www.411mania.com
|  News |  Columns |  TV Reports |  Video Reviews |  Title History |  Hall of Fame |  News Report |  The Dunn List |
SPOTLIGHTS  SPOTLIGHTS
MOVIES/TV
// Irina Shayk Shows Off Her Killer Curves At Cannes
MUSIC
// Kanye West and Jay-Z's Watch the Throne 2 Confirmed
WRESTLING
// Brooke Hogan Says Hulk Didn't Know She Was in Talks With TNA
POLITICS
// Obama Leads In Florida, Ohio, & VIrginia
MMA
// 411's MMA Roundtable - UFC 146: Dos Santos vs. Mir
GAMES
// Castlevania: Lords of Shadow Sequel Teased


 HOT TOPICS
//  CM Punk
//  John Cena
//  Triple H
//  Hulk Hogan
//  Randy Orton
//  Christian
SYNDICATE  SYNDICATE



411mania RSS Feeds





Follow 411mania on Twitter!




Add 411 On Facebook
 



 
 411mania » Wrestling » Columns



Advertisement
Wacky Wrestling Theory 10.16.08: Wrestling Stars vs. Cultural Icons
Posted by Jake Chambers on 10.16.2008



Pro-wrestling is a universe onto itself. Stars like Hulk Hogan and The Rock are bigger deities to wrestling fans than historical world leaders, genius inventors and charitable philanthropists. As much as we would like wrestlers to be the center of the universe, they are just one aspect of the fabric of popular culture on the planet Earth. That's why I think it's time to see just where the icons of pro-wrestling stand against other legendary cultural figures. Are we right to idolize these men or are we worshipping at the wrong alter?

Let's get started!

Round 1: Hulk Hogan vs. Mickey Mouse

Hulk and Mickey are two exaggeratedly cartoonish symbols for an entire industry. They are both massively popular with their target audience and never seem to lessen in popularity with time. Both characters are the center of a circle of friends/performers that benefit from their charismatic likeability; wherever Hogan goes he brings with him multiple nostalgic 80s-era wrestlers, as his exodus to WCW proved, whereas Mickey also has all those other anthropomorphized animals running around glomming off of his fame, not to mention the multiple broomsticks he kept producing at the end of ‘Fantasia.' Mickey Mouse definitely has the edge in marketability since he has saturated the entire world as the toy symbol of the Walt Disney corporation. Most children have to own at some kind of Mickey Mouse memorabilia, but come on, he is just a simple little mouse and images like Hello Kitty show that a cute design can easily be pasted onto any kids products and sell. Hogan on the other hand also became a successful commercial image during the Rock ‘n Wrestling era, but he did it as a balding, weight belt wearing goon, a much tougher image to market, so Hogan should get extra points for his achievements. Where Mickey Mouse loses overall is in his conservative values. Mickey looked particularly bad when Disney sued the makers of the underground comic book ‘Air Pirates' for a parody of Mickey Mouse and friends, (showing him eating out Minnie among other things) and generally trying to destroy what the lawyers called Mickey's "innocent image of general delightfulness." Lighten up! When Hogan was attacked by the counter culture, and even the mainstream, for his squeaky clean image and boring wrestling, he turned it around on them, became the figurehead of the evil nWo and made all those haters into fans again. Hogan is more flexible as a product than Mickey, especially when it comes to cool stuff like sex and violence, and for that he wins the first point in the competition for the Wrestling Icons.

