The "IWC" phenomenon

[Mr Wrestling X]

I mean technically speaking, the term "IWC" term could apply to anyone who engages in discussion/fan commentary/social networking within the media of professional wrestling on the internet, but that's not what this is about...

 

I'm talking about the derogatory application of the term that has become synonymous with wrestling fans who share (a derive) their opinions within communities that leech onto the same old sentiments (that include):

 

"The Attitude era was the best era in wrestling history"

"A match isn't good unless it's a 30 minute spotfest"

"Paul Heyman makes everything better"

"Vince Russo is to blame for everything"

"Pro-Wrestling needs blood to work" ....ad nauseam

 

Now whilst there are many fans in this "community" who hold these views or similar, there are many uniquely opinionated fans who are happy to be classed as being a part of the IWC. I personally have always called myself a fan, sure I'm smart to the business and have a deep interest in the inner workings, the coreography and business of professional wrestling, but I don't claim to be an expert and I welcome critique of any and/or all views that I may have about professional wrestling because that's just how it works in discussion forums. I like individuality and I stay away from generic opinion heavy communities, despite having the opportunity to share my opinions because I don't want people to take one good idea I have and believe that it's how wrestling has to be. This is naturally more likely to happen when Meltzer says something because a lot of fans latch onto him based upon his reputation without realising that his personal views are not what gave him this reputation (it was his dirt sheet and the insider information that it entaile -, the five-star ratings and podcasts came later).

 

Anyway, I'm rabbiting! Where does everyone stand on the issue of "IWC" and how it's being applied to fans?

[Loss]

I have never heard a single person say any of those things you put in quotes. Never. Not a single time. Ever.

 

Anyway, foolish is the man who only sees people in groups instead of as individuals. Internet wrestling fans argue too much to be a monolith, which should be obvious to anyone who has spent more than five minutes on a message board.

 

This topic doesn't do much for me. Please explain why the IWC is a phenomenon.

[Negro Suave]

I don't much understand what this topic is getting at. Wrestling fandom is very much like every other fandom out there in the entertainment world. And the objects of the fandom will either pander to it or ignore at will. I don't think that the moniker is a postive or negative influence.

[Loss]

Anyway, here is my thought on labels in general, courtesy of one Dr. Seuss.

 

Now, the Star-Bell Sneetches had bellies with stars.

The Plain-Belly Sneetches had none upon thars.

Those stars weren’t so big. They were really so small.

You might think such a thing wouldn’t matter at all.

 

But, because they had stars, all the Star-Belly Sneetches

Would brag, “We’re the best kind of Sneetch on the beaches.”

With their snoots in the air, they would sniff and they’d snort

“We’ll have nothing to do with the Plain-Belly sort!”

And, whenever they met some, when they were out walking,

They’d hike right on past them without even talking.

 

When the Star-Belly children went out to play ball,

Could a Plain Belly get in the game? Not at all.

You only could play if your bellies had stars

And the Plain-Belly children had none upon thars.

 

When the Star Belly Sneetches had frankfurter roasts

Or picnics or parties or marshmallow toasts,

They never invited the Plain-Belly Sneetches

They left them out cold, in the dark of the beaches.

They kept them away. Never let them come near.

And that’s how they treated them year after year.

 

Then ONE day, it seems while the Plain-Belly Sneetches

Were moping and doping alone on the beaches,

Just sitting there wishing their bellies had stars,

A stranger zipped up in the strangest of cars!

 

“My friends”, he announced in a voice clear and clean,

“My name is Sylvester McMonkey McBean.

And I’ve heard of Your troubles. I’ve heard you’re unhappy.

But I can fix that, I’m the Fix-It-Up Chappie.

 

I’ve come here to help you.

I have what you need.

And my prices are low. And I work with great speed.

And my work is one hundred per cent guaranteed!”

 

Then, quickly, Sylvester McMonkey McBean

Put together a very peculiar machine.

And he said, “You want stars like a Star-Belly Sneetch?

My friends, you can have them for three dollars each!”

 

“Just pay me your money and hop right aboard!”

So they clambered inside. Then the big machine roared.

And it klonked. And it bonked. And it jerked. And it berked.

And it bopped them about. But the thing really worked!

When the Plain-Belly Sneetches popped out, they had stars!

They actually did. They had stars upon thars!

 

Then they yelled at the ones who had stars at the start,

“We’re still the best Sneetches and they are the worst.

But now, how in the world will we know”, they all frowned,

“If which kind is what, or the other way round?”

 

Then up came McBean with a very sly wink.

And he said, “Things are not quite as bad as you think.

