Is It impossible to "break the fourth wall" in wrestling?

[Deleted]

When someone breaks Kayfabe it is often referred to as Fourth wall breaking



But recently I've been thinking about the concept of the fourth wall and about how the fourth wall is actually the invisible wall between the audience and the stage in plays. It is called the fourth wall because the characters in the play are unaware there is an audience there and for all intents and purpose it fuctions just like the three walls on the other sides. Breaking the fourth wall is actually when the cast speak to the audience or acknowledge them as the characters are ignoring the fourth wall aka breaking it.


Wrestling can't really break the fourth wall as the fourth wall doesn't really exist in wrestling, If breaking the fourth wall is acknowledging that there is an audience, Wrestling can't be breaking the fourth wall as it already acknowledges the audience, all promos and interviews are cut with the characters fully aware that people are watching, wrestlers regularly interact with the crowd and cameras. So breaking kayfabe is not really breaking the fourth wall imho as there isn't a fourth wall?

Plus y'know there are seats around all four sides of the ring


Is there something I'm missing? as alot of people seem to mention wrestlers "breaking the fourth wall"

[Deleted]

In this case, breaking the fourth wall would be acknowledging that it's all part of a pre-planned show, i.e. Raphael in the '87 TMNT toon, not Vince Russo.

Imagine (if you weel) someone giving an aside to the audience that falls completely outside of any semblance of storyline or kayfabe, unlike a worked shoot:

"I'm going to hurt you, John Cena - but not too badly, we've got a PPV to sell!"
"I'm going to figure out who's behind this - and I've got a feeling it will be by 11:15 EST."
"If Big Show doesn't do this, he'll be fired - and we all know how well that sticks."

[chazraps]

Yeah, I think the fourth wall has been broken at times, but people confuse the act of breaking the fourth wall with how wrestling's become self-aware of its own sillyness. In terms of your original analogy, an the actual definition of the fourth wall in terms of theater, there very much is a wall in terms of thing we aren't supposed to look at. Wrestling is theater, it just happens to have a different stage set-up and be primarily consumed as televised. But calling attention directly to something that's supposed to be an illusion or something we don't see does, in fact, break the fourth wall.

I think the clearest example of the fourth wall being broken was Edge and Christian's sort lived tenure as "The Insiders" in early 2000 when they would occasionally join JR and King on commentary and use "insider terminology."

[Deleted]

Oct 15, 2013 18:48:40 GMT -5 chazraps said:

But calling attention directly to something that's supposed to be an illusion or something we don't see does, in fact, break the fourth wall.

Well, that's exactly what I was trying to say.

[fw91]

cm punk did it

["Trickster Dogg" James Jesse]

I think what constitutes 'breaking the fourth wall' in wrestling today is anything that really doesn't (or shouldn't) exist in the storyworld of a professional wrestling show.

Examples:

- Hornswoggle painting a hole on a wall to escape Carlito
- Little People's Court existing underneath the ring
- Coachmen trying to blow up Hornswoggle and the ring along with it
- basically, anything with Hornswoggle
- R-Truth blows up
- Mae Young's hand-child appearing on the 1000th episode of Raw
- Sheamus gets help from a Muppet

And so on.

[chazraps]

Oct 15, 2013 19:22:26 GMT -5 "Trickster Dogg" James Jesse said:

I think what constitutes 'breaking the fourth wall' in wrestling today is anything that really doesn't (or shouldn't) exist in the storyworld of a professional wrestling show.

Examples:

- Hornswoggle painting a hole on a wall to escape Carlito
- Little People's Court existing underneath the ring
- Coachmen trying to blow up Hornswoggle and the ring along with it
- basically, anything with Hornswoggle
- R-Truth blows up
- Mae Young's hand-child appearing on the 1000th episode of Raw
- Sheamus gets help from a Muppet

And so on.

How so?

