The Complexity of Context... Or, "I don't get it"
May 21, 2018 8:09:38 GMT -5
Post by Cap on May 21, 2018 8:09:38 GMT -5
I am not really sure the best way to get into this topic, so I might fumble through this at first because I am sort of talking through my own thoughts.
Are there types/styles/genres/periods of wrestling where you watch and something happens that you just don't get? I am not necessarily talking about a style not resonate with you like some people don't connect with lucha or death matches or British or indy wrestling or whatever. Rather, I mean when you are following a long just fine and something happens in the match that seems to have significance to everyone else and you just don't get what is going on....
This tends to come in two forms I think:
There is the story type of context. If you hadn't been keeping up and you didn't watch the hype vignette you might wonder why, for example, Eddie Guerrero and Rey Mysterio Jr were battling for the custody of a child. In a vacuum that might seem over the top (it is) and dumb (it isn't), but I think in context because they were great performers, that worked way better than anyone might have expected. I don't want to get side tracked with a specific example though. There are plenty of things in a match that derive their significance from context (story, characters, previous matches, etc).
The other type however is something a little bit different. It is a matter of tropes and norms. Some of that might be reduced to "style" and some of it might be a matter of something more like culture. I thought of this while watching Parka vs Santo where I sort of feel like this confusing and contrived finish took something away from an incredible match and honestly this is something I personally find most with lucha. I love lucha, but sometimes things happen - particularly around the finish - that I just don't get. Part of this certainly comes from cherrypicking most of the lucha I watch, so it is a "me thing" and not necessarily a "lucha thing"
Sometimes these can be addressed pretty simply. You can look it up and find someone who is willing to explain what is going on to you. However, in other cases, and I think this is particularly salient in the latter type of confusion, you can read about it and still come away not really understanding the choice (or at least I can). Sometimes the explanation just isn't all that helpful. There seem to be norms and expectations that are just taken for granted, leaving me at the very least still unsure why the choice was a good one. Even when I am trying to be open minded and understand context there is a failure to connect somewhere.
In other words, and I can only speak for myself obviously, there is a limit to how far out of my own wrestling culture (as cosmopolitan as I try to make it) I can get, to what norms and expectations I can shift to and still find satisfaction. I use that term strategically. When I find myself unable to "get it" or unable to make sense of the choices being made, the result is usually just me feeling dissatisfied with the result of the match.
Taking the example that sparked me to think about this. Santo and Parka have a bloody brawl that clearly both men where putting some effort into. Parka wore a creepy white body suit for fuck sake, letting everyone know that this would be bloody. The ending however left me deflated. Its a combination of a booking choice that I didn't love (but that is fine) and norms and expectations of lucha in this particular context I believe. To me the two refs thing is always somewhat confusing, but I have read enough about it and seen enough that I get it. It doesn't bother me really. However the finish (and this isn't isolated to this match) is something that i just find somewhat deflating. With all this violence and two guys who went to extra trouble to make this a brutal spectacle, this (to my eye) convoluted finish just doesn't register. Maybe I am missing something, but i am more inclined to think that finishes like this have resonance in this context that I am not getting and that even if it were explained to me I probably wouldn't find that explanation super helpful.
To put it another way, context is obviously important. There is no doubt about that. I am very jealous of people who have watched a lot of the stuff I have cherrypicked in their context and who in turn get the nuances. However, context is very complex and it isn't JUST about knowing the story going into the match. I can sit here in North Carolina and watch every bit of Joshi that made tape in all of 1992 if I want, but it doesn't mean I was in Japan in 1992. I can "get" the story and probably a great deal of the joshi culture by immersing myself in it, but I'll always miss something. In that, the degree to which I am able to adapt to the norms and expectations that are taken for granted in putting together matches will in many ways limit (or not) my enjoyment of the match.
While I think there is something to "enjoy it for what it is" as well as those who "just can't get int (insert style)", neither seems sufficient for a project like this, where we are trying to sort out the greatest matches ever (and in turn, what that even means). Its almost an universal mantra here that great matches are timeless, that true greatness transcends the in the momentness of the match and I wonder to what extent true greatness must transcend its context. Obviously that will be different for each person. Some people's ability to find satisfaction in the finish of something like Santo v Parka is greater than mine. Some people's ability to enjoy any number of styles and time periods for these reasons might be lower. When we talk about cultural differences in wrestling I do think those differences are significant, but I don't think are these massive gulfs that are objectively impossible to bridge, people may just have different tolerances for different norms and expectations, different degrees to which they can shift out of their own. In an ideal world this project will work that out with lots of different voters with varied tastes, but we shall see.
I guess beyond a rant, I am interested to what degree people feel like there are things in certain genres/styles/time periods that they just don't "get". More specific than a judgement on these genres/styles/time periods, what tropes, norms, or expectations hinder your enjoyment of particular matches or types of matches, if any? Are there ones that used to bother you, but don't now? I am generally just curious if anything like this pops up for you in your watching/rating.
