighting and violence with death mixed in. Simple parole checks with Rachel turn into messy assault scenes. The leaders such as Nigel and Deacon know the consequences of this life but still choose to follow it: "'You know how this go. It's all in the game.' It was something they had said to each other many times in the past. Nigel did not sound as if he believed it anymore." (172). Pelecano shows the violence and tension in this world clearly around every corner and is asking the question why no one changes anything? If Nigel can see the death of his followers, his work family, and still keep his mind in the game something more powerful must be pressuring him to do so. This creeping influence is pride. I must agree with Jenny that these men in the drug game are willing to do anything for their image. This pride is the poison that taints the community and leads to the senseless violence.
ReplyDelete2. I think Rachel is an interesting character from her role in the book and the different lives she leads. Rachel is clearly not perfect hiding her night life and constricting her hunting grounds to hotel bars as a way to hide her downfalls. The judgement passed onto her by her peers if they learned of her other life is not something I think would affect her all that much. She is clearly a strong woman that can lay down the law. Rachel falls into the same pattern of the community, worrying about her image. This is her downfall. Rachel would tear herself apart if her offenders saw and knew her other life. The personal connections she creates is unlike any other character in the book. This is what makes her compelling. She is so thoughtful and caring she does not want to ruin the connections and relationships she has made with her offenders that she hides her life and puts on a mask. Rachel is a complex character and I am willing her to pull through and return after her incident with Rico.
1. Like Andrew and Jenny said, there is not one person who could be given the role of the villain. It would be so easy to say that Rico is the villain, but then there are the other dealers who have killed people. We even suspect that Lorenzo might have committed similar crimes. Rachel and Lorenzo are set up to be the protagonists or heros, but can we call all of their actions heroic? The villain of the book is in all of us. It is that part that we have to always repress. That anger that we never want to express. If you add this anger that brews in everyone to the surroundings of the neighborhood it is easy to see how the explosion of rage and violence occurs. Through the entire book Lorenzo is trying to keep his violent nature at bay, but we see the full extent of it when he threatens Leon with a key to the eye. It would be hard for anyone to thrive in this neighborhood in D.C. These men can only see one way to make something of themselves. They can show off expensive cars and have some sort of status in life. Nigel can't think of a life where he leaves the drug game, "It wasn't the money that kept Nigel in the game. It was the power, of course, and the fear that he would lose what he had and, once out, be qualified to do nothing else" (235). People in the drug game think that there is nothing else out there for them. They act tough, but they are riddled with the same fear, anxiety, and low self-esteem as everyone else. In the game people can let out all of their rage, but other emotions are left alone and never dealt with. They are caught living in a world where to love is to kill, relaxation is to watch animals kill each other, and happiness is to have a TV screen in the steering wheel of car earned by drug money.
ReplyDelete2. I think that Rico is the most compelling character. He seems like a kid when he looks up to Melvin Lee as a father figure and complains about PS2, but then he murders two people in cold blood. He kills Green because he insulted Lee, but then he kills Butler from the high he got killing Green. Rico wants to protect the man he sees as his father. He shows his love by murdering two people and stabbing Rachel. These are ruthless acts that are inexcusable, but it is sad that he does this for Lee. There is no excuse for Rico. He lets out every piece of rage that is inside him by inflicting pain. It makes him happy to see the last flicker of life in a person's body. He slept with his sister and doesn't see anything bad about it. It is hard to analyze Rico's behavior because when you think that he can't do anything worse, he does. Rico is the Michael Butler for Deacon's gang. He is young and hasn't all that much of life yet. Miller has no remorse for killing Butler at all. He doesn't even think about what he did. Rico is as young and naive as Butler. He will kill a guy without thinking twice, but then on the other hand he sees Lee as his father and would do anything to protect him.
