Politics and the death of the territories

[flyonthewall2983]

I think Bryan was better at it, where Punk's bread and butter was being a heel.

 

Cena has a little bit of it too. He dresses normally and he can be dead serious in his promos as he can be big and broad.

[Lust Hogan]

Bryan was good at being a more pure babyface, IMO. Punk's sarcasm, especially towards authority really helped him as a babyface. Cents has it but seems handcuffed by Creative as to the image he is to project.

[Loss]

Austin had both the larger-than-life aura and the working class appeal. He's the type of guy that we're lucky if we get one of every generation in wrestling.

 

I do think Bryan had the potential to represent a new form of that. He felt like a product of the times more than anyone they had pushed in that role since Austin.

[ohtani's jacket]

I think you could say that Punk and Bryan are the modern equivalent to the blue collar hero, "regular" looking guys who came up through the indies and appealed to fans as "one of us"

 

Punk doesn't really strike me as a regular looking guy in the blue collar sense. Build-wise, sure.

[Bierschwale]

funny I was just watching a Martin Scorcese interview from about 20 years ago and he revealed that after the gritty and realistic films of the 70s he had trouble getting work in the early 80s. Studio heads wanted to shift away from harsh reality and towards a less cynical, more "ideal" reality. Francis Coppola and Michael Cimmino and other directors went through the same thing.

 

Robert Zemeckis is one of Satan's greatest minions.

[Jesse Ewiak]

I think there's a point about the homogenization of wrestling being tied to the larger homogenization of America in general. Through the mid to late 80's, each region of the country had their own department stores, gas stations, fast food places, and the like. Sure, there was a few national chains, but they were part of a larger range of companies. Now, I'm stealing this joke, but if you kidnapped me and dropped me off in a very large percentage of the country in the exurban big box shopping areas, the only way I'd be able to instantly figure out where I was would be the weather and the accent of the people. Because the stores would all be the same - Target, Wal-Mart, Best Buy, Home Depot, Outback, etc.

 

It's the same thing with wrestling. But, the more odd thing is that even the "counterculture" of wrestling is like the "counterculture/hipsterism" of today. After all, thanks to the Internet, the same 20-30 guys are the 'hot' indy guys that PWG, EVOLVE, AAW, and all the other big indies want on their show. After all, before LU was a think, Fenix was not getting booking on PWG shows. So, just like every 'hip' area has the same types of restaurants and shops, even if the names are different, most indie companies are shooting for the same audience. With few exceptions, there isn't even the differences of the early oughts, where you had the Northeastern indies, the West Coast indies the Midwestern indies of IWA-MS et all, and the Southern indies with Wildside and everything else. If you get good, everybody wants to book you because you're getting Youtube hits.

 

Now, I'm not saying that's a bad thing for the wrestlers, but it's odd that for all the talk about "WWE all looking the same", everybody wants the same, but different thing on the independent circuit.

[fxnj]

For the vast majority of Indy promotions out there it actually still is the same as it's always been with promotions relying on local guys and bringing in name talent for the occasional one-off.

 

What you're talking about is only seen in the super indies, where it's simple business to load the card up with name guys regularly if you have the cash for it and your goal is to be recognized as a big promotion. We are definitely past the point of there being guys who only draw in a certain region, what with social media being out there to get the word out.

 

I think what's in place is more of a feeder system than a counterculture. Guys start out wrestling locally then when they get good the promotion starts booking them against name guys to build their brand on social media. Then they get bookings in those super indies after they get a good following and finally get a shot at the big leagues.

[MoS]

Excellent read, and was actually very informative for me about America's socio-political evolution - and the Western world in general, I guess. Holy shit Newt Gingrich wanted to quarantine gay people? Fuck, wasn't he a Presidential candidate recently? Jesus.

 

Also, fuck John Wayne. I realise I am not close to his target audience, because I am a brown dude in India who doesn't cheer for Murrican troops, but his entire shtick is a huge turn-off for me.

[Ricky Jackson]

John Wayne was awesome, as a performer anyway

[Johnny Sorrow]

Yeah, John Wayne was a great actor who was in a lot of incredible movies like "Stagecoach", "Red River", "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance", "The Searchers", "She Wore A Yellow Ribbon", "Fort Apache", "The Quiet Man, "Hondo", "Rio Bravo", "True Grit", The Shootist"...and so many others.

And the guy saying "Fuck John Wayne" has an av with a guy dressed up like John Wayne..

And yes, you arent in John Wayne's "target audience." Not because you're a brown dude in India, because you aren't 79 years old.

[overbooked]

As a little tid-bit, did you know that the He-Man cartoon was developed after the action figures with the express purpose of shifting more units? When they introduced new characters it was because Mattell told Filmation there was going to be X and Y character in the new line.

 

I'd always heard stories like this about 80s kids shows, and now I know at least one of them is true. This business model doesn't seem that far off the WWF/E model. I'm pretty sure we could collate a few examples of a WWF gimmick being thought up first, then applied to whichever wrestler came through the door. Wrestling characterisation became far less nuanced and reality-based, and more "product"-orientated, a 2D caricature with a logo and distinctive outfit that can be played by anyone and is there to shift merch rather than tell compelling stories in the ring.

 

Essentially, this all dovetails nicely into the theory that Vince would rather present wrestling with no wrestling at all. The aim is not to make the wrestling, nor the wrestlers, the draw. The draw is the product.

