async src="//"> The Wrestling Chronicle: What's In a Name? by Martin Dixon

Sunday, June 9, 2013

What's In a Name? by Martin Dixon

Martin analyzes the process that is coming up with a new name for a new performer and why they simply cannot keep the name they themselves came up with on the Independent scene. If you have a topic and you would like to submit for posting on, email me the attached piece to

"A rose by any other name would smell as sweet" I doubt that there's too many wrestling articles that will start with a Shakespeare quote but it's more than apt for what I'm going to say right now. There seems to be a lot of hang ups on WWE's policy of re-naming talent upon arrival. We should all understand why this is the case: WWE wishes to own the copyright on that performers name, preventing any subsequent competition earning money from what is essentially theirs, or to avoid paying a performer extra for use of a name they used prior to entering the crazy world of Vince McMahon. It's simple economics.

When Curtis Axel "debuted" on Raw recently, a significant portion of my twitter timeline immediately started blowing a gasket that even though Joseph Hennig's amazing lineage is being broached on screen, he isn't actually called "Joe Hennig".  Never mind that he's actually getting some screen time in a Raw main event segment, (Although not the most auspicious debut) remember he used to be called Michael McGillicutty, which isn't really a name that you could see on the Wrestlemania marquee. 

WWE seems at times to go out of it's way to give talent "regular sounding" names. I'm no expert on this (as if you hadn't guessed) but I think this may have something to do with the rise of MMA, as it's most popular stars compete under their real "regular sounding" names, that the audience can relate too. Sometimes this fits, as in the case of The Shield, although if I were writing, I maybe would have had them just use their surnames. Also Adrian Neville, the former PAC, to me that name sounds like a bloke from the north-east of England. However sometimes like with McGillicutty, it just doesn't sound right. I'm not saying I'd be happy for him to be called "Angry McFurious", but I'll take Curtis Axel any day of the week.

Before I start rambling too much, what I'm trying to say is that we really shouldn't care what name a wrestler has, just that they are there at all. Sami Zayn may not be El Generico, but the man portraying him certainly is, same with Kassius Ohno, a lame pun his name may be, but underneath it he is still the same Chris Hero that lit up the independent & international scene. 

The main gist of this is is that I simply do not care what collection of letters comprise a wrestlers name as long as I get to see these great wrestlers, having great matches & segments on my TV, week after week.

A rant by any other name would still be a rant, and this is what this little thing has become, I apologise, but I hope this'll inspire a debate with you dear reader. Do I have my head up my backside and names do make the man/woman? Do you agree and we should stop being so hung up on names as long as we get to see someone? Either way I can be reached on twitter @BunnySuicida where in between shilling my work as part of l'd be happy to converse with you about any points about this article. 

I'd like to take the opportunity to thank The Wrestling Chronicle for allowing me to invade the site, it's much appreciated, and I'd like to leave you with the motto of all of us at 4CR: Have fun with wrestling, because that's what it's there for.
Post a Comment