|
|
|
|
|
Submitted by aisce on Monday, February 18, 2008 at 11:05 PM EST
 Without writers, wrestling would never have evolved into what is now know as 'sports entertainment', and thus would never have emerged from the sideshow booths. Showmanship is now an integral part, even of legitimate sports, as anyone who has just witnessed the pageantry of the Superbowl, or seen the razzmatazz of a World Cup can testify. While the primary focus of many fans is on what happens in the ring, it is the trapping which adorn the action which do much to make it a spectacle. Stripped of gimmicks, characters and storylines, wrestling would be plain indeed, and would not command the appeal and the audience which it does today. Those whose job it is to script the shows are often unfairly maligned: the armchair fan only has to pass the occasional opinion on what he is served up. The WWE writing staff have to produce several hours of television on a weekly basis. This column is meant to redress a perceived injustice by offering some credit where it is due.   April is the cruellest month in the wrestling calendar. The aftermath of Wrestlemania leaves some counting their bonuses, whilst others find their careers rationalised away with those trite words about being wished the best in their future endeavours. Still more find that it is a time to have their characters re-assessed and possibly re-packaged. This may take the form of a full-blown face/heel turn, or it may simply be a matter of a change in ring attire, forming a new allegiance, or coming out every week to a different entrance theme. The constant re-packaging of wrestlers, and the ceaseless invention of new gimmicks and angles in which to place them, makes peculiar and interesting demands on both the audience and the writing team. Over a relatively short time period, a wrestler may find themselves presenting several, widely differing characters. This is, of course, the perennial fate of a life-long jobber like Steve Lombardi, as such men are used by writers simply as a 'blank canvas' upon which to project their own creations (as one of the Doinks, Knuckleball Schwartz, and the Brooklyn Brawler). Consider also, however, a wrestler of considerably higher status, such as Mick Foley who has played such diverse gimmicks as Mankind, Dude Love, and Cactus Jack during his career. It is the task of both wrestler and writer to make this transition convincing: to make you forget about the previous character and buy-in to the new one. This is something which WWE creative has been rather good at. Yes, there have been gimmicks so terrible as to almost destroy a person's career (the Red Rooster), but there have been many successes. Both Stone Cold Steve Austin and the Rock, the touchstones of modern gimmick excellence, were repackaged wrestlers: the triumphs of their new personae burying any lingering perceptions of their former ones. Although many will disagree, the Kerwin White character was also a stroke of creative genius. Prior to his uncle's death, Chavo Guerrero was largely uninteresting, permanently in the shadow of his more illustrious relative. The time and effort that clearly went into re-imagining him as Kerwin White gave him the perfect opportunity to emerge from that shadow and show that there was more to him than being just mid-card Latino #47. The truly smart fan would have appreciated the irony of a Mexican having to re-brand himself as the quintessential WASP in order to get over, and relished the subtextual racial commentary it provided. At the very least they could have appreciated the attempt to imbue Chavo with some character. In many ways, the abilities of both the writers and performers of new gimmicks are akin to those which are necessary in a repertory theatre company (such as that which existed in Shakespeare's day). The actors have to be flexible and skilled enough to portray a different character each night (some may have to fill several roles with a single play). They have little rehearsal time, and only the minimum of assistance from costumes and properties. They rely on the quality of the writing and their own acting talents in order to please and convince. The same is true in professional wrestling: face turns, heel turns, gimmick tweaks and new characters to not magically appear by themselves. They are the product of hard work behind the scenes by writers and wrestlers, giving you, the fan, another opportunity to suspend your disbelief and enjoy the pageantry.   Of course, one of the main vehicles by which such changes are made convincing, is their incorporation into feuds. These feuds are what define eras and the memories of fans. Hogan vs. Savage, The Undertaker vs. Foley, Stone Cold vs. The Rock . . . they all require plotting, pacing and motivation. The common assumption is that 'feuds write themselves', only they do not. Real-life antagonism, such as that which existed between Foley and Flair, or Edge and Matt Hardy, may provide the impetus for a programme, but that must then be communicated to the audience and given a place within the shows. Sometimes it is the gimmicks themselves which suggest material for a feud. Sgt. Slaughter's career-making WWF run as a face was centred around a natural enmity between the patriotic embodiment of American military muscle and the