Strong Faces vs Intelligent Heels

[shattered dreams]

Wrestling fans are idiots. Smarks like heels. Stop me if you have heard this one before. Anyway, it is interesting to think about how mental strength is booked to look opposed to physical strength. You can argue about the validity of this statement but it seems to me more often than not faces are booked to be physically superior when winning and this is a positive thing while heels have to use mental "tricks" to outsmart the face when they win and this is a negative thing. Obviously there is more to this, especially in the case of the heel, but this is the basis. The heel is calculating and resourceful while the face just comes down and brawls it out.

Assuming they want the majority of the audience to identify with the face we start to see where the first comment from this post comes from. The product directly appeals in the mainstream to those that value the ability to beat up a "nerd." It also should not be that surprising then that the smart marks are not enthralled with the faces and identify with the intellectual approach of the heels. I often see people chalk it up to the desire to be contrary and that might be an oversimplification. Thoughts on this and anyone else think this sends a weird message?

 

[Hulk Hogan's Brother]

I think you are reading too much into this SD.

Yes heels are shown as the guys who do most of the planning but it is not that they trouble the face only through their ingenuity. They mostly try to gain an advantage over the face by unfair means which in other words is blatant cheating or by misusing the powerful position they are in.

Also I certainly cannot think of any heel as a nerd except possibly The Brain but then again he was a manager. Most heels do have some other distinguishable characteristic which is the one that makes the fans hate them. I have certainly never seen a heel get hate only because he was intelligent.

Also it is not that faces do not use intelligence. On the surface of it, it does look like Austin just brawled his way to victory against Vince but if you take a closer look you will see that there were quite a few instances where Austin used his brains to get out of a sticky situation. An example would be his feud versus Dude Love and their match at Over the Edge 1998.

 

[shattered dreams]

I wasn't saying that heels are booked as nerds, which is why I put that in quotes. "Nerds" in this case meaning using mental tricks in place of physical prowess. When did HHH become the cerebral assassin for example?

I made it clear that it isn't only one way and there are examples here and there of the opposite but that doesn't describe the norm. Yes, there are other reasons that heels are disliked but my point was why do we not see more intelligence booked as a positive for faces. Faces seem to often be the guy that just shows up and wants to physically throw down. The heel is usually the one with longer, more elaborate plans. Why is it such a rarity that a character is portrayed as intelligent without being a bad person? The whole thing just seems like jocks vs pretentious "nerds" as told by an average high schooler. The message is a little warped even if it has a better mass appeal.

 

[ThaRegul8r]

It's basically tapping into the anti-intellectualism of this country.

Intellect is pitted against feeling, on the ground that it is somehow inconsistent with warm emotion. It is pitted against character, because it is widely believed that intellect stands for mere cleverness, which transmutes easily into the sly or the diabolical. It is pitted against practicality, since theory is held to be opposed to practice, and the “purely” theoretical mind is so much disesteemed. It is pitted against democracy, since intellect is felt to be a form of distinction that defies egalitarianism. Once the validity of these antagonisms is accepted, then the case for intellect, and by extension for the intellectual, is lost. Who cares to risk sacrificing warmth of emotion, nobility of character, practical capacity, or democratic sentiment in order to pay deference to a type of man who at best is deemed to be merely clever and at worst may even be dangerous?
(Richard Hofstadter, Anti-Intellectualism in American Life, pp. 45-46)

Again and again, but particularly in recent years, it has been noticed that intellect in America is resented as a kind of excellence, as a claim to distinction, as a challenge to egalitarianism, as a quality which almost certainly deprives a man or woman of the common touch.
(Richard Hofstadter, Anti-Intellectualism in American Life, p. 51)

The product appeals to the mainstream by having the faces beat those dastardly, devious, calculating heels. Being mentally superior makes you unrelatable to the "common man." And thus a heel. There have been sociological studies on wrestling which break down how the intelligent heel is one of the time-tested wrestling stereotypes. William C. Martin called it the "point headed intellectual." People get hate for being intelligent all throughout the country. It'll get you labeled as a "nerd," or other socially undesirable label growing up or in school--there are numerous studies on this, and many people can attest to it; they have to hide their intelligence, and males have to otherwise affirm their masculinity by participating in athletics, a dominant masculine practice which will serve to nullify the pejoratives directed at them for their intelligence. So it shouldn't be a surprise to see this played out in wrestling.

Intelligence has been seen as effeminate, a stereotype which was reflected in wrestling with "The Genius" Lanny Poffo. The statement that heels don't get hate because they're intelligent is false. Nick Bockwinkel, long-time AWA Heavyweight Champion, was extremely intelligent and articulate, and the common man vs. intellectual dichotomy was made many times. His using big words was construed as a negative, and during some of his matches you could hear fans slinging insults like "f****t" and "fairy," because being intelligent and articulate isn't "manly"--being able to kick someone's @$$ is. Which would be why faces are booked as physically superior (e.g., John Cena today). You solve problems with your fists, not by plotting, scheming and using mental "tricks."

 

[Alastor]

The answer is really simple. When you watch Basketball, do players that 'flop' on defense rile you up? They are trying to deceive the referee to gain an advantage and if not caught are playing within the rules of the game but it ruins the quality of the sport in the eyes of purists. Same thing with football (soccer) with diving and feigning injuries.

Gamemanship is seen as part of the game in many professional sports but in the eyes of ordinary fans or purists they ruin the enjoyment of the game. Many who watch wrestling would want to see a 'fair' fight. As for your questions about faces and intelligence I believe they are booked to have fight better intelligence which is related to their capability to win matches fairly.