1. I don't think there is necessarily a villain in this book but rather the driving force behind all of these characters: power. Power is the cause of all of the violence in this novel. Each character is trying to be in control of something for once in their lives. The relationship between power and violence is most obvious to me in Rico Miller. He desperately wants approval and to have some sort of advantage or power over the other members of the drug game. When he told Melvin about what he did to Rachel, Rico said ,"I took care of it man. For you." This is entire book is a story of a warped power struggle. Each man wants to be on top of the pyramid and uses violence to get to the top. I think Pelecanos is arguing that the competitive side of man is what is going wrong.
ReplyDelete2. I think Michael Butler was the most compelling character of the book up to the point of his death. I was, and still am, really interested and confused as to why he was even in the drug game. He was intelligent, bright, kind, and everything that the other men in the drug game are not. He brought a sort of lightness and happiness into an otherwise dark and violent world and I think that is extremely compelling. He brought a bit of sanity to this group of men, but unfortunately ended up dead.
1. The culture of violence in this neighborhood desensitizes the youth and normalizes crime. Just as an outsider of our world may look upon us and see the waste we create and accept as a daily fact of life, do we look at their world and condemn its violence. The gangsters also grew up poor, always wanting, and they stay the same throughout their lives: “Once poor, always poor” (234). They grew up not knowing how to grow up, not knowing right from wrong, “could not save and were not rich” (235), and so are trapped in a world that perpetuates this cycle. The fact that all of the gangsters did not have fathers, someone to teach them the ropes of life, is continued by the fact that they do not care for their children either: “Nigel had never known his father” (235), and goes to great lengths to look for him, but yet he “He had fathered a couple of children… but had paid the mothers off in lump sums” (235). There is obviously no clear villain (besides the blatantly violent Miller), but I think that the parents who leave their children without a chance to grow up without falling into the cycle hold much of the blame.
ReplyDelete2. Lorenzo is the most compelling character to me. Perhaps it’s because he’s the main character, but it’s also the inner conflict that goes on inside of him, wanting to change but unable to resist his past impulses, that keeps me interested in him. Lorenzo’s sense of justice, towards animals and humans alike, is also interesting. We know that in his past life he was a fearsome drug dealer, but now he’s channeled the aggression towards animal abusers and Rico Miller. While the young gang members strut their stuff to prove that they’re men, Lorenzo’s maturity proves that he is more “man” than every one of them. He is the strongest individual in the novel, but his fatal flaw is that he cannot turn the other cheek and must violently deal with those who hurt others, which is ironic. He is more complicated than most of the other characters, and it is that complexity which interests me.
Drama City's villain is neglect. Like Sohail said, the cycle that the characters live in creates the perpetuating neglect we see in Rachel's work with the parolees, Lorenzo's dogs, and the drug game's underlings. Each aspect of the book shows how neglect for each character, or dog, or person, perpetuates a cycle that they cannot break from. A child is born into a world where the mother is addicted to drugs. Lorenzo felt that his only path in life was the drug game, and that was what he followed. King, one of the members of the carwash, had a sign reading "'Tips please, this is hot we feed out families,' though King had fathered five kids and had never given one of them a thin dime" (218). The neglect King shows for his kids, along with almost everyone in Drama City one way or another, creates the violence and hate and dysfunctional "society" the book takes place in.
ReplyDeleteRachel Lopez is the most compelling of the characters to me for the same reason neglect is the villain. She shows respect to her parolees, treats them equally, and shows them time. That emotional investment rather than neglect is why she is such a good PO. Admittedly, her trust leads to her injury when Miller stabs her, but like Lorenzo, she needs to hold onto the hope that she can fix these people, or else she would drown in the sea of neglect and violence. She has to believe she can show them something more.