 

A couple of questions from all this that may or may not deserve a separate thread:

 

1. Could we make a case that not only did politics change wrestling, but also changed what happened in the ring too? Hulk Hogan's act was pretty heel-ish at times, which kind of aligns with some of the US foreign policy of the time where you can use force by any means as long as you think you're morally right. Later on, even Austin seems like a rugged individualist rather than working class hero when I think about it. Here was someone who worked and acted as someone just looking out for himself, couldn't be trusted, almost had a touch of the Ayn Rand about him at times. But I'm probably getting carried away there.

 

2. As wrestling moved from spectacle to product did it fundamentally change how we appreciate and critically approach it? I think analysing wrestling as primarily a live experience where workers and audience react off one another leads to certain conclusions. If we watch the same match as primarily a passive experience, as something recorded for tape, TV, streaming service etc, we can easily come to a different set of conclusions. Are both approaches valid? Should we approach the match according to how it was actually presented (spectacle vs product) or should we try to consider it from all angles?

[Gutenberger]

An example for Gimmick first, Wrestler last would be Mr. Perfect and the Red Rooster, wehre they hab both these gimmicks and weren't sure whom they should be given to.

[El-P]

almost had a touch of the Ayn Rand about him at times. But I'm probably getting carried away there.

 

So he should have come out to Tom Sawyer, not KVE.

[Jingus]

I'd argue that the whole Stone Cold character wasn't very Randian at all, considering that his mortal arch-enemy was a capitalist entrepreneur who was portrayed as being a brilliant self-made businessman while also happening to be a selfish sociopathic piece of egomaniacal shit. That's pretty much the direct opposite of the way that rich people are portrayed in Atlas Shrugged and the like.

[overbooked]

I'd argue that the whole Stone Cold character wasn't very Randian at all, considering that his mortal arch-enemy was a capitalist entrepreneur who was portrayed as being a brilliant self-made businessman while also happening to be a selfish sociopathic piece of egomaniacal shit. That's pretty much the direct opposite of the way that rich people are portrayed in Atlas Shrugged and the like.

 

Well, I did say I was getting carried away!

 

However, I do think there is a distinct shift from say, Dusty Rhodes the working class hero, standing up to the Man yet also looking out for others, making saves, mentoring young guys and Steve Austin, who stands up to the Man but essentially has no loyalty or empathy for anyone else. Austin and McMahon both seemed to be sociopaths in their own way.

[El-P]

 

I'd argue that the whole Stone Cold character wasn't very Randian at all, considering that his mortal arch-enemy was a capitalist entrepreneur who was portrayed as being a brilliant self-made businessman while also happening to be a selfish sociopathic piece of egomaniacal shit. That's pretty much the direct opposite of the way that rich people are portrayed in Atlas Shrugged and the like.

 

Well, I did say I was getting carried away!

 

However, I do think there is a distinct shift from say, Dusty Rhodes the working class hero, standing up to the Man yet also looking out for others, making saves, mentoring young guys and Steve Austin, who stands up to the Man but essentially has no loyalty or empathy for anyone else.

 

He did save Stephy from the deadly hands of Evil Taker though.

[Migs]

 

I think you could say that Punk and Bryan are the modern equivalent to the blue collar hero, "regular" looking guys who came up through the indies and appealed to fans as "one of us"

 

Punk doesn't really strike me as a regular looking guy in the blue collar sense. Build-wise, sure.

 

 

Punk looks like a regular guy if you go to punk or hard rock shows. Which is a piece of the fan base, and is blue collar in a way.

[JRH]

 

 

I'd argue that the whole Stone Cold character wasn't very Randian at all, considering that his mortal arch-enemy was a capitalist entrepreneur who was portrayed as being a brilliant self-made businessman while also happening to be a selfish sociopathic piece of egomaniacal shit. That's pretty much the direct opposite of the way that rich people are portrayed in Atlas Shrugged and the like.

 

Well, I did say I was getting carried away!

 

However, I do think there is a distinct shift from say, Dusty Rhodes the working class hero, standing up to the Man yet also looking out for others, making saves, mentoring young guys and Steve Austin, who stands up to the Man but essentially has no loyalty or empathy for anyone else.

 

He did save Stephy from the deadly hands of Evil Taker though.

 

And when he had that week as a CEO, he told them to take Vince's salary for that month and give it to Mankind (who was recovering from an injury both in real life and storyline at the time).

[NintendoLogic]

I think this conversation is focusing a bit too much on the cultural dimension and not enough on the political/economic one. The natural tendency in business in the absence of regulation is toward monopoly, and wrestling is no different. But the NWA was able to enjoy a favorable regulatory environment for the first three decades of its existence due to key members having friends in high places. For example, as a cartel, the NWA was pretty blatantly illegal. But Sam Muchnick was good friends with Congressman Mel Price, who helped the Alliance negotiate a consent decree (which they of course ignored) prohibiting them from doing things like blackballing wrestlers and recognizing exclusive rights to territories. Another example: in the wake of the quiz show scandals of the 50s, Congress passed a law prohibiting fixed contests from being aired on television. Nick Gulas was close to Senator Estes Kefauver, so he got a rider exempting professional wrestling added to the bill. But airwaves don't recognize territorial boundaries, and we now know that fans generally won't pay to see wrestlers they view as second-rate when they can watch the big stars on TV for free. In addition, the Alliance members had largely developed an every-man-for-himself mentality by the end of the 70s. As such, even if Vince hadn't gone national, the spread of cable most likely would have led to open warfare between the territories ending in a single nationwide monopoly.

[andrew79]

Deleted.

 

Decided I didn't want to get involved.