representative of all things Arab (and therefore, wrong) in the shape of the Iron Sheik. This was pretty standard fare, and merely a variation on the USA vs. the Nasty Foreigners angle that has been played out so many times before (think of the numerous 'Team Canada' factions, Ludvig Borga, or the Cold War era career of Nikolai Volkoff). It pales in comparison with the interest and the ensation generated by Slaughter's Gulf War heel turn, as he became an Iraqi sympathiser, allied with General Adnan and, eventually his old adversary, the Iron Sheik (as Colonel Mustafa). This angle caused, predictably an uproar, and went beyond what McMahon had publically stated were the boundaries of good taste for his promotion. It was a classic piece of topical scripting by the writing and booking team, providing a twist on a much-used scenario and creating one of the most memorable storylines of all time. Sometime, however, it is the little twists and additions that are written into feuds which elevate them beyond the ordinary. Take, as an example, the recent pre-injury feud between John Cena and Randy Orton. For weeks it was nothing out of the ordinary: just the company's top heel and top face feuding over the title. Many fans were, in fact, eager for Cena to drop the belt, but few were entirely convinced by Orton who had looked scarcely better than average in the ring and on the mic. That changed significantly when it was decided to write Cena's father into the feud. Simply by having Orton viciously kick him in the head, a new dynamic was added. Suddenly Cena became a man with a grudge who was out for revenge, as opposed to being the guy who fought the odds in order to stay on top. At the same time, Orton's heel persona deepened and connected in a way he hadn't managed previously: he now appeared credible in the role of amoral, arrogant thug. For the first time in their feud, people started to wonder if a planned title change was indeed on the cards. It is seldom enough, particularly within the context of several hours of weekly programming, for wrestlers to simply compete for honour or sporting glory. It is the writers and bookers who flesh out the bare bones of competition, supplying feuds based on gimmicks (or subversions of them) and introducing those dramatic touches which can ignite an otherwise predictable contest.   The more consummate the gimmick, the more potential for engaging entertainment. Seldom, if ever, has there been such a detailed wrestling persona as that of Kane. Although his story has evolved considerably, and been extensively retconned, throughout the ten years that Glen Jacobs has played the character, the figure of Kane has always held the attention and interest of the audience. His backstory as the bastard half-brother of the Undertaker, the result of a furtive coupling involving Paul Bearer as the unlikeliest of lotharios, who destroyed their parents and hideously scarred himself by immolating the Funeral Home in which they lived, is one of the most thorough and iconic in wrestling. Indeed, it was to provide sufficient material for a full length novel, albeit of the pulp variety, in the shape of Michael Chiapetta and David Stern's Journey Into Darkness. The recurring motifs of fire, and the fear of fire have informed many of Kane's better matches and storylines. Including the legendary inferno match with the Undertaker at Unforgiven in 1998. His kayfabe mental instability, and the mask which hid his scarred face were key factors in presenting him as a 'monster'. His pyrotechnic-laden entrances, with flame-image visuals, red-and-black wrestling gear, and the slow, menacing tones of 'Slow Chemical' compliment this perfectly, as does his apparently quasi-supernatural ability to trigger bursts of fire when he reaches the ring. It speaks volumes for the enduring fascination which the gimmick holds, that the character remains a favourite with fans, despite often being on the losing side. He even survived a terribly mishandled 'unmasking' at the hands of HHH which, despite the vehement insistence to the contrary by Jim Ross, revealed him to be not quite as hideously deformed as was expected. A large part of the success of the Kane character may be rightfully attributed to the skill of Glen Jacobs in taking on the role. What secured the long term success, however, success that did not come the way of Isaac Yankem of Unabomb, was the genius of the concept. In wrestling terms, the character of Kane is a deep and complex one which has allowed subsequent writers to portray him in such a way that, no matter how many times he jobs, his entrances will always be an event, and he will always be able to stake a claim to the upper-mid card. If the will existed within the WWE, it would not take much to propel him into the main event at any time.   