1. I think that the hardest part of this novel is characterizing the characters. I am tempted to separate the characters into good and bad, but Pelecanos makes this near impossible. We want to believe that Lorenzo is the hero of the novel but he is repeatedly going back to his future. It would be easy to assume that Rico is the villain of this novel, but the more I think about him the more I realize that he is just another mess up boy. I think that this could have been Lorenzo, given the fact that fighting excites him just like Rico. I think that saying ‘society’ is to blame is not a valid point because it is hard to define society. Society could refer to those people in the government who work down the street from these neighborhoods but it is clear that this people live in their own world. They are their own society. I think the problem lies within the repetitive infrastructure of this society. These men and women grow up with certain values that they pass down to their children and so on. They do not know anything other than this. Man like Nigel grow up and understand the self-destructive world they live in but they are not “qualified to do nothing else” (235). It would seem that these men and women are not to blame for the way they were raised, but at the same time, they are grown men and women how can comprehend what is going on. However, even men like Lorenzo, who have tried to live “straight”, find themselves trap. I think that what has gone wrong is that these people cannot be blame of how they were raise yet they are to blame for their actions. They are as innocent as the fighting dogs and as guilty as the owners of the dogs.
ReplyDelete2. I find Rico Miller a very compelling character. Like I mention before, he appears to be the villain of the story yet I see him as a lost boy that is trying to find Lee’s approval. The way he explains how he attack Rachel for Lee is almost an “ahhh” moment. Yet he is a ruthless, remorseless killer who needs to be taken away from the streets. He also poses the role of the young boy who is losing his life to the game and who needs saving. When we see Lorenzo, we think that he is very different from Rico but they might have been the same when Lorenzo was young. We see Rico, the crazy, wild teen from the perspective of the veterans of these game who now how he is going to end up, dead or in jail.
1. I think there are several serious issues at hand in this novel, but the most disturbing to me is how kids are raised to enjoy violence and conflict. Obviously this is not true for everyone, for example Lakeisha is a very sweet kid. However, Pelecanos makes clear multiple times that the children of the neighborhood are engaged is street conflicts just as the grown men are in dog fights. At Rachel's crime scene, Pelecanos says: "Kids rode their bikes around the residents and polic like buzzards waiting on the kill" (222), and this is not the first time we've seen this. When Lorenzo rescues the pitbull, the kids are heckling him. This sort of drama that they enjoy is an easy segway into the dramatic world of dealing drugs. As Alex said, the kids are desensitized to the violence. It is like they are playing a game or watching a movie. They don't understand the seriousness of violence or its true affects. Like Nigel said: "It's all in the game" (172). They are taught to accept violence and hatred.
ReplyDelete2. The most compelling character to me is Nigel. He really cares about Lorenzo, and even though the rest of his crew looks at Lorenzo as a fool, Nigel doesn't care. Nigel also really cares about his mother, and to him, her needs come first. Nigel definitely has his issues, but he seems like the most honest character to me. He also seems to be fairly sad, because he is trapped in "the life", even though he doesn't really enjoy it all that much. The parts of it that he does enjoy are the responsibility and the sense of a family. He also feels terrible about Michael's death, and clearly feels responsible.
I think that Pelecanos is arguing through this book that the problem with America in this time, 2005, is the very misguided sense of what is important. Throughout this whole novel we have talked as a class about why these young men lead this life. We've talked about the appeal of this drug life because it gives them money, but more importantly than that because it gives them a sense of pride and status that they probably would not have gotten otherwise. So far, I would argue that every crime we have seen, every act that has been one against the another, arguably, has happened to either gain, maintain, or protect one's pride in one way or another. Or, to protect the pride of a friend or a colleague. "Rico pulled the shotgun and the Glock off the rack[...]Melvin was the only friend he had in his life. Melvin was his father. Rico Miller heard the sound of his own teeth grinding." (134). But in one way or another, everyone seems to be selfishly looking out for themselves in terms of this money and this pride, in terms of becoming something in this life. This leads to more crime, which leads these men straight to prison, and this stress on the importance of these things leads them to join the drug game in the first place. It provides a false notion of success in a life of drugs and crime in a poverty stricken, hopeless community and society. I think Pelecanos is saying that not only does this apply to D.C., but that a misguided focus on pride and money and becoming someone, to "get ahead", applies throughout America, just maybe not to the same extent or with the same specifics.