 

So you don’t know who’s who. That is perfectly true.

But come with me, friends. Do you know what I’ll do?

I’ll make you, again, the best Sneetches on the beaches.

And all it will cost you is ten dollars eaches.”

 

“Belly stars are no longer in style”, said McBean.

“What you need is a trip through my Star-Off Machine.

This wondrous contraption will take OFF your stars

so you won’t look like Sneetches that have them on thars.”

And that handy machine working very precisely

Removed all the stars from their tummies quite nicely.

 

Then, with snoots in the air, they paraded about.

And they opened their beaks and they let out a shout,

“We know who is who! Now there Isn’t a doubt.

The best kind of Sneetches are Sneetches without!”

 

Then, of course, those with stars got all frightfully mad.

To be wearing a star was frightfully bad.

Then, of course, old Sylvester McMonkey McBean

invited THEM into his Star-Off Machine.

 

Then, of course from THEN on, as you probably guess,

Things really got into a horrible mess.

 

All the rest of that day, on those wild screaming beaches,

The Fix-It-Up Chappie kept fixing up Sneetches.

Off again! On again! In again! Out again!

Through the machines they raced round and about again,

 

Changing their stars every minute or two. They kept paying money.

They kept running through until the Plain nor the Star-Bellies knew

Whether this one was that one or that one was this one. Or which one

Was what one or what one was who.

 

Then, when every last cent of their money was spent,

The Fix-It-Up Chappie packed up. And he went.

And he laughed as he drove In his car up the beach,

“They never will learn. No. You can’t Teach a Sneetch!”

 

But McBean was quite wrong. I’m quite happy to say.

That the Sneetches got really quite smart on that day.

The day they decided that Sneetches are Sneetches.

And no kind of Sneetch is the best on the beaches.

That day, all the Sneetches forgot about stars and whether

They had one, or not, upon thars.

[Mr Wrestling X]

I have never heard a single person say any of those things you put in quotes. Never. Not a single time. Ever.

Let's just say that before I found here, I moved between 4 or 5 popular forums that more often or not had people mention my quotes whenever discussion started about something unpopular.

 

Anyway, foolish is the man who only sees people in groups instead of as individuals. Internet wrestling fans argue too much to be a monolith, which should be obvious to anyone who has spent more than 5 minutes on a message board.

I'll give you that, although "IWC" is more geared towards a group of people with similar interests - but very different opinions.

 

This topic doesn't do much for me. Please explain why the IWC is a phenomenon.

Because it's emerged in the last few years as being the new (by people in the business) hated-upon minority of wrestling fans. I watch a lot of classic wrestling and puroresu along with WWE, but whenever I've watched ROH or any other indie promotions, the audience has acted like a progressive film critic! So many audience members in promotions such as PWG, Chikara or CZW are classic smarks, but much worse than that, they actively blur kayfabe during matches and chant smarkey shit at the wrestlers. It used to be dirt sheets and those who called wrestlers by their real names that were hated by the business, but now fans who are active in internet discussion have become a nuisance. There have been instances of storylines being changed because of internet leaks...

 

But the main stigma that revolves around the IWC term is those who latch onto an opinion, as if it were gospel, by a dirt sheet writer or a well known wrestling blogger because they think it makes them sound like they have the business sussed. Anybody who claims to be a smark (those exact words) or who calls anyone who doesn't share a popular opinion a "mark" is labeled a member of the IWC.

[Mr Wrestling X]

I don't much understand what this topic is getting at.

I'm curious as to where people stand on the issue of being classed as a member of vilified community because they use the internet to socialise and discuss their interest/hobby/passion/distraction.

[Loss]

Someone actually said, in those words, that a match isn't good unless it's a 30 minute spotfest?

 

People in wrestling have really thin skin and look down on people who aren't in wrestling. I'm not sure they should care what we think, nor am I sure we should care what they think.

 

Anybody who claims to be a smark (those exact words) or who calls anyone who doesn't share a popular opinion a "mark" is labeled a member of the IWC.

By whom?

[Coffey]

I have never heard a single person say any of those things you put in quotes. Never. Not a single time. Ever.

www.wrestlingforum.com

 

I bet you don't last ten minutes...

[Johnny Guitar]

I'm a massive film fan and those five points you listed could easily be appplied to discussions movie buffs have.

 

Just switch the names.

 

"The 70's was the best era in film history".

"A film isn't any good unless it's over two hours".

"Quentin Tarantino makes everything better".

"Michael Bay is to blame for everything".

"Films need swearing and violence to work".