Kane's involvement in inferno matches is the perfect example of congruency between character and match type. Gimmick matches themselves have, of course, always been a part of wrestling history, existing long before regularly televised wrestling and the WWE. Blindfold matches, cage matches, bull rope matches, death matches . . . they all have a venerable tradition. Yet audiences are seldom satisfied with the status quo. The appetite for more spectacular, often more bizarre encounters, has fuelled those who write for wrestling promotions to come up with many variations on the theme of the basic wrestling match. It is this impetus which lies behind some of the more extreme bouts perpetrated by hardcore federations, where the winner is decided by putting his opponent through a latticework of light tubes, or by immersing him in a tank of piranhas. It also lies behind the development of the cage match into the Hell in a Cell and the Elimination Chamber. The best gimmick matches are those which are written into feuds to take advantage of the attributes of the participants (though the bra-and-panties match falls into this category too). This is why the series of tag-team TLC matches were so successful: they played to the strengths of the wrestlers involved. Edge and Christian could be scheming heels, the Dudley Boyz could exhibit their fondness for the more hardcore style, and of course the Hardyz, were able to exploit their capacity for death-defying, high-risk moves, the most famous being Jeff's Swanton Bomb from the top of a ladder at Wrestlemania X-Seven. Similarly, the wildly popular, often show-stealing Money in the Bank matches are perfectly designed for the purpose of showcasing the athletic talents of the upper-mid card and propelling the winner into the main event, as was the case with Edge, RVD and (were it not for his injury) Mr Kennedy. Sometimes, when gimmick matches are tailored to a storyline, the results are less pleasing. The infamous Kennel from Hell match between Al Snow and the Big Bossman must have seemed like a logical way to end a feud which involved Bossman kidnapping, killing, and serving up Snow's dog Pepper as a meal. Unfortunately, the execution only confirmed the wisdom of the old adage about not working with children and animals. In general, however, the creation and modification of gimmick matches has provided the WWE writers with an invaluable tool for use in ending a feud, kick-starting a push, or bringing a sense of occasion to a main event.   When it comes to the implementation of any major WWE storyline, gimmick, or feud, the final say rests with the Chairman, Vince McMahon. His somewhat old-fashioned sensibilities and tenuous grasp on modern culture have occasionally led him into some strange decisions, such his alleged termination of the 'Blonde Bytch Project skits, and Paul Burchill's popular Jack Sparrow-esque gimmick because of his lack of awareness of the films which they referenced. Generally, though, despite an oft-criticised tendency to hog the spotlight, Vince has been something of a gift to the WWE writing team. His portrayal of the Mr McMahon character made him into one of the most effective heels in wrestling, and his continued presence has served the televised product well through some of its darker days. For example, when the then WWF was taking a pounding during the Monday Night Wars, the feud between McMahon and Austin provided the promotion with its most substantial and compelling feud. Indeed, it is doubtful whether Stone Cold's blue collar rebel character would have had such an impact if he did not have such a tremendous foil, in the shape of Mr McMahon. More recently he has demonstrated his willingness to undergo personal humiliation in the quest to secure ratings (being shaved bald at Wrestlemania 23) and was the central figure in what was the most attention-grabbing pro-wrestling story in recent memory when his death was faked, shockingly, on live television. Had an even more sensational story in the shape of the Benoit murder-suicide not forced the cancellation of the angle, it could well have developed into one of the most interesting storylines in years. As the hands-on overseer of the WWE, Vince McMahon is the natural target of criticism from those armchair bookers who believe that they could do better. The writing team too comes in for more than its fair share of opprobrium as the audience takes issue with objectionable storylines and match outcomes. Yet, consider the task that lies before them. Wrestling without writing would be a poor spectacle indeed. Several hours of weekly airtime filled with random encounters, only a very few of which are given meaning by having a title on the line. To that basic framework, the writing team have to bring purpose and structure. They must cater to a diverse audience encompassing markish children, cynical teens, and those who remember the days when everyone ran the ropes for twenty minutes and wrestling was 'real'. When the writing team gets it wrong, the failure can be considerable, yet there are many occasions on which they get it right: the creation of a memorable character, the effective re-packaging of a wrestler, an intense and well-scripted feud, or a superbly worked pay-off. These are the things which wrestling fans remember, and on which their appreciation of sports entertainment is founded. If wrestling really is a 'soap-opera for men' and the wrestlers actors in it, it is worth remembering that each actor is only as good as the script allows them to be. If you would like to leave feedback or comments, you may send an email to the following address: aisceiyh@gmail.com All graphics are by the very wonderful KrazE designs. Thank you for reading. ~aisce ***DIRECT LINK*** AMAZING Gallery of SoCalVal in HOT B&P's!! Whoa!!
|
|