10 Words That Most Accurately Describe Wrestling Right Now
How to sell a contradiction.
It's fitting that a business based on a contradiction - the act of protecting an opponent under the pretence of inflicting pain - is full of them. That remains the case in 2017.
Wrestling is both good and bad because it is at once interesting and tedious. The LaVar Bell segment from a few weeks back crystallised the paradox; WWE dominated the wrestling conversation, which offered different philosophies, insights and arguments, when they weren't making the faintest pretence of presenting a wrestling segment. Wrestling is at once progressive and regressive. In the same week WWE filmed the Mae Young Classic, Renee Young wondered aloud if Sami Zayn had a problem with Mike Kanellis for taking his wife's name.
One notable omission from this list is "experimental"; the same company reverting to foreign menace archetype elsewhere is slowly introducing new concepts. The Great Balls Of Fire main event was a rare heel vs. tweener affair modelled after a fight, and not a sports entertainment story. Performers are allowed to perform extemporaneously on RAW Talk and Talking Smack. Wrestling being a contradiction, they also recite speeches written on their behalf mere hours later.
Wrestling is a contradiction. It's eclectic. It is also...
10. Homogenised
Things are nowhere near as bad as they were in WWE circa early 2011, in which most every developmental graduate, having received the same basic and repetitive training in Florida Championship, wrestled like a CAW fashioned by bored quality tester.
That said, everybody still talks the same, prefixing generic heel threats and babyface promises with "You know what they say..." - which is uttered so often on WWE television that it must be a creative team keyboard shortcut, customised purely to pad out pages upon pages of three hour RAW scripts. The suicide dive is as ubiquitous as those five words. It's almost easier to count how many WWE performers don't use it. At least with the Young Bucks, their devaluation of the Superkick is an intentional part of their obnoxious, postmodern act. Irrespective of whether that act is a good thing for wrestling or not, there is still an abnormal psychology behind it. WWE performers, and so many of them, dive through the ropes as a commercial break segue. You don't get much more contrived than that. Talent positioning is also homogenised. What are Bray Wyatt and Seth Rollins, really? Future headliners? Failed main event experiments?
Does it even matter who won their rivalry, when Wyatt's win/loss record is so inconsistent and Rollins has been rewarded for his loss with an imminent Intercontinental Title programme?