ReplyDeleteI'd have to agree with John that Nigel is the most compelling character in the novel in that while he is in the drug game, running the drug game rather, he is very real, very genuine. Nigel seems to have a mature understanding of his life and of his surroundings that one really would not expect from a guy who is atop of the drug game. Nigel is not flashy, not boastful, or even rich as he puts all of the money he is making into his business or into the other people in his life. Nigel expresses love and compassion for the people in his life, for his family and for his friends, and he puts the focus on them as opposed to on himself and on his status or pride. But I think the most compelling thing about Nigel is his awareness of his actions throughout his life and where he has gone. Nigel is really beginning to question his life as a drug dealer, to question the morality behind everything that happens. He is beginning to regret what he does for a living and how he has led many young men that he cares about to their deaths or incarcerations. So we have here a thoughtful character who is almost the exact opposite from what one would expect a drug dealer to be, and yet we cannot forget that he is a drug dealer nonetheless. This is what makes him so complex and compelling.
1. I agree with Zoe. The tragedy of this narrative is how the children are raised into this environment where morals are screwed. A world where drugs and murder are rampant. Where you know your father doesn't give a shit about you, and your mother is too high to comfort you about it. Not only is violence desensitized, it's the only thing that makes sense to these young men. Where else do you throw your frustration and anger? Into washing cars or serving at McDonald's? A line that struck me was when Miller was drying a BMW for an old man, thinking, "Like he wasn't even smart enough to point a hose at the wheels. Reminded him of those classes they used to stick him in before he dropped out of school, with all the kid couldn't read...like he was one step off retard himself"(217). Even in school, it is difficult to get ahead, to be the one who makes it out with an education. A big reason is the pressure to conform and be like the other guys who drop out. Another reason is that school is hard, and a lot of times you feel stupid and down on yourself, and the option of the game is too easy and tempting to pass up.
ReplyDelete2. For me, the most intriguing character is Lorenzo. He's the most compelling because I understand why he does what he does. Hearing about his past and how he went about his life just makes sense (so far). He lived the now 'classic childhood' the novel presents every page, got into trouble, went to far, and is trying to live right by his grandmother and the growing number of people who support him. Even having this desire to do well by his loved ones' standards, there are many moments where violence makes the most sense to him. It just seems like the most straight forward answer for him because of his background. You can't change the way you live your life in a matter of months. The fact that he has even been able to stay straight for this long is amazing. Just imagine the other way around: if you had been living your life just as your peers and parents had, but then forced to live another way. It'd be beyond difficult, especially with ties still pulling you back to your old ways. Lorenzo is a strong man, but I have a feeling we're about to witness his downfall.
1. There's not just one character who's the villain or the bad guy in the novel. Most of them have done drugs or been involved with crimes including murder. In certain ways, many of the characters are villains. But they are all fighting for the same things, power and high status, in this world where violence and drugs are a norm. All these men are fighting against each other to be the alpha dog and to run this harsh world full of crime and hate. "It wasn't the money that kept Nigel in the game. It was the power, of course, and the fear that he would lose what he had and, once out, be qualified to do nothing else. But it was also the responsibility he felt he had for those under him." (234) Nigel is "qualified" to be the leader or the alpha. His power gives him his status, and all these men are all fighting to have this power and status. But I think their biggest villain is themselves and their pride and their manhood. They need this power to fulfill and prove themselves.
ReplyDelete2. I think Lorenzo is the most compelling character, because he sees his flaws and his mistakes. He may not be fully perfect and recovered, but he can at least see his past mistakes and what's he's done wrong. He has a clearer perspective. He sees how messed up the world is he's living in, but he's trying to disassociate himself from this harsh world. I don't think Rachel is compelling. I think she's weak. She tries very hard to stay strong for herself and her offenders, but she's clearly unstable.
