An Indicative Scene?

So, while watching A Serious Man, for some reason a scene from the Wire popped into my head. It was the one in which Marlo steals a lollipop or some crap from a corner store when he knows the security guard is watching, and then when confronted outside says to the guy, "You want it to be one way. But it's the other way." I've been trying to clarify what he is saying. It's important that he says the other way, not an other way. There are, in his view, two possible ways the world can be. One is the way the security guard wants to see it. The first way, the one in which, when he goes outside to talk to Marlo, the security guard engages in a conversation based on mutual respect that ends with Marlo acknowledging that though the law abiding life is not the one he has chosen, it is a valid one. It is a way that, despite the reality of drugs and violence, is based on principles and a kind of moral code. But for Marlo, principle takes second seat to his ego, to his attachment to his "name."
I found the clip on youtube,


and there were some insightful comments following the clip. There were several that caught my attention. The first was about Marlo's obsession with power, which I think is supported very well by the lollitheft. Marlo has no reason not to pay for it, and he makes sure the guard sees him and realizes he can do nothing. The second comment noted the difference between Marlo and most of the other players. Stringer, Avon, Omar, even Prop Joe etc. These men have very different goals from Marlo, and, despite often producing the same results, different ways of operating. I think the closest anyone comes of the four is Stringer, when he mutilates Brandon. I think that "other way" as Marlo expresses it, is the way in which it is whether you win or lose, not how you play the game.
There are many examples of criminals, though breaking the law, following specific rules. The Sunday truce for example, or basically anything Omar does (that guys a walking code of honour). Can you picture Avon stealing that candy, or Stringer. Definitely not Omar, remember the time he robs the stash in that store and then pays for cigarettes?
I think David Simon is demonstrating more than just the differences between these characters. I think that when Stanfield says "it's the other way," he's speaking to us as viewers as well. Most of the characters in The Wire, despite being involved in the drug trade, or crooked police, or part of the structure perpetuating suffering, are sympathetic. We like Avon, we like Omar, we like Brother Muzone. Stringer, maybe not so much, but he is closer morally to Marlo than the others. Marlo is reminding us of the reality. The "game" we see on the Wire, the one Bodie talks about when he is reminiscing about the days before Marlo, is idealized, romanticized, just like what we're watching. The unprincipled reality that we see briefly through Marlo is probably much closer to the real thing than the rest of the show.
Despite the tragedy of the cycle apparent in The Wire, we see Marlo getting "justice" at the end of the series (and here I am deriving from another YouTube comment), through the ruin of his name. This, with the cast of likeable drug dealers and crooked cops, serves to remind us that although this series is closer to reality than the vast majority of crap on TV, we're still watching extremely well written and socially important television. It's still entertainment, and we are seeing it one way, but it's probably the other way.