Zujaja Tauqeer
Il Principe and The Wire
Written at the height of political disorder in Renaissance Italy, Niccolò Machiavelli‟s The
Prince was dedicated to the Medici family of Florence. The work‟s purpose and its author‟s
motives have been the subject of much debate throughout the ages, but the advice given within
the relatively short manual for new rulers has made its author infamous for his “depraved”
political philosophy. Similarly attuned to controversy, The Wire, an HBO drama series, studies
the dynamics of an urban setting where politicians, drug dealers, law enforcement, and average
citizens tread a world that is more grey than black or white, and where a Machiavellian style of
leadership, with all its overtones of immorality, deception, and manipulation, seems to be the
only way to ensure a sustained hold on power. The drug kingpins Avon Barksdale and Marlo
Stanfield, in the show‟s exploration of the illegal drug trade, vindicate Machiavelli‟s practical
stratagems to the titular prince on armies, reputation, and Fortune; his theoretical assessment that
inspiring fear is better than inspiring love is intertwined throughout the show‟s plot.
Machiavelli explored the different types of rulers in the first few chapters of The Prince.
He discussed hereditary princes and new princes, those that acquire their position through good
luck or through nefarious actions, those that command the support of the elites as opposed to
those that command the support of the people, etc. The most important distinction according to
Machiavelli was “when categorizing rulers: One should ask if a ruler has enough resources to be
able, if necessary, to look after himself, or whether he will always be dependent on having
alliances with other rulers” (p. 34). The formidable Barksdale organization, decimated by the
incarceration of its leader, Avon Barksdale, was being led by Avon‟s right-hand man Stringer
Bell midway through season two and their business was vulnerable due to the weak quality of
their drug supply. It was in these dire straits that “Proposition” Joe Stewart approached Stringer
Bell and offered Stringer better quality drugs in return for territory in West Baltimore. Bell
wanted to capitulate, but took the offer to Avon who resolutely responded, “It's not even a
thought, man. No” (“Backwash”). Avon even in jail was loath to rely on others and in this
respect was mirrored by the young star Marlo Stanfield, who was involved in a turf war with the
Barksdale organization. Bell sought to involve Marlo in the New Day Co-op, which Bell and
Prop Joe led in order to settle issues peacefully and ensure access to high quality heroin, to
eliminate competition with Marlo over street corners. Marlo‟s response was to order his own
right-hand man to “Tell our people to tool up,” declaring a determination to continue his quest
for sole dominance over West Baltimore rather than settle for a shared peace (“Stringer Bell
Makes Marlo an Offer”).
A major player in the drug trade and leading member of the group of self-declared drug
kingpins of the region, Prop Joe was the criminal equivalent of Machiavelli‟s political elites in
this urban setting. According to The Prince, “He who comes to power with the help of the elite
has more difficulty in holding on to power than he who comes to power with the help of the
populace” (p. 31). Bell, in carrying out Avon‟s “princely” duties while the latter was in jail, put
the organization in a weak position by relying on a fellow “elite.” As he soon learned upon
joining the Co-op, one who comes to power with the help of the elites “is surrounded by many
who think of themselves as his equals, and whom he consequently cannot order about or
manipulate as he might wish” (Machiavelli, p. 31-2). This stands in stark contrast to Marlo‟s
campaign to win over the people by giving cash handouts to local children. Monk, an associate,
told Marlo afterwards, “Your name gonna ring out man,” and as successive episodes revealed,
some of these very children would later choose to work under Marlo (“Marlo Chris Monk hand
out cash to children”). Marlo was also cognizant of the fact that those that acquire power due to
the help of influential friends are virtually set up to fail. “They have no problems on the road to
power, because they leap over all the obstacles; but dangers crowd around them once they are in
power” (p. 21). Had Marlo become dependent on the Co-op supply, he would have had to
declare a cease-fire with rival gangs, abstain from acquiring further territory or strengthening his
muscle at the expense of the Barksdale crew, and would have been unable to obtain a better offer
from Prop Joe, which he later did and because of which he eventually assumed control over the
Co-op and Baltimore‟s heroin trade. Fortunate for him, he avoided such a political mishap.
Machiavelli concludes his analysis of the various types of leaders by claiming, “I would
maintain those rulers can look after themselves who have sufficient reserves, whether of troops
or of money, to be able to put together a sound army and face battle against any opponent” (p.