1. In this book where everyone is doing something wrong and everyone is fighting one another for the power that in all honesty none of them truly deserve, and all of them doing things that not only go against the law but go against the morals of many of them, I truly believe that there is not one villain. Stating one villain is like trying to simplify this book into good and evil, black and white, and doing that I think is a cop out. I think everyone is playing a role in their own desperate lives, and everyone is playing a role in the devastation of this town. No one person, or thing like society is fully to blame. However I think one of the things that sticks out to me as a hard thing to pass up in this world is power. I think coming from broken families and a shitty drug ridden town, trying to find yourself can be very difficult. As we have seen insecurities are a dime a dozen, and trying to have control over anything let alone your life can be very difficult. I think what Pelecanos says about Nigel speaks to this need for power, which I think for me, if I had to choose could be classified as the biggest villain, is the need for power, and the need to be in control, “It wasn’t money that kept Nigel in the game. It was the power, of course, and the fear that he would lose what he had...” (235). The force driving these young men to commit heinous crimes and destroy their lives is power. I think this is behind Nigel, and Rico, and was behind Lorenzo, and is behind Rachel. This city is being run by power hungry immature children who will never be happy because they will never have control over the people they want the most to control, themselves. I do not think there is a person who is the villain, I think the struggle for power is the problem and I do not think there will ever be a cure, or a way to take this need away, unfortunately.
ReplyDelete2. I think Rachel is the most compelling character simply because she confuses me the most. I want to know her entire life's story. When we first met her she was simple and easy to get a person who wanted to help, then we saw her at night and we saw her desire for control, and power over her life, and other peoples lives, not unlike her parolees, and the people running drugs on the streets. We know she is an alcoholic who has a hard time coming to this conclusion. I feel like she understands some facits of everyones life, and can truly connect with people. I think she is the most compelling because she was the first character is this book to make me reconsider evil and good, and put together and completely falling apart, she is all four of those things and somehow manages to function.
I agree with Andrew in that people in this community have no faith that the system (school system and all) will get them anywhere in life and therefore they are drawn to other options which at a young age seem more propelling. Getting involved in the game gives these young kids a chance to hold some power and to have control and feel some kind of security, which is often lacking at home (due to this cycle). This quote is one that throws me a little, “But you can’t tell’em shit. They ain’t gonna listen to no old heads, that’s for damn sure. Same way we didn’t listen. We knew it all.” 146 Of course it’s not news that teenagers are rebellious and are thrilled by the temptation of doing something they are not supposed to be doing, but there is clearly a gap here between the new kids who get involved in the game and the survivors who make it out like Lorenzo. Lack of effective communication is causing kids to play a game which they don’t all truly understand the consequences of. Murders like the ones of Butler and DeEric are not consequences which many people, who are fully aware, would gladly take.
ReplyDeleteI am really intrigued by Nigel. I don’t quite understand how he came to be top dog really…he seems to have started young with Lorenzo and as the years have passed he has come to realize that it’s not the game he thought he was playing back then…or just that it isn’t a game at all. Lorenzo even says that Nigel doesn’t sound like he believes in his own system that much anymore. However, he runs it o he’s got to find a way to deal with it. I am interested in seeing his meeting with Deacon. I don’t really know how to react to Nigel right now…and to the fact that he buys his mother ice cream even though he worries about her heart (he doesn’t address the issue). I am curious to see what he will do about his business.
Reading other's responses to the first question, I couldn't help but notice that many of my classmates felt that all of the kids in these particular sections of Washington are screwed right off the bat. I don't believe that this is true, and I think that Pelecanos gives examples in the book to the contrary. Take Lorenzo's daughter, for instance. Even though her father is estranged from her and her mother spends a bit outside her limits sometimes, she certainly doesn't live in poverty, and her step-father obviously cares about her well-being. Also, I think that we have to differentiate between capitalism and crime. All too often we associate these elements with one another, and though they can be bedfellows more than we would like, they are not overtly connected. That being said, I believe that the principal antagonist of the novel is fear- for Lorenzo, of falling back into his old habits, for Rachel, of facing the reality of her parent's death (she still talks to herself like her father), etc. For Nigel, fear of the game and it's consequences has left him long ago, and he understands the façade of the gangs: "He had told himself that he was providing opportunity and a sense of family for those who otherwise had no chance of attaining either. He knew now...it was a dirty lie"(235).