 

Some fans think Ebert's word is gospel. One guy on the Empire boards thinks Eberts cancer gave him brain damage and is opnion is therefore irrelevant.

 

Football fans. Comic fans. Baseball fans. Music fans and so on will all have names and themes they can put to those points. Every group has it's own talking points that come up time and again.

 

IWC sounds like a wrestling company. I thought that was the joke.

[Loss]

I'm not going there. Why purposely open myself up to something that you say I won't like?

 

But I refuse to believe that anyone would actually say, word for word, that everything is Vince Russo's fault.

 

Everything?

 

Hunger? Political corruption? The lack of good radio stations? The collapse of the banking system?

[Coffey]

He was obviously paraphrasing. You know what he meant!

 

And that forum has 215k members. It's quite amazing, really. Not the forum itself but just the popularity.

[Loss]

He said they were exact quotes! I seek to understand.

[Mr Wrestling X]

Someone actually said, in those words, that a match isn't good unless it's a 30 minute spotfest?

You know what I mean, The point I was getting at was people rubbishing the more traditional matches because they don't contain the elements associated with what some people might call a 30 minute spotfest.

 

By whom?

The IWC is popularly classed as a label for the wrestling fans who criticise the business without actually understanding what they are talking about, by those in the business. Outside of the business, it's slightly different because no wrestling fan can truly understand the business unless they've been a part of it - or at least that's what I understand from trying to understand some of the more intricate workings of the business, and I'm sure that's the same for anyone else here who isn't a part of the business.

 

Therefore, anybody who trolls others for not subscribing to popular views or opinions expressed by people with reputation, are automatically shifted to that negative part of the fandom by anybody who chooses to follow their own opinions as a fan. It's hard to really put it into words, but what I'm trying to get at is that subcultures have emerged within the fandom and those using the same media (internet) to engage with other members of the fandom risk being labeled as something they aren't a part of.

[Dylan Waco]

Is the IWC even a term that gets used that much anymore? I honestly don't know

[Loss]

In the future, if something is a paraphrase, indicate that. It shouldn't go in quotes. You went from direct quotes, to telling me 4-5 people say this in every single thread on other message boards where divisive topics are discussed, to "You know what I mean."

 

I honestly don't have a clue.

 

Wrestling is pretty easy to understand. The idea that you have to be part of it to understand it is silly. That doesn't mean we know everything, but no one knows everything about wrestling. The last people whose opinions I care about are wrestlers. I don't even know any wrestlers.

 

I like what I like.

I don't like what I don't like.

I usually post about it either way.

 

That's it. It's not some attempt to change wrestling, or hope that someone in power reads my posts and has an epiphany that they have been doing everything wrong. That's awfully egocentric.

 

Who cares if we're mislabeled by people in wrestling? Many wrestlers apparently think all pro sports are worked. We don't own their opinions, and there's nothing we can do about their opinions.

[Negro Suave]

I'm a massive film fan and those five points you listed could easily be appplied to discussions movie buffs have.

 

Just switch the names.

 

"The 70's was the best era in film history".

"A film isn't any good unless it's over two hours".

"Quentin Tarantino makes everything better".

"Michael Bay is to blame for everything".

"Films need swearing and violence to work".

 

Some fans think Ebert's word is gospel. One guy on the Empire boards thinks Eberts cancer gave him brain damage and is opnion is therefore irrelevant.

 

Football fans. Comic fans. Baseball fans. Music fans and so on will all have names and themes they can put to those points. Every group has it's own talking points that come up time and again.

 

IWC sounds like a wrestling company. I thought that was the joke.

 

This is pretty much what I am getting at. Don't let the narrow field of your interests make you believe that Internet Wrestling fans are any more or less villified than internet Star Wars fans, or Internet Harry Potter fans, or Internet Local Sports Team fans. Wrestling is not that special in that regard the only thing that makes it special is the amount of enjoyment or whatever else you get out of it.

 

And the other thing is... Villified by who? Other members of that community? Casual fans dont know the internet fans so who is villifying who?

[Negro Suave]

Many wrestlers apparently think all pro sports are worked. We don't own their opinions, and there's nothing we can do about their opinions.

 

Hey... some of us believe that everything on TV is a work to a certain degree myself being one of them. There is some grade a worksmanship out there.

[Loss]

I want to try to work those things into daily conversation.

 

"It's raining again! Ugh, damn Russo! Everything is his fault."

[Negro Suave]

I want to try to work those things into daily conversation.

 

"It's raining again! Ugh, damn Russo! Everything is his fault."