Round 2: The Rock vs. Superman

The Rock, wrestling alter ego of Hollywood superstar Duane Johnson, was ‘the most electrifying man in sports entertainment' who combined a refined WWF main event wrestling style with hilariously self-effacing oratory skills to become a crossover megastar in the WWF Attitude era. Superman, the cape wearing alien alter ego of mild mannered Clark Kent, is a comic book and cross medium symbol for all things heroic and just. The Rock is a homegrown creation of Vince McMahon who tweaked earlier incarnations of Rocky Miavia by adapting to the fans insecure and self-important attitude of boo-ing Miavia mercilessly for being too heroic and drab. Superman is a DC Comics property who was created by Jerry Seigel and Joe Shuster in response to the fears of emasculation during the Great Depression. Both men have overcome great obstacles in their careers; The Rock came back after two loses in the Wrestlemania main event to finally defeat Stone Cold at Wrestlemania XIX, but wow, Superman came back from the dead almost a year after murder at the hands of Doomsday. In the end though, it all comes down to the fact that The Rock can sing, so therefore he wins. Superman has had so many incarnations, and has been written by so many people for almost one hundred years, and certainly he has been seen singing, but never on the scale of memorability that the Rock accomplished during his ‘Rock Concerts.' Kicking ass is one thing, but being able to sing, look cool and still be wryly funny at the same time, that's a super-power that you don't get just from being under a yellow sun. The Rock wins another point for the Wrestling Icons.

Round 3: Undertaker vs. Gravedigger

The Undertaker is a zombie inspired WWF Superstar who has an incomprehensible winning record of 17-0 at the global phenomenon Wrestlemania. Gravedigger is the awe-inspiring Halloween themed Monster Truck that single handedly carries the Monster Jam circuit on it's back. They both have a cartoonishly healthy death obsession, and both play out destruction and resurrection themes in their performances, with the Undertaker often being ‘sent to hell' or buried alive and then returning thanks to his other worldly powers, and Gravedigger being most beloved for crash producing, show ending Freestyle runs. The Undertaker has ‘squashed' a lot of giant wrestlers and Gravedigger has squashed countless old wrecks and buses, both to the delight of the audience. Wow, this one is tough… hmmmm, Gravedigger does have multiple copies competing simultaneously throughout the USA, but the Undertaker also had a doppelganger replace him in the past. Gravedigger is driven by wildman Derek Anderson, while the career of the Undertaker was steered by the wily Paul Bearer. This competition is really neck and neck. Ah ha, there is one category where one of these gothy monsters must lose; babes. The Undertaker once tried to marry young cute Stephanie McMahon in a sacrilegious black wedding ceremony, then really married the neck tattoo of a hottie Sara, and now is currently rumored to be dating life-loving, sporty sexy Michelle McCool. Unless Gravedigger has started to use the old siphon hose on the Madusa truck, I'm afraid he just can't compete with the Undertaker.

Round 4: Stone Cold Steve Austin vs. James Brown

The legendary ‘Texas Rattlesnake' Stone Cold Steve Austin is the most successful pro-wrestler of all-time. James Brown was easily the most successful R&B singer of all time. As far as influence goes, Brown has to get the nod for his past achievements to popularize raw R&B music, inspire acts like the Rolling Stones and Michael Jackson to name a few, and provide the musical backbone for the entire genre of hip hop. Stone Cold on the other hand influenced many children to say ‘asshole' for the first time, but was really more of a personal sensation than a medium changing force. Overcoming mid-1900s prejudice to become a role model for young black youth is commendable for the inspiring legacy of James Brown, but Austin had to overcome the career prejudice held against mid-card wrestlers in the twilight of their careers to change his entire style and become the barrier breaking Stone Cold character, which to me was a discrimination more difficult to overcome than even southern US racism. While both men had legendary substance abuse problems, Austin was the one who was able to avoid rehab and maintain his drinking and turn it into a clever marketing ploy, whereas Brown sadly let his addictions over shadow his artistic persona and thus kept him out of the mainstream for the latter years of his career. In the end, Austin has to get the point, but it was another close one.

Round 5: Bret Hart vs. Benjamin Franklin

Although it's already a victory for the Wrestling Icons, the fifth round stills bears mentioning. You may be surprised by this one, but I'd say that Bret Hart wins this round for the pro-wrestlers as well. Benjamin Franklin is a symbol for Revolution era USA and multiple inventions, but Bret Hart was the ‘excellence of execution' and will forever be associated with pure pro-wrestling talent. Both men achieved fame in foreign countries while proudly representing their homelands as ambassadors for extended periods of time, so that's a push. Bret Hart is often connected to his famous finisher ‘The Sharpshooter,' although he didn't invent the move, just like Franklin whose kite and key lightning experiment is often misinterpreted as him inventing electricity, so they've got to be dead even there also. What it all really comes down to is the fact that although not a former president, Benjamin Franklin still appears on the US $100 bill, and while it might be great to have your face on a widely distributed currency, it's a bit pompous to be painted onto the ‘rich' $100 dollar bill. On the other hand Bret Hart's trademark sunglasses found themselves on the faces of regular, humble wrestling fans the world over, and particularly young impressionable kids who would grow up to respect what those silver shades stood for: respect. To me, it's better to have people want to look like you than look at you, and Bret Hart is a Wrestling Icon who everyone wanted to be.