ReplyDeleteI think that makes a nice segue into my opinion that Nigel is the most interesting character in the book. I can understand Rachel and Lorenzo's actions, but Nigel seems to defy explanation. He is just like most of the other gang members in the neighborhood. His father left his mother whe ln he was a kid, he grew up around violence, and experienced the same things everyone else did, yet, as I mentioned above, he has a deeper understanding of the game than any of his subordinates. Maybe that's why he's in charge.
Theres no way to tell at what point things went wrong. Maybe theyre not wrong. Obviously, the drug trafficking game is looked down upon and has serious negative repercussions on all of those involved, but playing devil's advocate, maybe Pelecanos is trying to show some sort of humanity underneath all of that callous that protects them from the real world. Tucked away somewhere is the desire to succeed and do good, but all of these folks tied up in the vicious, life or death game are so blinded to the entire rest of the world. Ignorance is passed down more than trust funds. If any of these kids were taught to stay in school and educated about other countries and other ways of living, about the simple joys of picking up dog feces, then they wouldnt look to the drug lords as fathers. Mike Butler even asks "But how did you get a passport? How did you buy a plane ticket". All of these people that see dealing as the only way to the top are basically stuck in their own little bubble with no windows looking out.
ReplyDeleteI cant wrap my head around the fact that Rico Miller and Michael Butler are both 17. I like Butler though, he's curious, and seems like he was probably good in school. He acts as a whatcouldhavebeen kind of character, and seeing him get shot definitely is the saddest part. Of all of the characters, I can relate the most to him. I like that he's the least violent one, and brings ice cream to Nigels ma. It just shows his innocence. Because we look at the drug game in such poor light, it makes me feel even worse for Butler. I just want to show him what it's like to go to travelocity.com and dream up whichever itinerary he pleases. As innocent as he is however, he's still part of one of the most dangerous lifestyles, so he can't be justly deemed good or bad, just a tragic story.
1. I don't think any of these characters are truly villains. Yes, they all do bad things and commit crimes, etc, but as we've discussed in class, most of them don't know another way of life. This is the cycle that goes on here; you drop out school, get involved in the game, maybe go to prison, and you do it until you're too old to keep up. The bad guy is the vicious cycle that they go through. The problem is once you're in the game, it's hard to get out. Even Lorenzo who has proved that people can be better has to make sure his employers and his friends are aware of his situation.
ReplyDelete2. Rico Miller is the most compelling character to me. He is so young and thinks he has everything figured out. All of his actions, such as the killing and stabbing of people, are all for approval from Miller. He's not exactly an ill-intentioned person. He is in that he purposefully killed these people, but he isn't because he thinks this is what he's supposed to do for his only father figure.
1. I agree with Jenny when she says the principle villain is Pride. It is just so dominant throughout the story, and it seems to guide so many people. Pride is what kept Lorenzo from backing down from the dog owner, and its also what made Rico kill DeEric and Michael. Rico's Pride is so dominant in his life, that its clear he really enjoys it, “Lee walked to the BMW and stood by its driver’s-side window. Miller’s white T-shirt was streaked and splattered with blood. His eyes were electric and alive."(220)In both cases, Pride was the driving force behind both actions. Lorenzo had the dog and could have backed down, but the guy had injured Lorenzo's pride in front of other people and Lorenzo felt the need to do something about it. Rico killed DeEric and Michael because DeEric had injured Melvin's pride and Rico wanted revenge, as Rico says "I took care of it, man. For you.” Pride even goes back to the smallest encounters, even to the dogfight. Both owners wanted their dog to win and also didn't want to back down even though one of their dogs was going to get hurt. I mean I doubt they care about either dog, but their pride was definitely part of it as well.
ReplyDelete2. I honestly think that Lorenzo is the most compelling character in the book. His character is just so interesting to me. His struggles while trying to survive in Drama City seem so real. I like that he isn't the normal type of protagonist like other books; he is more human. He is not just "good" hes also "bad" and everything in between. I can't say too much because I finished the book, but I really like Nigel's actions toward him in the end, I think its really great of Nigel and shows how much Nigel wants Lorenzo to succeed in life.
