Catchy title draw you in? Well stick around, I want to talk about, what I feel is THE critical, basic aspect of the game that I see a lot of people gloss over or straight take for granted; The Sell.

In this social media driven world, it’s so easy to build yourself up. Of course, you build yourself up to give people a reason to care about your stories, your work – an emotional hook to dive into your promotional content and bouts @ your home fed. After all – jobbers don’t build interest. But, and here’s the key, there’s only so far talking yourself up will get you, as compared to being a living, breathing entity with flaws and quirks. Consider Goldberg, a man whom in WCW’s time was “over” by virtue of being a “badass that can’t lose”. Now, compare this to a more rounded character, someone you could get invested in, say…Mick Foley. Look at the layers of creative depth in a Mick Foley. On a fundamental level, at some point, you realize you just want to see this guy because you can relate to him. He feels real. Contrast that with the Goldberg example; he’s got a definite plateau because it’s hard, if not virtually impossible to relate to him. (I’m not disputing the gimmick worked, because clearly it did…but where did it go)?

In this game of ours, we have that same opportunity. And it seems to pass more and more people by the day. On any given day, you can log onto social media and read a virtual pissing contest of “I’m better than yous”, Championship accolades, and dismissal of others’ accomplishments by those looking for that “quick pop”. Coincidentally, there’s also a number of character accounts that subsequently go inactive, feeling as if they’ve done all they can with a character. Whereas instead, had they focused on building a person rather than a resume, they’d have a more-real-feeling living, breathing entity, that would serve you well for many more months – maybe even years – to come.

For example, anyone whom knows me knows I’m one of the few who has developed and “gotten over” as a defined non-wrestler character. A despicable heel who on the surface boasts about how self-important he is because of his billions – “Billionaire” Miles Blake. But deep down, the character is fundamentally flawed – a concept which couldn’t have ever been explored if it weren’t for the hot, emotional feud with Sasha Foote, and the ever-ongoing feud with Melina Wilson: two women who have repeatedly called him on his bullsh*t and refuse to back down from his will. The point is, because these two (and more, these are just the top two) called Miles on his stuff, and I acknowledged it, rather than ignored/nosold it, it worked to make a more compelling, believable character – and a more long-lasting character survivability in the long run.

Admitting a character’s weakness doesn’t make the character weak, it makes the character robust, well-rounded. After all we as people are not perfect – we are very flawed creatures in and of ourselves – so why should these entities we create, be perfect?

DISCUSS: https://ewspace.com/forums