"You know what this sandwich needs? PAUL F'N HEYMAN"

[Gregor]

I like individuality and I stay away from generic opinion heavy communities, despite having the opportunity to share my opinions because I don't want people to take one good idea I have and believe that it's how wrestling has to be.

I don't mind generic opinions. To me, they're no better or worse than outlier opinions. As long as you explain why something is your opinion, that's fine with me. And if you don't, and you say something like "I dunno why I like it. I just do,"* then my reaction would probably be something along the lines of "Yeah, sometimes it can be hard to explain why certain things resonate more strongly than others."* But I'm not a very confrontational person.

 

*Please note that neither of these quotes is intended to serve as an exact representation of anything that anyone has said. Please also note that I am not ruling out the possibility that someone, somewhere, actually has said these things.

[rovert]

Is the IWC even a term that gets used that much anymore? I honestly don't know

Goodness gracious yes. Revived like a motherfucker. Mainly just as a generalisation tool.

[Dylan Waco]

Really? I'm not doubting you, but I rarely use the term myself and don't recall seeing it/hearing it as much in the last couple of years

[Loss]

I like individuality and I stay away from generic opinion heavy communities, despite having the opportunity to share my opinions because I don't want people to take one good idea I have and believe that it's how wrestling has to be.

I don't mind generic opinions. To me, they're no better or worse than outlier opinions. As long as you explain why something is your opinion, that's fine with me. And if you don't, and you say something like "I dunno why I like it. I just do,"* then my reaction would probably be something along the lines of "Yeah, sometimes it can be hard to explain why certain things resonate more strongly than others."* But I'm not a very confrontational person.

 

*Please note that neither of these quotes is intended to serve as an exact representation of anything that anyone has said. Please also note that I am not ruling out the possibility that someone, somewhere, actually has said these things.

 

No worries, Gregor, I have no desire to troll you.

[med2089]

Really? I'm not doubting you, but I rarely use the term myself and don't recall seeing it/hearing it as much in the last couple of years

There was a board I was frequenting (the In Your Head Wrestling Radio board) for a little while where the term IWC was thrown around like the word "the" on a daily basis. I personally thought that the idea of an IWC went away in 2004 or so.

[JerryvonKramer]

I think that by this stage "The IWC" actually has a few quite large sub groupings.

 

1. People stuck in the early 00s mindset, similar to those laid out in the OP. The quotes Mr. Wrestling X pulled out seem to have a hardcore / ECW bias, but there's also a probably much bigger variant that has a workrate bias -- thinking Malenko vs. Guerrero in 96 was the best match ever, or that Benoit was the best worker ever or Shawn or Bret Hart and that's where the conversation ends -- and probably many many of the members here were once fans of this general type. The low-end version of one of these fans is Scott Keith. This is sort of the lazy, default "IWC" attitude, probably a good few years out of date now.

 

These guys may well have turned their back on the current product and their point of reference is still the Monday Night Wars and their high benchmarks are still Bret, Shawn or Benoit matches. Huge amount of people out there in this boat.

 

2. People stuck more in an 80s / early 90s mindset. Similar to those above, but they'll point to "golden age" examples from NWA or WWF (or the territories) instead as their watermarks. Possibly more of an understanding or emphasis on "guys playing their role" here and on psychology and storytelling over workrate. Also a huge amount of people out there in this boat.

 

3. "Smart" fans who analyse the current product inside and out, who really really know WWE very well and possibly TNA and some of the super indies too. On the high end this is people like John Pollack and Wai Ting who do the LAW. These are basically your current smarky fanbase. Again, huge amount of people like this, especially younger fans.

 

4. "Post-IWC" or "enlightened" fans -- which I'd say is a lot of the people on DVDR, here and related forums. This is more your Dylan or Loss, devoted to watching lots of footage from any era, any promotion, any time and developing a real appreciation for workers of all different styles. A strong aspect of this type of fandom is challenging received wisdom and lazy opinions by actually taking the time and really watching and analyzing stuff to put those opinions to the test. Basically anyone who has stuck around PWO long enough has more than a hint of this in them. Far far fewer people in this group.

 

5. Specialist fan -- could be puro, could be extreme hardcore, could be lucha -- just an enthusiast for a particular niche. This may or may not come with the trait of thinking everything in said niche is better than . More people in this boat than in 4, but far fewer than 1, 2 or 3.

 

------------

 

These five categories are not mutually exclusive, could have a bit of two or three of them or even have aspects of all 5. But the vast majority slot into 1, 2 or 3.

 

I'm probably predominantly a 2 and a 4 with a hint of 1 and a dash of 5. No interest in 3 at all.