So yes, there you have it, the Wrestling Icons are 5-0. Call me wacky, but the way I see it, today the stars of pro-wrestling have shown that they can hold up in comparison against any cultural icons out there!



Post Comment (50)  |  Email Jake Chambers  |  View Jake Chambers's 411 Profile

  Send To Friend  |    Stumble It!  |    Digg It!  | 



Please add your comment below.
If you are registered, you can login and post under your registered name. If not, you can post as a guest or register.

* Please note that 411 moderates all comments. Your comment will show up on the site after it has been approved by an editor.
 
Name : 
Comment : 
Remaining Characters : 
2800
 

Comments (50)

 
I can say, without hyperbole, that this is bar none the single worst article I have ever read on this site.

You get no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.


Posted By: Anonymous Smart Mark (Guest)  on October 15, 2008 at 11:12 PM

 
 
Mickey
Superman
Undertaker
Austin
Bret (via horribly blatantly obviously clearly rigged mismatch)


Posted By: Guest#5841 (Guest)  on October 15, 2008 at 11:15 PM

 
 
I can't believe i just skimmed thru it

Posted By: ASM2 (Guest)  on October 15, 2008 at 11:45 PM

 
 
The Rock is far better than Superman but in reality like when he was in the WWE he will JOB to the tippy toppy guys and no one is higher on the superhero pole than Superman.

Posted By: Andrew Barbarash (Guest)  on October 16, 2008 at 12:03 AM

 
 
I applaud your efforts to be different but that wasnt very good. On the postiive side, at least it was kinda short. Maybe next time

Posted By: amusing comments (Guest)  on October 16, 2008 at 12:10 AM

 
 
I havent seen anything stretched THIS far since I trashed my old Stretch Armstrong!

Posted By: CM Wolf (Guest)  on October 16, 2008 at 01:41 AM

 
 
Have you had a good column yet? Your porn one was just GOD awful.

Posted By: Good Stuff Fan (Guest)  on October 16, 2008 at 02:02 AM

 
 
How did you....I dont under.....

Hogan vs. Mickey Mouse?
Bret vs Benjamin Franklin?
Undertaker vs a monster truck...

How did you come up with these "opponents"?


Posted By: Doodle (Guest)  on October 16, 2008 at 02:06 AM

 
 
The Rock is God
Bret no much so
Austin was huge for his era
Hogan got big because of the times


Posted By: Erik (Guest)  on October 16, 2008 at 02:10 AM

 
 
You, Mr. Chambers are a moron and are wasting space on this site that could be taken up by intelligent, well thought out articles. This place needs an editor to reject this nonsense and prevent it from being "published".

Posted By: Donovan Carmichael (Guest)  on October 16, 2008 at 03:47 AM

 
 
You should have done actors/wrestlers:
Orton: Alain Delon
Austin: Robert DeNiro
Flair: Marlon Brando


Posted By: bababouie (Guest)  on October 16, 2008 at 04:22 AM

 
 
He's got a point about the Invasion column he wrote last wk though- i started to rewatch raw episodes from 2001 from the invasion angle after reading the column and those episodes are friggin awesome compared to what we have on raw these days. i remember at the time we were just bitching about how much more they could've done with the angle and how we would've done it differently, but if u watch it again now, it's actually pretty kick ass

Posted By: Joe (Guest)  on October 16, 2008 at 05:11 AM

 
 
Takers 16-0 not 17-0

Posted By: Guest#4234 (Guest)  on October 16, 2008 at 07:02 AM

 
 
SO much Fail at 411 lately

Posted By: The Rev (Guest)  on October 16, 2008 at 10:27 AM

 
 
jake chambers...kill yourself

Posted By: guest53 (Guest)  on October 16, 2008 at 10:45 AM

 
 
what about Sting vs. Batman?