Are there types/styles/genres/periods of wrestling where you watch and something happens that you just don't get? I am not necessarily talking about a style not resonate with you like some people don't connect with lucha or death matches or British or indy wrestling or whatever. Rather, I mean when you are following a long just fine and something happens in the match that seems to have significance to everyone else and you just don't get what is going on....
This tends to come in two forms I think:
There is the story type of context. If you hadn't been keeping up and you didn't watch the hype vignette you might wonder why, for example, Eddie Guerrero and Rey Mysterio Jr were battling for the custody of a child. In a vacuum that might seem over the top (it is) and dumb (it isn't), but I think in context because they were great performers, that worked way better than anyone might have expected. I don't want to get side tracked with a specific example though. There are plenty of things in a match that derive their significance from context (story, characters, previous matches, etc).
The other type however is something a little bit different. It is a matter of tropes and norms. Some of that might be reduced to "style" and some of it might be a matter of something more like culture. I thought of this while watching Parka vs Santo where I sort of feel like this confusing and contrived finish took something away from an incredible match and honestly this is something I personally find most with lucha. I love lucha, but sometimes things happen - particularly around the finish - that I just don't get. Part of this certainly comes from cherrypicking most of the lucha I watch, so it is a "me thing" and not necessarily a "lucha thing"
Sometimes these can be addressed pretty simply. You can look it up and find someone who is willing to explain what is going on to you. However, in other cases, and I think this is particularly salient in the latter type of confusion, you can read about it and still come away not really understanding the choice (or at least I can). Sometimes the explanation just isn't all that helpful. There seem to be norms and expectations that are just taken for granted, leaving me at the very least still unsure why the choice was a good one. Even when I am trying to be open minded and understand context there is a failure to connect somewhere.
In other words, and I can only speak for myself obviously, there is a limit to how far out of my own wrestling culture (as cosmopolitan as I try to make it) I can get, to what norms and expectations I can shift to and still find satisfaction. I use that term strategically. When I find myself unable to "get it" or unable to make sense of the choices being made, the result is usually just me feeling dissatisfied with the result of the match.
Taking the example that sparked me to think about this. Santo and Parka have a bloody brawl that clearly both men where putting some effort into. Parka wore a creepy white body suit for fuck sake, letting everyone know that this would be bloody. The ending however left me deflated. Its a combination of a booking choice that I didn't love (but that is fine) and norms and expectations of lucha in this particular context I believe. To me the two refs thing is always somewhat confusing, but I have read enough about it and seen enough that I get it. It doesn't bother me really. However the finish (and this isn't isolated to this match) is something that i just find somewhat deflating. With all this violence and two guys who went to extra trouble to make this a brutal spectacle, this (to my eye) convoluted finish just doesn't register. Maybe I am missing something, but i am more inclined to think that finishes like this have resonance in this context that I am not getting and that even if it were explained to me I probably wouldn't find that explanation super helpful.
To put it another way, context is obviously important. There is no doubt about that. I am very jealous of people who have watched a lot of the stuff I have cherrypicked in their context and who in turn get the nuances. However, context is very complex and it isn't JUST about knowing the story going into the match. I can sit here in North Carolina and watch every bit of Joshi that made tape in all of 1992 if I want, but it doesn't mean I was in Japan in 1992. I can "get" the story and probably a great deal of the joshi culture by immersing myself in it, but I'll always miss something. In that, the degree to which I am able to adapt to the norms and expectations that are taken for granted in putting together matches will in many ways limit (or not) my enjoyment of the match.
While I think there is something to "enjoy it for what it is" as well as those who "just can't get int (insert style)", neither seems sufficient for a project like this, where we are trying to sort out the greatest matches ever (and in turn, what that even means). Its almost an universal mantra here that great matches are timeless, that true greatness transcends the in the momentness of the match and I wonder to what extent true greatness must transcend its context. Obviously that will be different for each person. Some people's ability to find satisfaction in the finish of something like Santo v Parka is greater than mine. Some people's ability to enjoy any number of styles and time periods for these reasons might be lower. When we talk about cultural differences in wrestling I do think those differences are significant, but I don't think are these massive gulfs that are objectively impossible to bridge, people may just have different tolerances for different norms and expectations, different degrees to which they can shift out of their own. In an ideal world this project will work that out with lots of different voters with varied tastes, but we shall see.
I guess beyond a rant, I am interested to what degree people feel like there are things in certain genres/styles/time periods that they just don't "get". More specific than a judgement on these genres/styles/time periods, what tropes, norms, or expectations hinder your enjoyment of particular matches or types of matches, if any? Are there ones that used to bother you, but don't now? I am generally just curious if anything like this pops up for you in your watching/rating.