tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1546665963755719151.post3674136261019134264..comments2023-07-15T07:17:49.535-04:00Comments on Professional Wrestling in U.S. Popular Culture: He's the manSam Fordhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17233749268141980625noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1546665963755719151.post-4563038980216557092007-03-14T16:26:00.000-04:002007-03-14T16:26:00.000-04:00All interesting points from everyone. Carolina, I...All interesting points from everyone. Carolina, I think another interesting difference between Hulk and Ric is that their "greatness" is completely different. Hogan drew more money than Ric overall, I'm sure, but Ric draws much more consistently than Hogan. That remains consistent today. Ric probably couldn't come in and have nearly as big an appearance as a single Hogan match would be. On the other hand, Hogan's character would be terrible week-in-and-week-out and people would tire of it. Which to you rank as greater in the greater scheme of things? I'm not sure, but I would certainly fall on the Flair side of the fence in this debate.Sam Fordhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17233749268141980625noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1546665963755719151.post-54839793488123880002007-03-14T09:46:00.000-04:002007-03-14T09:46:00.000-04:00I really like Deirdre's point about the role of ch...I really like Deirdre's point about the role of character and caricature. I think someone was musing on Hogan, and how part of his appeal stemmed from how he seemed very straightforward. But his character really is two dimentional. Rick Flair, by contrast, is a more well rounded character, though I'd be less interested in talking to him.<BR/><BR/>How much of the longevity issue, though, is less about realistic/non-realistic, and more about flexibility? Are there wrestlers who've always had very two dimensional characters, but were always big because they were good at placing themselves in various types of stories?<BR/><BR/>My other point would be on fairy tales. Bettleheim, among others, argue that very simple characters in simple stories offer unconscious therapeutic value to kids, which is lost primarily when this value is pointed out. Hogan is totally one of these, which may help explain why he's popular with the kids. By contrast, simplicity works less well for adults, who need a more complex character to relate to on an unconscious level.<BR/><BR/>Then, it's the mixture of these different types that's important in wrestling: there really is something for everyone.narwoodhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07763177822411212052noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1546665963755719151.post-48195498368643592802007-03-14T04:24:00.000-04:002007-03-14T04:24:00.000-04:00I agree with you that Ric Flair is one of the all ...I agree with you that Ric Flair is one of the all time greats. And yes, being in this class makes the WWE Hall of Fame a lot more relevant to me, both as a student and fan. Before this class, I would wonder who the people getting inducted were. The only ones that I had a good idea about were Hulk Hogan and Bret Hart.<BR/>Ric Flair is one of those guys who just seems to keep that fan following long after his time as a main event star has past. He is a performer and that is what keeps the fans there. I remember when he did come to the WWE as part owner and one of the funniest segments involved Ric teasing McMahon as they watched Stone Cold Steve Austin beat down Booker T.<BR/>It is obvious he can't wrestle as well as he did before but he still finds a way to amaze the crowd. The most recent event that stunned me was the conchairto? he received from Edge and Randy Orton. He had his head placed on a chair and slammed on with another chair. All while literally lying in a pool of his own blood. I knew at that moment that Rick Flair was the real deal.Luis Tenoriohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17084055128087243838noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1546665963755719151.post-71723946823142096582007-03-14T03:31:00.000-04:002007-03-14T03:31:00.000-04:00I agree with you on just about everything. When I ...I agree with you on just about everything. When I was first introduced to Flair it was when he returned in 2001, and I knew from the reaction that he was something big, but I didn't get it at the time. I still didn't really respect him as I should until we delved into the past in this class, and got to see the glory days, and hear about his importance over the years to so many wrestling companies. <BR/><BR/>I also think that his longevity is related to the realistic nature of his character, as opposed to Hogan. It seems the most successful and long-lasting characters (with perhaps the exception of the Undertaker, who is just a very special circumstance all around) are those that are very grounded, basically charicature versions of the actual person portraying them, for example Flair, John Cena, and Stone Cold Steve Austin. These are not superheros, or phantasms, or monsters, but basically well built, well-voiced versions of somebody somewhere out there in real life. It allows the audience to identify with these characters, and make that important emotional investment. <BR/><BR/>I think this is part of Flair's success, along with his phenomenal style, athleticism, class and of course, that Ric Flair charisma.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com