Layeth the Smacketh Down

It has often been said that professional wrestling is basically a soap opera. The only difference is the audience. Soap operas cater to middle-aged women (and gay men) and wrestling caters to adolescent boys (and gay men). And for the most part, it is true: high stakes storylines, bad acting, and well choreographed "fight scenes." But, I would take that comparison one step further: Pro Wrestling is Theatre. Or, at least, a modern day Vaudeville.

This is live performance. A difference between this and theatre is that these stories need to change and evolve with every performance. They aren't doing the same show every night (although if you've been watching pro wrestling for a while, you might disagree with that). But they are doing a show almost every single night. The squared-circle is their stage and they must make the fans (thousands to millions depending on the TV coverage) feel something if they want to stay viable. Actors on stage must also make their audience feel, think, and discuss. Both professions must tell a story through performance, no matter how simple or complex. And if the audience doesn't feel it, the story doesn't continue. In theatre, shows close and actors lose jobs. In wrestling, wrestlers no longer get their "push" from management and may ultimately lose their jobs.

In addition, wrestlers are gypsies. They may have a home base, but they are in a different city almost EVERY night. And that is not an exaggeration. Some guys work upwards of 300 days a year. If they have families, they rarely see them. All for the love of the business and for a shot at being the next Hulk Hogan, Ric Flair, or Stone Cold Steve Austin. If you're an actor, imagine being on a non-equity tour (pro wrestling is not unionized), doing one-nighters EVERY NIGHT for most of the year. No split weeks, no week or month-long stints. A different city every night. Many of them won't even be interesting cities (not that it matters, these guys hardly have time to "explore" the cities they are in).

And even if you've never seen a stitch of a wrestling telecast, you cannot deny that the theatricality of wrestling is what makes it tick. You can watch no-name boxers beating each other to a pulp to cure your fix for violence. But, the reason that pro wrestling has been so popular for all these years is the characters. What's more fun: watching two middleweights punch each other for 6 rounds, or seeing Shawn "Heartbreak Kid" Michaels face The Undertaker in a "Hell in a Cell" match.

Does it appeal to our more base sensibilities? Sure. But, so does "Rock of Ages" and "Tony and Tina's Wedding." Sometimes entertainment is meant to be just that. Which is why, when a lawsuit from the World Wildlife Foundation threatened him a few years ago, WWE owner and chairman Vince McMahon had no problem changing the name of his product from World Wrestling Federation to World Wrestling Entertainment. We know the results are pre-determined, and in the internet age, many are finding out said result before the events even take place. But, most of the world knows what happens at the end of "Hamlet," and we still go see it because we want to see how it's going to play out.

I have been having this discussion for years. While I don't really watch it on a regular basis anymore, I will incriminate myself and say that I used to be a huge fan. And I do feel that it still needs to be defended as entertainment. And I think it matters. Right, Rock?