1. I don’t think that any particular character in this novel is a villain. More, I feel that society, or perhaps more the environment that they live in is the villain. All of these characters don’t know any other life. They grew up with drugs and violence, and that is what they turned to when they grew older. "But how did you get a passport? How did you buy a plane ticket?" Something that seems so simple to us in something that Michael Butler has no idea about. Now, that is not to say that all kids do that. Like Ben said, Shay is living apart from this. But many people turn to them.
ReplyDelete2. Like Jessica and Ben, I am also really interested and intrigued with Nigel. Here is this man at the top of the food chain, in command of all of these “soldiers” who sell drugs. He is supposed to be kind of heartless. And yet, here we see him care for everyone, and he understands that game better than anyone. He knows to stop Lorenzo from going, and also knows that this “game” is just sick. All of the killing that is done.
1) Character-wise, the most obvious answer is Rico Miller. Miller kills without hesitation and seems to lack any kind of moral compass. Even Melvin Lee, the man he claims to kill for, is disappointed and worried by the actions of this man. Miller seems to lack all human emotion. Theme-wise, it could be argued that the circumstances these men are raised in produces this gang mentality and urge to be the best. These men are on a constant quest for power, leaving their sympathy at the door. These two gangs are barbaric, they have no interest in resolving things peacefully. The neighborhood and role models are the villains in this novel because they are the ones who spur this violence.
ReplyDelete2) Nigel stands out to me for a couple of reasons. The clearest and most obvious is the fact that we can identify with many of his characteristics and actions. We see parts of ourselves in his care and concern, but watch as he leads a gang and deals with murder. Nigel is the most interesting character because we are not able to read him instantly. He loves and cares for his mother and acts as a father figure to those in his community, but we know he has a dark and dirty past. Lorenzo sees this contrast in Nigel and has thus befriended him. There is normality and softness behind his tough guy image.
1) I believe that the main villains in the novel are pride and power. I believe that although Rico may be the easiest person to name as a villain, the really bad parts of him have developed due to his intense craving for power. I think that this novel tries to show that it is not the people but how the people react to the world around them that makes them so messed up. The obsession of power and pride appears to be holding everyone back from changing. No one appears to be letting anything go. Rico, after the seemingly unimportant encounter with Butler and Green, goes out and seeks to avenge his father figure because his pride was injured. Green shows off his gun because he wants to be in the position of power. Rachel seems as if she is spending her entire life in search of some sort of power.
ReplyDelete2) I am also extremely fascinated with Nigel and I believe it is because of his unique outlook. He is an "optimist" in the sense that he picks out the best and the brightest. He still continues running his men even though it seems as if he doesn't believe in the same things as he used to. It seems as if he is growing out of his position but he remains there for some reason that I can not find.
1) I believe that the main villains in the novel are pride and power. I believe that although Rico may be the easiest person to name as a villain, the really bad parts of him have developed due to his intense craving for power. I think that this novel tries to show that it is not the people but how the people react to the world around them that makes them so messed up. The obsession of power and pride appears to be holding everyone back from changing. No one appears to be letting anything go. Rico, after the seemingly unimportant encounter with Butler and Green, goes out and seeks to avenge his father figure because his pride was injured. Green shows off his gun because he wants to be in the position of power. Rachel seems as if she is spending her entire life in search of some sort of power.
ReplyDelete2) I am also extremely fascinated with Nigel and I believe it is because of his unique outlook. He is an "optimist" in the sense that he picks out the best and the brightest. He still continues running his men even though it seems as if he doesn't believe in the same things as he used to. It seems as if he is growing out of his position but he remains there for some reason that I can not find.
