We’ll be going A Modest Response style for the next few columns. Let’s begin with Michael O’Mahoney’s Poll Position. In his first article, he discussed why we watch wrestling. There are a few fallacies in this one that I’ll quote in italics, then address.
As Mr. Matthew Michaels astutely pointed out over on the forums, if all you care about is athleticism, workrate, and psychology, why the fuck are you watching wrestling? That’s not exactly what he said, and I added some swearing to give it a little extra oomph, but the point is valid. I love a sweet wrestling match as much as the next guy (if the next guy marks out for Naomichi Marafuji, anyway), but even the greatest of contests need context (say that ten times fast). To go back to the mid-nineties again, there was a time when the satellite channel Eurosport (If that means nothing to you, it’s because you weren’t raised in Europe) suddenly began showing some sexy NJPW goodness a couple of nights a week. For a while, I was transfixed by the promotion’s Junior Heavyweights and would tune in to see some of the world’s greatest (Liger, Sasuke, Ultimo Dragon, Owen Hart, Benoit, Guerrero) put on technical and aerial masterclasses. But after a while, I got bored of it. That’s right, some of the most gifted and celebrated performers of the last two decades were tearing the house down before my very eyes…and I got bored of it.
That’s wonderful and all, but speak for yourself. I know many people who watch wrestling for athleticism, workrate and psychology. It’s a performance art that demands an emotional investment from the fans. Our own <a href=http://wrestling.insidepulse.com/2009/08/31/alternate-reality-by-vin-tastic-exitenter-the-dragon/comment-page-1/#comment-10779 target=newVinny Truncellito is one such fan, as he’ll watch even the smallest indies to see a great performance. As for being bored of New Japan juniors, that’s fine and a personal choice, but I can watch all Japan heavyweights, which is pure workrate, all day and all night. If you need some recommendations with downloads right there, check out David Ditch’s recent stuff.
The point I’m trying to make can be demonstrated using the Jericho/Malenko feud of 1998. Two great wrestlers, many great matches. Those two in the ring together were a workrate fan’s wet dream. But the match that stands out, the one people remember, was the one where Malenko returned disguised as Ciclope at Slamboree 1998. It’s a decent match, but it’s far from the best of their confrontations from a technical standpoint. What makes it so great is the angle behind it, and the tremendous amount of work Jericho put into building it, which can plainly be heard in the massive pop Malenko gets when he peels off the Ciclope mask. Cruiserweights in WCW had always earned kudos for the quality of their matches, but this really represented the first time it was about a storyline.
That’s great and certainly true, but the flipside to the coin is that if they weren’t such good wrestlers, I wouldn’t have cared about the build-up nearly as much. Malenko, using just wrestling, became one of ECW’s most successful acts, facing Eddie Guerrero numerous times in that pure athletic competition you scoff at. That wouldn’t work in the WWE, you say? Well, explain to me how Chris Benoit vs. Chris Jericho was built, then. Pure, amazing wrestling will create drama in the ring so that fancy storylines aren’t always needed.
Still, if it’s all about the in-ring stuff, then how come we’re not all tuning into Impact each week? This is, after all, a program that regularly features at least one match comfortably breaking three star territory. Hell, there have been more than a few this past year that have snuck under the barbed wire and made a break for the land of awesome. Samoa Joe, AJ Styles, Chris Sabin, Alex Shelley, Kurt Angle, Chris Daniels, Doug Williams…these are some of the best workers North America has to offer, and they share a promotion.
Impact doesn’t usually have good wrestling. It has some good wrestlers, but several of those on that list aren’t even that. You have to deal with 25 run ins for every one great match. I won’t suffer through that ratio on the chance that AJ Styles big match gets more than four-minutes before ¾ of the roster runs in. And just because…
Kurt Angle isn’t a great wrestler. He gets lost early in matches, meaning what happens early never effects what happens late. What happens late is always the same thing, a ton of finishers and near falls tossed around without rhyme or reason. He was great with WWE agents, but in TNA, only Christian and some under-rated undercarders (notably Jay Lethal) have reigned him in.
Daniels was very good about five years ago, but since has let his character fall apart when he steps between the ropes. He’s become just another spot monkey, doing moves for the sake of them, which is a shame because of how much meaning he used to have behind everything.
Doug Williams is a great technical wrestler, but not a great wrestler. He’s injured pretty much always and well past his prime. He can still hold a match together, but can no longer create the kind of emotional investment in an audience himself to be great.
Samoa Joe appears to not care. He’s barely having serviceable matches with Homicide, a good friend of his who he was good for at least *** ½ with just about four years ago, so why go out of your way to see him?
Shelley and Sabin are fantastic. Truly top of the line, though you wouldn’t know it from TNA where they are treated as jokes who almost never get time. I really remember them facing Beer Money once and Speed Muscle. I’m supposed to hold out another six months for them to be well used again?
That leaves AJ, who is awesome now, but not long ago was a lackey, then after a short big push, became an afterthought. When given time, he’s a superstar… but how often is that?
Finally, several times throughout this article, it’s implied that pro-wrestling in the ring is about the moves done: the flashier the moves, the better the match. That’s just not the case. Pro-wrestling is about building drama using psychology and storytelling to create a compelling emotional investment in the audience. I explain this at great length right here, so please, give it a read.
Told you I’d reply, Michael.
