Amazingly, I can recall a moment even more racist than this.
Additionally, Havok (formerly of TNA) sort of blew her shot with NXT with a series of similarly awful tweets on social media.
Yeah, these are terrible. Watching Hogan come out to Real American and not Eye of the Tiger for Wrestlemania I drives me nuts. Yeah, most licensed music has been scrubbed.
I have not noticed that this edit has been performed. I recall the entrance music you reference. Have they edited out DDP altogether, muted his entrance music, or what modes and methods of post-production tinkering are going into these archival retcons?
Nick, great comments, keenly zeroing in on the media hegemony rule of thumb: control the narrative and you control history. WWE borrows from media titans, whether it be Netflix’s go big or nothing at all strategy as well as Disney’s corporate synergy absorption model of global capitalism. The linguistic application of “monolith” carries great weight here, as you use it to describe WWE’s hegemonic power (perhaps that indie director Kubrick(?) was onto something way back when?). Indeed, the company ideology is drenched (oiled?) in rituals of hyper-masculinity, organized at the top by hyper-masculine rhetors, toward a uniform model of infinite rebranding and maximum economic and cultural currency. Its hard to stop and reflect on a diverse working atmosphere when there’s so much energy going into protecting the bottom line and reifying the status quo. The Sirius XM wrestling radio series Busted Open keys in on how this strategy is now negating their developmental future, with so many “part-timers” maintaining Top-Billing as the key PayPerViews.
I am still angry that I can’t watch WCW events with DDP with the original SELF HIGH FIVE theme song.
The control that the WWE exercises over their own digital content has scary parallels for the manner is which reality is defined in the digital age: Video or it didn’t happen. The degree to which individuals in the larger sociopolitical sphere can get away with outrageously ahistorical claims in the absence of a video record appears remarkable. Non video text is easily dismissed and discarded. The monolithic control that the WWE exercises over the whole of wrestling history (a control that expands with every purchased promotional archival video catalog) makes their own ability to control that narrative seem almost unparalleled.
Kristine, thank you for your comments. You are spot on in assessing (and critiquing) not only that WWE holds this retconning capability that privileges what content is visible versus invisible but also that they demonstrate biased subjectivity that functions to perform digital cultural erasure from their archival history (ex: Benoit) or “scrubbing” (ex: Hogan) as PR damage control, while with the same brush minimizing marginalized voices of dissent (e.g. Punk) in the effort of homogenizing product output and public perception. And it doesn’t matter because for those previously without access, the network is a floodgate whether it lets in a controlled amount of media content or an uncontrolled amount (still controlled).
In effect, they continually rewrite their own history, which is the base conception of reshaping culture through storytelling throughout human history. The difference is, we have physical (and digital) memories that suggest otherwise, or to put it in their terms, the “WWE Universe” talks back.
Loved reading this. One of the things that occurred to me is how the WWE Network has facilitated this ability for WWE to attempt to negate what they feel are problematic current/former wrestlers. While obviously for different reasons, the purging of most of the references to Chris Benoit and CM Punk reflects this. The network itself serves to retroactively alter and create narratives about WWE’s history.
Amen on both counts.
>Declaring it fan service is an easy way to dismiss having to engage with what the show did there.
Yeah—it’s a shorthand dismissal that’s patronizing to both the series and to fans. Nil points.
And I trust Fuller, but I would be so very ok on the one hand if there were no more Hannibal. The ending to the series is just so freaking perfect. On the other, though, as a fan, I’d love to watch 13 episodes of Murder Husbands. But perhaps that’s what the (non-network televised) fanfic is for…
I adore this line of discussion. My goodness. :) Hence me waiting a week to comment—been savoring it.
>I really like the idea that if we think of Hannibal as fanfiction, the metaphor of the glass takes on a different value because fanfic (esp. slash) often operates with non-normative ideas about gender and sexuality
Just want to throw this out there:
The models that Jenkins and even Constance Penley offer re: fanfic formed were premised upon the notion of an intractable, unbreachable divide (that glass again) between official producers and the fans. You could even argue that the text itself was the glass, apparently transparent and accessible but really hardened against breach or crack from the inside. What Hannibal does so beautifully is let everybody leave their fingerprints all over that glass—Hannibal as text bears our fannish marks, including Fuller’s, and that brings me such inexplicable joy.