34). Naturally, if Avon and Marlo were, by initial comparisons, truly Machiavellian, their
emphasis on the essence of self-dependency – a standing army – would be evident. Such is the
case when Avon was finally released from prison and was alarmed at Marlo‟s encroachment on
what was formerly Barksdale territory. Avon chose to – against Stringer‟s advice – begin a
ground war with Marlo. When he ascertained the state of the organization, he was forced to ask,
“So what you tellin‟ me? We weak?” and when Slim Charles, his chief enforcer, recounted the
loss of manpower, Avon‟s response was as follows. “You go out, you get Cuddy and the best of
the rest and put a hurtin‟ on Marlo. I want my corners!” (“Avon wants his corners”). In the same
vein, a scene involving Marlo showed him questioning a runner, who complained that his
numbers were down because of intrusion by some of Barksdale‟s men. The militarism that is
characteristic of Machiavelli‟s philosophy is displayed in Marlo‟s way of doing business. “When
I ran the shop, and my numbers dropped, I damn sure did something about it…I just want „em
moved. Take the young uns with you, give „em a workout” (“Marlo questions Fruit”). Thus,
Marlo was able to take Barksdale‟s corners and keep them by maintaining a standing “army” of
enforcers that could capitalize immediately on any favorable contingency.
Since adaptability to changing political fortunes was a central quality that determined
how successfully a ruler could maintain power, the Machiavellian Prince had to know when to
adopt different characteristics as the situation demanded, for “if one knew how to change one‟s
character as times and circumstances change, one‟s luck would never change” (p. 76). Therefore,
the theorist noted, “A ruler, then, needs to know how to make good use of beastly qualities…you
must be a fox when it comes to suspecting a trap, and a lion when it comes to making the wolves
turn tail” (Machiavelli, p. 54). To understand the import of this talent to the success of a ruler, it
is useful to discuss the dynamic at the end of season three between the dueling kings in West
Baltimore. One stark example is Marlo‟s relationship with Proposition Joe.
After Prop Joe managed to convince Omar, a stick-up man who made his living by
robbing drug dealers, to dupe Marlo into joining the New Day Co-op, thereby securing Marlo‟s
support and resources for the Co-op, Prop Joe betrayed Marlo by giving Omar part of Marlo‟s
cut of an incoming heroin shipment in return for Omar‟s discretion (“A New Day”). This plan
was undermined from the beginning as Omar audaciously stole the entire shipment. Marlo
suspected inside involvement in the theft and began to act the part of the fox, asking Prop Joe
exactly who was responsible for securing the shipment, without threatening him. Prop Joe, trying
to dispel Marlo‟s alarm, responded, “My connect had his people there when the shit went down.
If that‟s what you need to make you believe, you can hear it straight from him,” thereby
revealing his heroin supplier (“Prop Joe introduces Marlo to Vondas”). Marlo thereafter went
directly to the suppliers – the Greeks – and without revealing his ambitions to double-cross Joe,
humored the middleman Spiros by saying, “I‟m not here to badmouth Prop Joe, but people
depend on me. You know, last year it was a robbery…What if this happens again…All I‟m
asking for is an insurance policy” (“Marlo meets with Vondas”). After securing a direct line to
the Greeks, Marlo capitalized on the next opportunity to get rid of Prop Joe, who was in hiding,
using Joe‟s nephew Cheese. Marlo found out that Cheese was involved in a feud with a fellow
Co-op member, and had this rival removed in exchange for information about Joe‟s whereabouts
(“Transitions”). After having Joe shot, Marlo assumed sole control of the heroin supply.
After becoming the leader of the Co-op, Marlo wasted no time in resuming the role of the
lion. “Y‟all know the Co-op took some hits,” he began at the first meeting afterwards,
“especially Joe…I know what you thinkin‟, so I‟ma put it out there. I‟m responsible…and in
light of that fact, I‟m gonna take it upon myself to conduct this meeting” (“Marlo dismantles the
Co-op”). It is thus that Marlo, through a mix of human ambition and animalistic instincts,
deposed Avon, Stringer Bell and Prop Joe and assumed supreme control over the illegal drug
trade and supply in East and West Baltimore. Avon lacked this skill, and ended up in jail at the
end of season three, because he was the epitome of a lion, “for the lion does not know how to
avoid traps…those who simply act like a lion all the time do not understand their business”
(Machiavelli, p. 54). Avon was unfit for arrangements that relied on cunning and discretion,
admitting, “I ain‟t no suit-wearing businessman…You know I‟m just a gangster I suppose”
(“Just a gangsta I suppose”).
The most important obstacle to the Prince‟s power is not how he came to power, his
army, or his character, but the most fickle of all factors – Fortuna. “I compare her to one of those
torrential rivers that, when they get angry, break their banks, knock down trees and buildings,
strip the soil from one place and deposit it somewhere else,” Machiavelli wrote (p. 74). Such a
capricious entity required an equally capricious foe, and so Machiavelli reasoned, “I also think a
ruler will flourish if he adjusts his policies as the character of the times change” (p. 75). While
Avon Barksdale was no longer the king of West Baltimore by the end of season three, his
supremacy in season one and prior to that is explained by the discretion he used to exercise in
protecting himself against the destructive advances of Fortuna. Avon always kept a lawyer on
retainer, Maurice Levy, because he was cognizant of the fact that “fortune…demonstrates her
power where precautions have not been taken to resist her” (Machiavelli, p. 75). He also realized
that “it is better to be headstrong than cautious, for fortune is a lady…she more often submits to
those who act boldly than to those who proceed in a calculating fashion” (Machiavelli, p. 76-7).