[Glitch]

Semantics. It's still the same thing

[Cranjis McBasketball]

Happens all the time. All backstage skits break the 4th wall. People always piss and moan "why don't they watch Raw to see the plans the guy is hatching?" Well, it's not really happening that way, it happens without the awareness of everyone else. Like a soliloquy in a play.

[Magic knows Black Lives Matter]

I don't know, let's find out.

*Stares directly into camera*

CHRIS BENOIT.

[mrmulluk]

Oct 15, 2013 18:48:40 GMT -5 chazraps said:

Yeah, I think the fourth wall has been broken at times, but people confuse the act of breaking the fourth wall with how wrestling's become self-aware of its own sillyness. In terms of your original analogy, an the actual definition of the fourth wall in terms of theater, there very much is a wall in terms of thing we aren't supposed to look at. Wrestling is theater, it just happens to have a different stage set-up and be primarily consumed as televised. But calling attention directly to something that's supposed to be an illusion or something we don't see does, in fact, break the fourth wall.

I think the clearest example of the fourth wall being broken was Edge and Christian's sort lived tenure as "The Insiders" in early 2000 when they would occasionally join JR and King on commentary and use "insider terminology."

Hey, we don't cheat...we do "run-ins".

["Trickster Dogg" James Jesse]

Oct 15, 2013 19:31:36 GMT -5 chazraps said:

Oct 15, 2013 19:22:26 GMT -5 "Trickster Dogg" James Jesse said:

I think what constitutes 'breaking the fourth wall' in wrestling today is anything that really doesn't (or shouldn't) exist in the storyworld of a professional wrestling show.

Examples:

- Hornswoggle painting a hole on a wall to escape Carlito
- Little People's Court existing underneath the ring
- Coachmen trying to blow up Hornswoggle and the ring along with it
- basically, anything with Hornswoggle
- R-Truth blows up
- Mae Young's hand-child appearing on the 1000th episode of Raw
- Sheamus gets help from a Muppet

And so on.

How so?

Because if we suspend our disbelief, meaning that we treat whatever appears on the show seriously, it breaks the logic of the plausibility (and not so much the 'reality') of what can or can't occur in the story universe of wrestling TV. Meaning: yes, if you're being chased by someone in the story universe of professional wrestling, you can now paint a hole on the wall to escape; or that there is a pocket universe which exists underneath the ring populated by little people, or that you can now blow up the ring without actually incurring any sort of destructive damage; or people can now at any point be blown up without leaving any viscera strewn about; or that someone can give birth to a hand, that hand can grow into a hand-person that can talk; or that Muppets are as much real people as real people are. But even then, it wouldn't be so bad other than the fact that each of these incidents, all recent examples no less when WWE decided to go 'Looney Tunes' with their gaga segments, only occur once. Unlike, say, the random backstage dancing segments, which have occurred so much on WWE TV that they now become a part of the fabric of plausibility that at any random moment, a bunch of wrestlers backstage will start singing and dancing.

It's kind of like the Family Guy cutaway gags: they are so frequent in the Family Guy universe, even to the point that characters recognize their presence, that they come to make up the fourth wall instead of breaking it altogether. There aren't so much rules or laws when it comes the believability of the story world that is professional wrestling, but guidelines. But within those guidelines, you can't just make shit up without justifying why that is, which, with the examples I suggested, is ultimately what is lacking about WWE's recent attempts at comedy which I believe have come to signify those very wall-breaking moments that before were never even conceivable: imagine blowing up the Ultimate Warrior on the interview round with Gene Okerlund as witness to the event, or Mr. McMahon painting a hole on the wall to avoid getting beat up by Steve Austin. You'd swear off the program forever because it treated you like you were stupid for ever believing that such silliness could occur in wrestling (which is already quite the silly universe indeed).

Keep the cartoon stuff to cartoons and out of wrestling unless you're trying to turn wrestling into a cartoon (say, like CHIKARA) when such silliness is not only welcomed, but allowed.