Posted By: BBM (Guest)  on October 16, 2008 at 11:15 AM

 
 
"what about Sting vs. Batman? "

Screw that.. Sting vs. Eric Draven a.k.a. The Crow! I'm sure he has a settle to score.


Posted By: Jamal (Guest)  on October 16, 2008 at 11:29 AM

 
 
Once again great article. Wrestling fans take themselves way to seriously.

Midcard to Main Event Glass Ceiling worse than Southern racism = Hilarious


Posted By: D (Guest)  on October 16, 2008 at 11:50 AM

 
 
well, i think everyone is fair in assessing Jake Chambers as the worst writer ever to grace 411...he gets worse heat than X Pac ever would if he won the WWE World title at Wrestlemania and had a live sex celebration with Shelton Benjaman's fake momma on next night's Raw

but with all these advertisement banners gracing the left side of the screen, I guess 411 wouldnt mind getting hits even if it means sacrificing a retarded, sex-crazed teenager and his woeful writing skills and moose-piss poor imagination at the IWC altar

the way I see it, as his articles keep gettin more and more horrid, more people shit on him on the comment board.

Comments = Hits = Happy advertisers

Cant blame 411 though...everyone gotta hustle sometimes, I guess

Having said that, I can only plead...please get Chambers off my screen and off your website

I know I know...WWE still havent fired Mark Henry after more than a decade of mediocrity...

But jeez Chambers is not even in his league in terms of unfair and gainful employment

He's bad, real bad..."Steve Mongo vs Brother Ray" bad

hell "TNA" bad


Posted By: christy (Guest)  on October 16, 2008 at 11:54 AM

 
 
also, dumbass..

it's "an universe"...dont worry. you ll learn about it when you reach second grade

and philanthropists are charitable by nature...redundancy! get it?

for fuck sake, editor...he cant even write proper English!


Posted By: christy (Guest)  on October 16, 2008 at 12:02 PM

 
 
Of course you wrote this article it SUCKS! Your the only writer on this site that always puts up a shitty article.

Posted By: mr. HALLIDAY (Guest)  on October 16, 2008 at 12:15 PM

 
 
Jake Chambers is the anti-christ!

Actually, I'm just kidding. However, the column was weak this week.


Posted By: Owen Can't Fly (Guest)  on October 16, 2008 at 12:40 PM

 
 
Wow... just wow. there are no words.

Posted By: matt (Guest)  on October 16, 2008 at 12:47 PM

 
 
@Christy
Universe does not take an article other than the because there is only one universe. By its very nature, there can only ever be one. Therefore,the a or an argument is moot.

This article needed to be more carefully executed. There's a germ of a good idea somewhere among the drek, but Chambers couldn't find it.


Posted By: Iron Knee (Registered)  on October 16, 2008 at 01:04 PM

 
 
Your 2nd sentence in your last paragraph says call you WACKY and that I shall do.

Posted By: reader 12 (Guest)  on October 16, 2008 at 01:30 PM

 
 
Your 2nd sentence in your last paragraph says call you WACKY and that I shall do.

Posted By: reader 12 (Guest)  on October 16, 2008 at 01:31 PM

 
 
Ooookayyyyy???

Posted By: Guest#7089 (Guest)  on October 16, 2008 at 01:38 PM

 
 
Huh? Whah? I can't even begin too....Ridiculousness!

I don't even understand the argument? What is the theory you are trying to prove? There is no clear rational paralells between the 2 entities being matched up.

What the hell was that?

Retarded! There have been some real douseis on this site lately. There definetly should be some type of content review.


Posted By: Big Dirty (Guest)  on October 16, 2008 at 02:10 PM

 
 
I could see where there could be an intersting article written about which character are more powerful in their respective universe. It would probably have to be a comparision between wrestlers and dc/marvel comic ubnivers, wrestlers and greek mythology, wrestlers and pro sports athletes.

