Is it heretical to admit that the WWE was not the most important wrestling promotion on the planet in this young aspiring booker's life? In common with many people scattered around message boards on the Internet, the most impressionable period of my life coincided with an uninspiring movie-like WWF creative system. That incorporated Silicone bimbos with an inaptitude for breathing like humans filled most minutes on TV, not the suave (dare I say debonair) bleach blond heels of the 60's, 70's, and 80's.
The swagger (and dominance) of Ric Flair; the grace of Bobby Eaton, and the unrelenting, unquenchable joy of Jim Crockett Promotion in their pomp soon painted a far more colorful tapestry than the modern day Vince Russo or Stephanie McMahon or their silicone army ever could.
Having said that, there was not a time when the WWE wasn't hammering away in the background of my pro wrestling education. The first time I ever watched WWE (at the time WWF), long before the putrid feeling of skepticism ever savaged me, was a show that is most memorable for one of the greatest matches ever: SummerSlam 1992. The card is rightly most remembered for Davey Boy Smith versus Bret Hart. Sadly, the rest of the show seemed hapless compared to the Intercontinental Title Match; it seemed in awe of the British Bulldog's power or the almost hypnotic like grace of Bret Hart.
Before long, I was ranting about the damn thing. It felt like a matter of months, yet in reality it was eight years. What did it all mean? In truth, in the eight years that followed, I could have watched anything and got some thrill out of what was being show, like I had done when I saw Terry Funk for the first time in 1989. At this stage some eleven years on from my first viewing of pro wrestling, an overwhelming feeling of dissatisfaction had replaced the excitement. The failing ship that was WCW had taken in my eyes the mantle that WWF had previously occupied. ECW was still in business and the most evolutionary product on the market and this was pre-ROH so there was no aspiring Chris Benoit or Shawn Michaels on the market, whereas some ten years previous, Chris Benoit and Shawn Michaels had been the aspiring Dynamite Kid and Ric Flair.
The truth is that for all of the money Vince McMahon has made in the industry, WWE have never really mirrored the cultural artistry of the harsh ECW in it's prime in the mid 90's or the fantastic storytelling of underdogs made good in AJPW in the early 1990's. So the WWE is not a constant; it can be the most compelling product on the market (2000 - 20001), but it rises and falls in significance according to the moment and, most importantly, to the logic of the booker/committee. But when it all comes together, as it did in 1997, there isn't anything to beat it.
Firstly, there is a greater sense of history than other promotions. Little could Jesse McMahon and Toots Mondt have known how much they were to answer for when they started co-promoting in the 1930's. Little could they have known how far the consequences of the thirst of a Neanderthal instinct could draw so many people in. Think of all the arguments that take place on the internet. No wonder the WWE and old timers ridicule this vast wasteland that captures so much opinion. What other promotion in the world inspires such feelings of joy, anger, and befuddlement? It is, of course, the most rich wrestling promotion of them all, not only in its revenue but the tapestry of previous era from Rogers to Sammartino to Graham to Hogan to Austin to dare I say Cena?
History is a thing of irrelevance to most modern wrestlers and promotions - although the WWE have been better at protecting its value and calling on its powers than most - understandably so, since they are consumed by the moment, and their place and importance within the industry so recall on things that work!
In recent months, I have realized something though; history gradually assumes greater significance as you realize that the era we are in is but a link in the chain between the past and the future. This context becomes more important and it gives the immediate era of the industry greater meaning. For the business to succeed in the future, the moment has to captivate more than one specific demographic for more than fifteen minutes.
Secondly with TNA, the only other mainstream option for wrestling fans, WWE is now the only promotion that commits to wrestling matches having significant time on a semi-regular basis. TNA proved that Vince Russo is still living in 1998 when the three best match-ups on their Genesis PPV barely received forty minutes in a three hour PPV.
WWE, for all their faults, have a two hour flag ship vehicle with ten PPVs a year. Undeniably, this is diluted by the existence of SmackDown! and ECW, but let's face it; the WWE wouldn't be the WWE if they didn't give us something to complain about. So speaking exclusively about their flagship RAW broadcast, there is no better way for a story to unfold gradually with twists and turns, subplots, characters coming, characters going, heroes rising, heroes falling, and heroes minted into the annals of time as legendary figures. ECW may be a flash in the pan; I've made my peace with the product and I view it as a simple existence, not the original. SmackDown! will only last as long as WWE is without competition.
Thirdly, there is a rivalry, but not of a sporting kind. Vince McMahon's undeniable wantonness to capture a segment of mainstream America's viewing public has resulted in a rivalry with the American media. Of course, the Vince McMahon is not unique in this aspect. There are many sporting rivalries that have the added spice of deeper meaning. Many of these rivalries have lost their meaningful connotations. When Kurt Angle said a few weeks ago that he was responsible for the ten greatest matches in WWE history, case in point that many modern day wrestlers find history an irrelevance. However, this is not the sole point the comment brought up, Angle wanted to teach his former masters a lesson signaling they had lost their best tool to a supposed competitor.
But even in the most humorous moments, there is no disguising the antipathy and bitterness that the wrestling business holds close to its heart for Vince McMahon and his sports entertainment vehicle. So, there we have it: when history and rivalry combine with close competition over a period of time, the result is compelling. Thank the lord for Vince McMahon who has his faults but recognizes the importance of history. No matter how long the history is - how deep the enmity runs - people will only endure mismatches for so long. The late 1990s was not that WCW beat WWE for 83 weeks straight, but that the wrestling industry as a notion regained its significance and pre-eminence as the most compelling combative sport in the known world. This is what the business needs now; we need to recognize our history, but not live in the past.
Quote Of The Week: History teaches us that men and nations behave wisely once they have exhausted all other alternatives. - Abba Eban - Israeli Politician
Thanks for enduring my thoughts for the time being. If you want to agree, disagree, shout or laugh at me for what you've just read you can contact me at:
mattgreeniow@hotmail.com
or
AIM: mattgreeniow
Copyright © 2005; TheWrestlingVoice.com & Douglas Nunnally.
All Rights Reserved.
Disclaimer & Privacy Statement
| What Did You Think About WWE Backlash 2008? |
|
|