How Wrestling Can Explore the Studio Space, or an English Degree IS Worth a Good Bit

Having good narrative structure prevents feuds like these from lasting two shows past when they should've ended
Photo Credit: WWE.com

"Storytelling" is an important word in pro wrestling. Match quality dorks (myself included) like to use it to describe what good wrestlers do, whether or not they understand how said wrestlers tell the story. Wrestling promotions' jobs between the matches is to tell stories as a way to get from match to match. Some companies, like Chikara, are good at it. Some companies, like WWE, suck at it. Still other companies, like Pro Wrestling Guerrilla, don't even try that hard. The key to telling a good story is to know how to tell one, which sounds reductive. However, even people who get paid gobs of money to tell stories in other media ignore the things that make good stories good. For example, when asked about themes in their hit show, Game of Thrones, showrunner David Benioff said "Themes are for eighth grade book reports. Given how far off a cliff the show fell in its final season, well, I can believe that answer was genuine.

Storytelling in wrestling, when it's good, rarely reaches levels of intricacy that the best authors and playwrights and filmmakers attain. It's simple and based on primal conflict, man vs. man rather than man vs. God or technology or whatever other themes are prevalent in literature/art. However, more often than not, promoters and bookers muddle even the simplest storytelling with delaying the resolution, nonsensical swerves, or putting wrestlers in a series of matches with no real plot advancement other than someone winning and calling it a feud. It's easy to say that WWE is the biggest culprit, because they are, but they are far from the only one, whether current or historically. It's almost like a wrestling company, in addition to having a support staff direct and train the wrestlers on how to do the wrestling portion should have some kind of staff that advises and trains the writers and bookers on how to tell stories.

It's not just companies like WWE and All Elite Wrestling that should have people who have studied narrative construction and criticism. Every company should have someone in house who knows this kind of stuff. For the bigger companies, they should definitely dip into their billions of dollars to have someone on staff that knows how to construct a story, telling the bookers to knock it off when they decide they want to nix a logical resolution point so they can get another Takeover main evented by Tommaso Ciampa vs. Johnny Gargano. Not only should these writing consultants be able to add basic things like story structure to an angle/feud (introduction-rising action-climax-falling action-resolution), but do things like foreshadowing or adding a greater thematic element than just "dude wants a title." Not that that conceit is bad per se, and you can do simple feuds like that with narrative structure that would enhance them. A title feud that involves the title itself needs that five-part structure anyway.

People like to say that wrestling is "just" wrestling and it can't be something more, something artistic. I see people pushing back against the theater kids, which okay, their introduction into wrestling has added some unwanted elements like main events that at mandatory have to go 20 minutes to mean something even if they only should have at best 12 minutes of content to work through. But it's not like the carny-ass world of wrestling was perfect before they flocked to it. I mean, look at the entirety of Vince Russo's career in creative. Or the days of the territories when people would promise big title unification matches between the WWWF/NWA/AWA Champions only to see them go to a bait-and-switch with a double-countout finish. Every industry can stand a bit of continuous improvement. Wrestling itself is a storytelling medium, so going more and more elaborate with the story conceits that get you from point A to point B can't hurt it if they're done right. The matches don't have to change drastically. It'll still be wrestling even if the characters are attempting to recreate Hamlet or Seven Samurai in graps form.

So who could come aboard to help spruce up wrestling's narrative fidelity? English majors, of course! The much maligned denizens of any given college campus by the titans of industry who GOT JOBS thanks to their degrees are certainly not pursuing useless degrees. English degrees at least get a foot in the door at schools, where young people learn the language and the critical analyzing skills that can help them navigate through things like fake news. They certainly keep the entertainment business afloat. They go onto law school. They write grants. It's not the barren wasteland that leads to baristadom that idiot conservative jagoffs malign it as. And thus, with wrestling companies needing people who know how to navigate literature and narrative structure, well, that's another prospective job for them that should be available.

For bigger promotions with money, this kind of hire should be a no-brainer. For smaller companies that live on the margins, well, I'd think that someone like that would be worth the $50-$100 that one might give to a wrestler for a payoff for a single show. You want the best possible presentation, right? So you get someone in there who knows how to make stories work, and how to keep fans hooked for more than just the wrestling, for when you don't have someone like Orange Cassidy or Marko Stunt or Allie Kat coming in as a guest star. If wrestling is storytelling, then wrestling companies should have someone who knows a thing or two about it on hand. Expecting carnies and grifters to tell a good story rather than attempting cheap tricks for extended payoffs on stories past their due date is a foolish endeavor.