Obviously the writer of this article was way to lazy to flesh out his own idea.

Terrible

F- dude. Don't try again!


Posted By: Big Dirty (Guest)  on October 16, 2008 at 02:17 PM

 
 
Ben Franklin would kick Bret Hart's ass. If you think Vinnie Mac screwed Bret just you wait and see what continental congress would do to him. Can you say government imposed tariffs?

Posted By: Timmy-O (Guest)  on October 16, 2008 at 02:24 PM

 
 
really?

Posted By: poppasquat (Guest)  on October 16, 2008 at 03:24 PM

 
 
"it's "an universe"...dont worry

@Christy
Universe does not take an article other than the because there is only one universe. By its very nature, there can only ever be one. Therefore,the a or an argument is moot."

Ummm, no. Universe doesn't have to be used with the. Just because there is, theoretically, only one universe, that doesn't mean people can't talk or write about others. Also, it is "a universe" not "an universe".


Posted By: jeff (Guest)  on October 16, 2008 at 03:32 PM

 
 
Hey idiots if you dont like the article DONT CLICK ON IT and DONT READ IT this isnt brain surgery here people No one makes you read this article and if you dont like it,hit the BACK button dummies Good job Jake

Posted By: Roman (Guest)  on October 16, 2008 at 03:50 PM

 
 
Awful. Just awful. Surely this is some kind of bad joke. Plus, there really is no way The Rock is beating Superman. That's just silly

Posted By: BigJoe (Registered)  on October 16, 2008 at 05:15 PM

 
 
"Hey idiots if you dont like the article DONT CLICK ON IT and DONT READ IT this isnt brain surgery here people No one makes you read this article and if you dont like it,hit the BACK button dummies Good job Jake"

Hey, take your own advice! If u don't like the comments DON'T READ them! U know I really hate when hypocritical morons like you comment! No one forced you 2 read the comments & bitch about that either! Next time don't go below the part of the page that says COMMENTS in big black bold letters & u won't need 2 be bitching yourself! Complaining about complaining is STUPID! STFU & get a life! U know there's a word for people like u... CHARKS(Chambers Marks)! We get it! U love Chambers! Hooray! Good for you! Next time instead of criticizing everyone else why don't u just skip 2 the I love Chambers part & get it over with!

PEACE!


Posted By: THE BOMB! Settin 'em skr8 (Guest)  on October 16, 2008 at 05:24 PM

 
 
@ Jeff

Posted By: Iron Knee (Guest)  on October 16, 2008 at 05:51 PM

 
 
WOW this is the most heat I've seen on an article.

It was pretty bad, but I kinda enjoyed the idea in theory... but then again Cloverfield was a good idea for a film and look how that turned out.


Posted By: Andrew Barbarash (Guest)  on October 16, 2008 at 06:23 PM

 
 
@ Jeff:
So you would call it a WWE or the WWE? How about an Earth or the Earth. When only one of something exists, a or an are not applicable.

Also, people say "for all intensive purposes" instead of "for all intents and purposes" does that make it correct. There are hard and fast rules in life.


Posted By: Iron Knee (Registered)  on October 16, 2008 at 06:23 PM

 
 
Question for Roman: how do we know we don't like an article if we don't click on it and read it?

I think the negative comments are a little bit out of hand, but I agree with the general consensus. It's called "Wacky" Wrestling Theory, so it's probably supposed to be satire, but satire is supposed to be funny. Not just retarded and half-baked. I don't get the POINT, is what I'm trying to say.


Posted By: The REAL MP (Registered)  on October 16, 2008 at 06:33 PM

 
 
Less pot.

Posted By: Guest#6528 (Guest)  on October 16, 2008 at 07:03 PM

 
 
Guess I'm in the minority here, but I like Wacky Wrestling Theory. Most everyone else must have sticks up their (bleep) or they missed the word "Wacky" in the title.

Clearly today's subject matter is highly subjective, but it's also argumentative and I enjoyed reading it. It's really not fair to compare apples to oranges, but that's exactly what haters of pro wrestling do, so why not have some fun at their expense once in a while?