Barksdale‟s boldness was put on display when he had his men plant laced drugs in the car of CO
Tilghman, a drug dealing prison officer. When the tainted drugs caused deaths and a public
relations crisis for the city government, Avon came forward as an “informant” and had his 7-year
prison term reduced to one-year by Levy‟s bargaining skills. Capitalizing on the city‟s public
relations concerns, Levy clinched a win against Fortuna for Avon, making the offer irresistible to
the prosecutors. “After all, until someone identifies the source of the tainted heroin, you‟re gonna
have another five overdoses tomorrow” (“Stringer and Levy…”).
Machiavellian analysis of the relationship between princely prestige and fear and love is
mirrored resolutely in the show by the downfall and demise of several characters. Machiavelli
concluded, “As far as being feared and loved are concerned, since men decide for themselves
whom they love, and rulers decide whom they fear, a wise ruler should rely on the emotion he
can control, not on the one he cannot” (p. 53). Avon managed to flourish in the treacherous urban
landscape of Baltimore as long as he wielded fear as the ultimate foundation for his supremacy.
He met his downfall because of the brotherly love that existed between him and Stringer Bell,
which undoubtedly provoked Bell into taking extraordinary license with the business in Avon‟s
absence and pursuing policies contrary to Avon‟s wishes. Love in The Wire repeatedly turned
out to be an emotion that was exploited, and the betrayals it made possible turned out to be fatal
for many characters. Avon and Prop Joe tempted the love their close friends and family had for
them by trusting them with information essential to the formers‟ survival in direct contravention
to the ambitions of the latter. Regarding fear, Machiavelli was justified in his logic, e.g. when
Omar ingeniously blackmailed Prop Joe into betraying Marlo. When his boyfriend asked, “You
trust him?” Omar replied, “I trust his fear” (“Omar pays a visit”). Omar relied on fear to reign in
the actions of those he wishes to subdue because he knew they would not act contrary to their
own interests. The motives that drove Stringer and Cheese to betray Avon and Prop Joe support
Machiavelli‟s predictions that love bestowed by a leader on his subordinate can be reciprocated
or not depending wholly on the wishes of the latter, while fear proceeds involuntarily from the
weaker party and can be manipulated due to the dependability of man‟s aversion to personal loss.
The strength of the advice presented in the pages of The Prince stems from a keen insight
Machiavelli possessed on human psychology. Ultimately, Machiavelli formulated his views on
many aspects of political maneuvering, such as the ones illustrated on the show, in light of the
maxim that whenever possible, “Men are wicked and will not keep faith with you” (p. 54).
Furthermore, “In the behavior of all men, and particularly of rulers…people judge by the
outcome” (Machiavelli, p. 55). The show vindicates this crucial aspect of Machiavelli‟s
philosophy by attributing the success of Avon and Marlo to their development of self-reliance, a
standing army, and a mutable personality, and their failures to the inability to conform to the
same concepts. Most significantly, The Wire faithfully adheres to Machiavelli‟s discussion of
whether it is more beneficial for a leader to inspire fear or love. His pragmatic views on
leadership innervate the characterizations and experiences of the show‟s criminal princes.
Works Cited
“Avon wants his corners.” 28 June, 2009. Youtube. Web. 13 March, 2010.
HBO. “A New Day.” Dec, 2009. HBO: The Wire. 13 March, 2010. <http://www.hbo.com/thewire/episodes#/the-wire/episodes/4/48-a-new-day/synopsis.html>.
HBO. “Transitions.” Dec, 2009. HBO: The Wire. 13 March, 2010. <http://www.hbo.com/thewire/episodes/index.html#/the-wire/episodes/5/54-transitions/synopsis.html>.
“Just a gangsta I suppose.” 24 July, 2009. Youtube. Web. 13 March, 2010.
Machiavelli, Niccolo. Machiavelli: Selected Political Writings. Trans. David Wootton.
Indianapolis: Hackett, 1994.
“Marlo dismantles the Co-op.” 29 June, 2009. Youtube. Web. 13 March, 2010.
“Marlo meets with Vondas.” 4 May, 2008. Youtube. Web. 13 March, 2010.
“Marlo questions Fruit.” 10 March, 2009. Youtube. Web. 13 March, 2010.
“Omar pays a visit to Prop Joe‟s shop.” 15 March, 2007. Youtube. Web. 13 March, 2010.
“Prop Joe introduces Marlo to Vondas.” 20 May, 2008. Youtube. Web. 13 March, 2010.
“Stringer and Levy handle Avon‟s problem with CO Tilghman.” 5 May, 2008. Youtube. Web.
13 March, 2010.
“Stringer Bell Makes Marlo an Offer.” 18 May, 2008. Youtube. Web. 13 March, 2010.