Smackdown has a new General Manager. It's Vickie Guerrero. Dolph Ziggler expounded on dumping AJ Lee. He mused that he shouldn't have waited this long to do it. Damien Sandow spit the hottest truth this side of the Sun. He was rewarded with validation of his own opinions with violence from Cody Rhodes. The more things seem to trend in a direction of change, the more WWE seems to send things careening back to the familiarity of a narrative that hasn't been freshened up in two decades.
Some say the narrative doesn't have to change if it has worked. I could be swayed either way that WWE is right in not fixing what isn't broken for them. As long as the faces change, the names, then it's a win, especially when those names are fronting talented wrestling characters.
For example, Sandow and Rhodes danced the same unlikable babyface lashing out against heel playing exactly by the books but doing so in the smarmiest, most condescending way possible many have before. Yes, Sandow was correct, but it was much in the same vein that Wal*Mart is in the right when they invade a podunk town and put every mom 'n pop shop out of business in the name of falling prices. He got Rhodes to react with a folksy, heroic seeming vigilantism that gets people behind a guy but may not be the correct way of going about things. It was the same as before, but Rhodes and Sandow put their spin on each role. It's fresh, and it's going to be the best match that doesn't involve Daniel Bryan or John Cena at SummerSlam.
But what happens when everything is regressive? What happens when Vickie Guerrero replaces Teddy Long when you know she's only filling a seat for Long to come back after Triple H and Stephanie McMahon catch wind that Smackdown isn't just the recap show anymore? What happens when the next woman who gets dumped by a turning babyface melts down and tosses chairs all over the place because that's the only way women react to relationships ending in the eyes of Creative? That's true regression.
I know WWE has the burden of producing over 300 hours of original content in a year, but there's a difference between spinning wheels and falling back into bad habits. I love Vickie Guerrero, but putting her back in the GM role doesn't do anyone any favors. Continuing women as emotionally fragile as a rule demeans 35% of the audience and 50% of the population. They can maybe put someone new in the former role like they did on RAW, and they can maybe instead of shaking up the kayfabe power structure (welcome to World Job Evaluation Entertainment!), maybe they can shake up the roles of women on the show. Y'know, instead of just empty husks of crying banshees who need a man in their lives, have some who are husks, some who are shallow in other ways, and others who have full characters in various different ways.
Maybe it takes a long time to change. But WWE has been given enough time to expect regression to be out of the question. Let Cody Rhodes and Damien Sandow run in similar ruts, but also maybe find different roles for folks like Guerrero and Lee too. Just because it's hard to run a wrestling company doesn't mean that backsliding should be excused. They get the big revenue for a reason.
Some say the narrative doesn't have to change if it has worked. I could be swayed either way that WWE is right in not fixing what isn't broken for them. As long as the faces change, the names, then it's a win, especially when those names are fronting talented wrestling characters.
For example, Sandow and Rhodes danced the same unlikable babyface lashing out against heel playing exactly by the books but doing so in the smarmiest, most condescending way possible many have before. Yes, Sandow was correct, but it was much in the same vein that Wal*Mart is in the right when they invade a podunk town and put every mom 'n pop shop out of business in the name of falling prices. He got Rhodes to react with a folksy, heroic seeming vigilantism that gets people behind a guy but may not be the correct way of going about things. It was the same as before, but Rhodes and Sandow put their spin on each role. It's fresh, and it's going to be the best match that doesn't involve Daniel Bryan or John Cena at SummerSlam.
But what happens when everything is regressive? What happens when Vickie Guerrero replaces Teddy Long when you know she's only filling a seat for Long to come back after Triple H and Stephanie McMahon catch wind that Smackdown isn't just the recap show anymore? What happens when the next woman who gets dumped by a turning babyface melts down and tosses chairs all over the place because that's the only way women react to relationships ending in the eyes of Creative? That's true regression.
I know WWE has the burden of producing over 300 hours of original content in a year, but there's a difference between spinning wheels and falling back into bad habits. I love Vickie Guerrero, but putting her back in the GM role doesn't do anyone any favors. Continuing women as emotionally fragile as a rule demeans 35% of the audience and 50% of the population. They can maybe put someone new in the former role like they did on RAW, and they can maybe instead of shaking up the kayfabe power structure (welcome to World Job Evaluation Entertainment!), maybe they can shake up the roles of women on the show. Y'know, instead of just empty husks of crying banshees who need a man in their lives, have some who are husks, some who are shallow in other ways, and others who have full characters in various different ways.
Maybe it takes a long time to change. But WWE has been given enough time to expect regression to be out of the question. Let Cody Rhodes and Damien Sandow run in similar ruts, but also maybe find different roles for folks like Guerrero and Lee too. Just because it's hard to run a wrestling company doesn't mean that backsliding should be excused. They get the big revenue for a reason.