Shining a Spotlight 02.26.09: Fandom

Posted by Michael Weyer on 02.26.2009

What does it mean to be a wrestling fan? And should you let others make that judgement for you?

Like many, a bit disappointed Mickey Rourke didn't win the Oscar as his performance was phenomenal. Nothing against Penn who was good as well but he already had one and seems more like politics than actual weight of performances.
　
Last week, If I Could Be Serious had an interesting article on fandom and what it means to be a fan. It made me think a bit as he raised some good points but the argument of fandom can be very complicated.

People often have different criteria for what it means to be a fan. It varies quite a lot and quite often really doesn't make much sense but it's what it is. The problem is often the fact that for the majority, no two people really have the same definition of what being a fan really means. And those who do can be very, very strict about such criteria.

For an example, I've always considered myself a Star Wars fan. I love the first film more than any other, I have them all on various DVD and VHS releases, I read the books and comics, still have old action figures and all that. So yes, I consider myself a fan. However, I think the prequels are good, the Ewoks work well and I prefer Return of the JedI over Empire Strikes Back. Thus, by that criteria, I've had people say I can't be a real Star Wars fan because no "real" fan can feel that way. I rather enjoyed the last Indiana Jones movie and yet "real" Indy fans are supposed to hate it. I actually liked the second and third seasons of Heroes despite so many others turning on it.

It's not like I'm blind to things I like of course. I recognize the train wrecks of shows I enjoy like Gray's Anatomy and last season of 24. At the same time, I also don't jump on bandwagons of some stuff. For example, I think Firefly is a really overrated show, good but nowhere nears as amazing as people think it is. And there's always movies I keep hearing are amazing but when I see them, I come off with a feeling of "that's it?" I guess it shows how the buzz about some stuff can overwhelm your appreciation of it.

Wrestling is a lot like that. It's always been more entertainment than sport and both of those have their wide range of fandoms. Even in the pre-Internet days, you had some big divisions among fans, particularly as the WWF grew to power in the 1980's. You had the fans who preferred "real" wrestling with the NWA and other territories while more of the mainstream flocked to the wilder WWF. I'm not ashamed to say I was more a WWF guy back then but I could still appreciate the good shows from the NWA and such. I guess the wide range of wrestling I like does make me a good fan but my modern-day sensibilities tend to be a bit different than others.

I think I've made that clear in some of my past columns. I think John Cena is a damn good worker and champion who doesn't deserve the massive hate he gets. I think HHH is also a great worker who does a good job boosting others and has let go of some of his past spotlight hogging. I think RVD is hugely overrated, a guy who peaked in 1999 and has proven he can't carry a company due to his erratic behavior. I prefer Matt Hardy over Jeff as a worker and a more capable champ. And I think Ric Flair, in his prime, was just as big a spotlight-hogging politician as Hogan and HHH at their worst.

I've been trashed for those opinions but I've also heard from many who share those views exactly. It shows you how you can't judge all fans alike, even those who seem to like the same guys because there will be divisions among them. The worst part of the IWC is that people can so easily take an open brush to put everything under the same scope with no study of those divisions.

It needs to be pointed out that there is a vast difference between the IWC and the majority of wrestling fans. Like it or not (and I know a lot of guys don't), we are not the majority voice of wrestling fandom. That majority are the ones who go to the shows without reading spoiler, who don't spend hours every week trolling for gossip and arguing angles without giving them a chance to develop. They're the ones creative teams listen to, not us, even if we are supposedly smarter.

The problem with that mentality is that…we're not that smart, really. James Guttman summed that up perfectly in his latest book as he talks about how he thought he had wrestling all figured out in 2005 but after years of interviewing guys, realized he didn't know the half of it. A lot of what we know as supposed fact are really based on rumor, speculation, innuendo and half-truths with no real basis. My favorite prime example is how it was reported as absolute fact for years that Eric Bischoff conceived the AWA Team Challenge Series and booked the AWA in its last years but that's not true. There are other tales like that, stories that have come to be accepted as truth because of how the fans see it. It's not helped that a lot of wrestlers can actually use such stories to boost their personas and even promoters can use it as well. Matt Hardy and Edge is a good example as WWE did manage to use fan expectations and knowledge of the real-life troubles to help the storyline out. And Brian Pillman remains an expert at being able to use the fans to help himself out. But too many wrestlers are affected by the reputations they've received. Erik Watts wasn't one of the worst workers ever. He was fair and got his push because his dad was running WCW but had some potential. But sadly, the IWC considers him utterly wretched and that mentality remains today, as it does for a lot of others.

Raven hit it on the head in an interview: the fans who think they know so much and know what's coming are the easiest ones to con. Guttman's book raised a point I agree with totally, that too many people in the IWC are too eager to believe every story that comes around, no matter what. WWE just used that with the "Jeff Hardy found in hotel room" bit that a lot of fans truly bought thanks to his history. Really, the whole "smart factor" has gotten completely out of hand and that just makes a lot in the IWC look foolish as fans. I remember Cena's return at the Royal Rumble last year as the place truly erupted but then suddenly he had boos as if fans were remembering "oh, wait, booing him's the cool thing to do." That mindset, that you have to go with the majority if you want to be counted as a true fan, is horrible and just insults yourself and fandom.