Posted By: DXSSI (Guest)  on October 16, 2008 at 07:24 PM

 
 
The article had *some* entertainment value. But that's about it.

The problem, Jake, as I see it is that your articles lack things like facts or any real interest to wrestling fans. I'm sorry, but no one cares about Hogan vs. Mickey Mouse.

What your readers do care about is things like wrestling history, the latest backstage gossip, current storylines and how good they are and/or how they might be improved. That kind of thing.

Yes, your writing style and subject matter are very much different from the other authors who grace this site. And that just might be the problem.


Posted By: William (Guest)  on October 16, 2008 at 07:31 PM

 
 
...What?!

Posted By: STG (Guest)  on October 16, 2008 at 09:02 PM

 
 
Hey, take your own advice! If u don't like the comments DON'T READ them! U know I really hate when hypocritical morons like you comment! No one forced you 2 read the comments & bitch about that either! Next time don't go below the part of the page that says COMMENTS in big black bold letters & u won't need 2 be bitching yourself! Complaining about complaining is STUPID! STFU & get a life! U know there's a word for people like u... CHARKS(Chambers Marks)! We get it! U love Chambers! Hooray! Good for you! Next time instead of criticizing everyone else why don't u just skip 2 the I love Chambers part & get it over with!

PEACE!

Posted By: THE BOMB! Settin 'em skr8 (Guest) on October 16, 2008 at 05:24 PM

Nicely done BOMB! If there is ever another taping in Tulsa I'll take a THE BOMB!>HHH sign in your honor.


Posted By: Scrotum Pole (Guest)  on October 16, 2008 at 09:09 PM

 
 
I got excited at the premise, but was let down by the half-assed execution. I LIKE the column, so stop phoning it in, Jake!

Posted By: KanyonKreist (Guest)  on October 16, 2008 at 10:30 PM

 
 
I hate you and this article. It never makes any sense

Posted By: Guest#0004 (Guest)  on October 16, 2008 at 11:53 PM

 
 
I don't get it. I read this article because I thought it would be interesting and it's another poor article so I comment them as such. What's wrong with that? I'm not hating on Jake Chambers. Just saying his writing is terrible so please shut up with the don't read it crap.

Posted By: Ed (Guest)  on October 17, 2008 at 02:23 AM

 
 
In other words, the wrestling stars will always be greater than cultural icons. The real test would be as follows:

Cena vs Eminem
Kurt Angle vs Michael Jordan
Big Daddy V vs Fat Albert
Teddy Long vs Jesse Jackson
Shawn Michaels vs Brett Michaels
Nsync vs 3 Count
Skinner vs Crocodile Dundee


Posted By: Joe (Guest)  on October 17, 2008 at 06:15 AM

 
 
"Nicely done BOMB! If there is ever another taping in Tulsa I'll take a THE BOMB!>HHH sign in your honor."

Ha, Thanks! I'll be looking forward 2 it!

PEACE!


Posted By: THE BOMB! (Guest)  on October 17, 2008 at 07:02 AM

 
 
Hey, take your own advice! If u don't like the comments DON'T READ them! U know I really hate when hypocritical morons like you comment! No one forced you 2 read the comments & bitch about that either! Next time don't go below the part of the page that says COMMENTS in big black bold letters & u won't need 2 be bitching yourself! Complaining about complaining is STUPID! STFU & get a life! U know there's a word for people like u... CHARKS(Chambers Marks)! We get it! U love Chambers! Hooray! Good for you! Next time instead of criticizing everyone else why don't u just skip 2 the I love Chambers part & get it over with!

What do you think you are doing you idiot? This whole thing was complaining about me complaining. I dont love Jake you moron,I just read and happen to like his article and if you have a problem with that shove it.


Posted By: Roman (Guest)  on October 17, 2008 at 06:57 PM

 


www.41mania.com
Copyright (c) 2011 411mania.com, LLC. All rights reserved.
Click here for our privacy policy. Please help us serve you better, fill out our survey.
Use of this site signifies your agreement to our terms of use.