I would say that it is indeed hard to name a specific villain in this novel. I would think that most people's first instinct would be to name Rico as the villain, however even he has extenuating circumstances that make us want to justify his actions on some level. I think the book really makes us think about the idea that each of these drug-dealing youths are just a product of their environment, and it doesn't define them as a person. When Lorenzo arrives at Rachel's apartment, he sees "one of the kids riding bikes made a pistol out of his fingers and pointed it at the back of one of the police cars." I think this quote calls attention to the cycle that most young people in the community seem to follow. Most all of them will get into drug dealing for some amount of time, and most all of those will end up in jail or dead.
ReplyDelete2. I think that the most compelling character in the novel is Lorenzo. He's clearly the main protagonist, and I would say that we are definitely supposed to like him the most. I find Lorenzo compelling because I think his story is the one that actually brings in a hopeful view to the novel. Lorenzo has done his fair share of bad things, just like everyone else, but it seems that he has actually reformed his ways and changed as a person.
1. In my opinion, the villain in this work, as well as many others, is ego. It is ego that forces men into the disastrous situations that we find in the book, such as DeEric's "punking" of Lee. Ego causes these men to act in such a way that constantly puts them in danger. It creates a society that is constantly at war with eachother. It's ego that ultimately causes Rico to slaughter DeEric and Butler, as Rico is defending Lee's ego after it was bruised by DeEric. We see ego playing a role in multiple instances throughout the book, another example being Lorenzo's encounter with Leon Skiles.
ReplyDelete2. I think that the most compelling character is Nigel as well. He has been in the game for most of his life, and we see him becoming disenchanted with it. His view on life is unique from the others in the novel, as he continues to be positive in the face of depressing circumstances.
I believe either ambition or violence would be the main villain in this novel. The sad thing about it is that because of the environment that these characters have grown in they seek a false idea of success instead of fighting for a better life or to escape the cycle. In that same ambition for power and money they get caught up in the drug game. One also has to establish a though guise where one has to be masculine and appear strong and though where if you don't act that way you are looked down upon. Violence also imprisons these characters inside this vicious cycle. It keeps the area they live in in poverty and bad conditions . The crime life is the only thing they can be in. They live a false concept of life because they have plost themselves to money and power. They create his false image by using their "power" and money to cover up how truly weak and lost they are. They have no one that can keep them on track and give them advice because this cycle gets to everyone.
ReplyDeleteI think Rachel is the most complex character because of her actions. Pelecanos wants us to feel she is the hero along with Lorenzo but he also includes their flaws to question the reader. She is a parole officer yet she could be considered a hypocrite because she lives a double life where she is a completely different person.
ReplyDelete1)I think, like most have already said, that the villain in this novel is the hunger for power over others. Poverty, ignorance, unhappiness, and resentment all go hand in hand and for many in this type of lifestyle would say they strive to be more powerful than their neighbor. The truth is, there is not a hero figure of hope to look up to. Rachel tries to be this figure for her clients but ultimately, her clients were not taught to have faith in people or have hope. There is a never ending cycle of unhappiness. The same way that a victim of bullying sooner or later becomes a bully himself, people in Drama City are just victims of life. For example, Lorenzo’s mother we know has been in jail for a big chunk of his life and this is the kind of example he grew up with. Many people have a lack of strong will to do the right thing because it is easier to do the wrong thing. It is easier to do drugs and have fun than flush your weed down the toilet. For most, drugs is the only “good” way of coping with their problems. “It was the power, of course, and the fear that he would lose what he had and, once out, be qualified to do nothing else" (235). When they are in charge of their own pleasure and intake of drugs, they feel satisfied. And there is no one telling them not to do this. No one says, “Son, don’t ever do drugs, you are and can do better than this.” There is a lack of rules and sense of organization that guides these young people up.
2)The most compelling character to me, obviously, is Rachel, because she’s the main female character. In a way she sort of inspires me. She just seems so collected, of course, during the day. I don’t judge her too much for her night lifestyle because it’s common that many women goes through this phase at some point in their life. She’s just trying to find some escape for the feeling of uselessness and impotence she feels when she can’t help her parolees. She seems to have strong will in the day, and then lets loose at night. She seems like a strong and independant latina woman, which of course I aspire to be.