The thing that is so easy to forget about wrestling is that everyone involved, to one degree or another, is always working us. Wrestlers, writers, promoters, it doesn't matter, they all work us. It's their job, it's who they are, it's built into them from the moment they step into the business. Their entire job is to make us believe in them and what they do and a lot of guys are unable to turn that off. "Shoot" interviews for the most part of guys grousing a lot about those who have done them wrong and often glossing over their own shortcomings and problems. WWE DVDs can be the same way of course but they can be brutally honest as well. Yet guys will always be trying to manipulate the fans for their own ends. RVD comes off as an arrogant asshole to me but a lot of folks see that as refreshing honesty despite the fact he blames everyone but himself for his failure to rise higher in the business. A lot of us are able to see through this but so many will just buy whatever comes our way.
　
These divisions of fans can be seen so often on the IWC. Ring of Honor has long been a focus for debates as so many complain that a lot of sites (like 411mania) go too overboard hailing the promotion as brilliant and the epitome of what wrestling should be. Yes, it's a great promotion and I think work wise it's the best but I recognize there are still parts of it that don't click as well. TNA has their loyalists who insist it's going great despite poor storylines and bad matches. Of course, I still back WWE when they have the same problems so it's not like I'm in a position to talk.

And that's another problem, that a lot of fans will take the position of being authorities when they're really not. I've been guilty of that from time to time and I recognize it but some take it to a ridiculous degree. While his attitude has lessened a bit in the last few years, Scott Keith will still paint himself as a be-all and end-all word on things, despite the fact he really has zero backstage connections to the business. Others can come off just as righteous and know-it-all which just serves to undermine their own standing. More importantly, it makes hard for those newer fans who don't know as much about the business to get the wrong idea. Complain all you want about how Vince tries to whitewash his stuff with WWE (although it's not as widespread as some claim) but is that worse than people who make it sound like every single evil and ill in the entire business is all Vince's fault?

It should also be remembered there's a fine line between a "fan" and a "fanatic." Hell, most wrestlers don't pay as much attention to wrestling history as fans do, they live for the now, not the past. Yet so many fans thing it's vital to know every detail of every title change and card, ignoring the forest for the trees. That's led to the annoying way star ratings can be seen as so much more important than they really are and go into way too much detail on moves. That's led to the annoying tendency to subtract from matches just because every single spot isn't done to absolute precision, as if we expect utter and complete perfection with a regular sport. It's not like you have to be a wrestler to judge wrestling; I mean, how many movies has Roger Ebert directed? But expecting them to not let you personally down seems a real disservice to the guys you're supposed to like so much.

The attitude of a lot of IWC'ers makes it clear why the promotions look down on us all so much. I don't want to sound like I'm annoyed at the people who post comments because I enjoy any feedback, positive or negative. It's just better when posters are able to put in real comments instead of "you suck" or "EPIC FAIL" (and I swear, that saying has long since outlived its shelf life). It's not that the people who make those comments are dumb, I'm sure they're intelligent, they just don't get how foolish they come off saying it. Passion can overwhelm reason and that comes true a lot around here.

It's because we want to believe. When we become fans of wrestling, we made a decision, conscious or not, to suspend the knowledge that it was all fake. We knew, deep down, we knew but we ignored it for a while. That willingness to believe is often a reason it's so easy for us to be played and ignore the fact we're being played at all. We wanted to be sucked into the world of wrestling so to go about complaining over how bad it can be or that a match isn't a five-star masterpiece because they messed up one dropkick or an angle that the fans on TV love but you dislike seems idiotic and petty. And even more petty is to lambaste a guy as a complete moron for liking that sort of thing. You can say you think differently, you can offer reasons why but just say "you're not a REAL fan" just makes yourself look foolish.

There's a plaque at my local library: "NEVER apologize for your tastes in reading." I think that should apply to wrestling too. We all have our own reasons for getting into it and staying with it. We all have our likes and dislikes. We're always going to disagree, that's the nature of it. I just think it's important to realize that's all we are, fans. We don't know the inner workings of the business for real, we don't stand as utter authorities on stuff and half the time, we don't know who's really telling the truth or not. That's what wrestling is and you have to accept that. You start debating who's a "real" fan or not and it just shows how judgmental a fan you yourself can be. After all, throwing around how you're so "smart" about wrestling can work against your own standing in various ways. You love because you love it and when you cut down to it, that's all that really matters. Isn't that what being a fan means?


Also around 411mania:

Chin talks the Importance of Wrestlemania III

The Bard has a unique take on fandom himself

Don't Think Twice has a nice bit about The Wrestler

For the Record discusses HHH as boss.

The Shimmy examines HHH and Orton

Five-Star Conversation looks at Christian

The Doc looks at Mania tag teams

Lansdell starts his own promotion

Piledriver Report examines the road to Mania

Don't forget Column of Honor, Triple Threat, 3 R's, Ask 411, The top 5 and the rest.


For this week, the spotlight is off.