 

[shattered dreams]

I disagree with the sports analogy. Yes, brute force is celebrated in many sports but so is intelligence. People love trick plays. In fact the main job of a coach seems to be outsmart the other team whether they are more talented or not. More importantly being outsmarted in a sports setting almost always places a negative light on the person that was bested, not the person doing it. I understand the flop analogy but plenty of heel tactics are essentially legal anyway. Do people boo when their team runs out the clock to preserve a win? Are no look passes frowned upon? Strategy is a term that comes up a lot in sporting events. In prowrestling strategy more often seems to be the tool of the heel.

 

[Rasha]

I can see your point but it's far from absolute. Bret Hart was always portayed as the smartest guy in the ring regardless of his face/heel alignment, with his ring psychology and strategy a constant source of praise. Similar praise goes to Kurt Angle now. Also, anytime you have a physically dominant heel like a Yokozuna, Undertaker, Kane, etc, the face is the guy who is talked about as having to be smarter and more strategic to win the match.

I think your reasoning had more merit 15-20 years ago than it does now. Think about the faces of those days (e.g. Hulk Hogan, Ultimate Warrior, Jim Duggan, Big Boss Man, Legion of Doom) and compare them with heels (Ric Flair, Jake the Snake, Mr Perfect, Rick Martel) and there's a much wider gap in the "brains versus brawn" perception than there is today. Part of that is because of how much alignment flopping guys do in modern wrestling, but it also comes from the more well-rounded and less gimmicky wrestlers of today.

 

[Alastor]

I disagree with the sports analogy. Yes, brute force is celebrated in many sports but so is intelligence. People love trick plays. In fact the main job of a coach seems to be outsmart the other team whether they are more talented or not. More importantly being outsmarted in a sports setting almost always places a negative light on the person that was bested, not the person doing it. I understand the flop analogy but plenty of heel tactics are essentially legal anyway. Do people boo when their team runs out the clock to preserve a win? Are no look passes frowned upon? Strategy is a term that comes up a lot in sporting events. In prowrestling strategy more often seems to be the tool of the heel.

I am not American so correct me if I am wrong but trick plays require some form of strategic thinking from the team or individual trying to outsmart the opponent. What I was going for was stuff that professional athletes do that in trying to gain an advantage by pushing the rules. Flopping is seen as a legitimate tactics now but 10 15 years ago it would be considered unsportsmanlike as it was basically trying to getting the opponents ejected. Feigning injuries to get the opponent ejected can be considered smart tactics but would you cheer your athletes for doing so? Watch soccer to see teams being booed when running out the clock. No look passes are frowned upon due to its high risks and causes a turnover but it has no place in our argument.

In prowrestling the faces employ strategy by using trick plays to outsmart opponents while heels employ gamemanship to disrupt or distract and pushing the limits of what is legal. Both require skills and training/experience but one would elicit more ill-feeling than the other.

 

[Rasha]

I am not American so correct me if I am wrong...

Gladly!

Flopping is seen as a legitimate tactics now but 10 15 years ago it would be considered unsportsmanlike as it was basically trying to getting the opponents ejected.

It's still considered unsportsmanlike. The NBA actually instituted new anti-flopping rules this year and have said refs can call fouls on the flopper if it's blatantly obvious.

Feigning injuries to get the opponent ejected can be considered smart tactics but would you cheer your athletes for doing so?

Nobody gets ejected in American sports because someone gets injured. The act, not the result, has to be flagrantly violent. But NFL teams have been known to fake injuries to slow down opposing offenses that are trying to play no-huddle or hurry-up.

No look passes are frowned upon due to its high risks and causes a turnover...

Huh? No-looks are common in the NBA today (even the 7-footers do them now) and are typically a better play than telegraphing your pass and getting it stolen. Sure you'll hear about it if you turn it over, but that's true for anything.

 

[Alastor]

Nobody gets ejected in American sports because someone gets injured. The act, not the result, has to be flagrantly violent. But NFL teams have been known to fake injuries to slow down opposing offenses that are trying to play no-huddle or hurry-up.

I was really going to football (soccer) when I stated this as many players feign a serious injury to get a referee to give a yellow or red card to the opponent. But I believe making a injury look worse than it is can convince a ref to eject someone in American sports too. For some fouls the ref might not have ejected someone if not for injuries as it is only human to feel that the offending player deserve some sort of punishment for causing injury.

Anyway the Sports analogy seem to killed off the thread. I believe physical strength is booked over mental strength because it is easier to identify with. Also, the quality of the commentators affect how intelligent wrestlers are portrayed on television. If they keep harping on the fact on how smart wrestler X is by using certain methods, it will catch on similar to how HHH was identified as the cerebral assassin.

 

[Mustang Sally]

....but it seems to me more often than not faces are booked to be physically superior when winning and this is a positive thing while heels have to use mental "tricks" to outsmart the face when they win and this is a negative thing.

It's nothing new; it's a time honored tradition of professional wrestling. Makes me think of the diabolical heel of the 1960's strutting around the ring, tapping his forehead to show the crowd how smart he was for overcoming the superior strength and gamesmanship of his "face" opponent with a devious tactic. Variations of this remain today, although we hope they've become more subtle over the years.

What gets me is how "stupid" the referees have always been. In a tag team match, the ref is forever pushing the face partner out of the ring because he didn't see the tag that everyone else in the arena saw, yet the bad guys can climb in and out of the ring without being admonished at all.

And the good guys? They fall for the same tricks over and over by the heels.

Jeez, maybe we've been rooting for the wrong people.