[BayleyTiffyCodyCenaJudyHopps]

Oct 16, 2013 18:43:58 GMT -5 "Trickster Dogg" James Jesse said:

Oct 15, 2013 19:31:36 GMT -5 chazraps said:

How so?

Because if we suspend our disbelief, meaning that we treat whatever appears on the show seriously, it breaks the logic of the plausibility (and not so much the 'reality') of what can or can't occur in the story universe of wrestling TV. Meaning: yes, if you're being chased by someone in the story universe of professional wrestling, you can now paint a hole on the wall to escape; or that there is a pocket universe which exists underneath the ring populated by little people, or that you can now blow up the ring without actually incurring any sort of destructive damage; or people can now at any point be blown up without leaving any viscera strewn about; or that someone can give birth to a hand, that hand can grow into a hand-person that can talk; or that Muppets are as much real people as real people are. But even then, it wouldn't be so bad other than the fact that each of these incidents, all recent examples no less when WWE decided to go 'Looney Tunes' with their gaga segments, only occur once. Unlike, say, the random backstage dancing segments, which have occurred so much on WWE TV that they now become a part of the fabric of plausibility that at any random moment, a bunch of wrestlers backstage will start singing and dancing.

It's kind of like the Family Guy cutaway gags: they are so frequent in the Family Guy universe, even to the point that characters recognize their presence, that they come to make up the fourth wall instead of breaking it altogether. There aren't so much rules or laws when it comes the believability of the story world that is professional wrestling, but guidelines. But within those guidelines, you can't just make shit up without justifying why that is, which, with the examples I suggested, is ultimately what is lacking about WWE's recent attempts at comedy which I believe have come to signify those very wall-breaking moments that before were never even conceivable: imagine blowing up the Ultimate Warrior on the interview round with Gene Okerlund as witness to the event, or Mr. McMahon painting a hole on the wall to avoid getting beat up by Steve Austin. You'd swear off the program forever because it treated you like you were stupid for ever believing that such silliness could occur in wrestling (which is already quite the silly universe indeed).

Keep the cartoon stuff to cartoons and out of wrestling unless you're trying to turn wrestling into a cartoon (say, like CHIKARA) when such silliness is not only welcomed, but allowed.

Thing is, wrestling's already a cartoon in its purest, rawest form. If I'm being led to believe that wrestlers are too dumb to realize they can halt an irish whip by grabbing on the ropes, head-impacting moves like DDTs aren't instant match enders, and authority figures can rampantly abuse their power without being targeted by ethics committees, Sheamus shooting the breeze with Beaker isn't too far of a stretch.

Now if childish humor isn't to one's liking, that's one thing, but I think wrestling is so inherently lowbrow that it really ought to be exempt from most guidelines. Trying to reach true "believability" will always be a losing battle, especially now that kayfabe is more or less gone forever.

But that's me- I enjoy wrestling a lot more when I throw any concern of consistency out the door. I have things like Boardwalk Empire and Scandal if I want programming with nuance and logic, and I don't see much point in wrestling even glancing in that direction when it can just embrace its absurdity.

[chazraps]

Oct 16, 2013 18:43:58 GMT -5 "Trickster Dogg" James Jesse said:

Oct 15, 2013 19:31:36 GMT -5 chazraps said:

How so?

Because if we suspend our disbelief, meaning that we treat whatever appears on the show seriously, it breaks the logic of the plausibility (and not so much the 'reality') of what can or can't occur in the story universe of wrestling TV. Meaning: yes, if you're being chased by someone in the story universe of professional wrestling, you can now paint a hole on the wall to escape; or that there is a pocket universe which exists underneath the ring populated by little people, or that you can now blow up the ring without actually incurring any sort of destructive damage; or people can now at any point be blown up without leaving any viscera strewn about; or that someone can give birth to a hand, that hand can grow into a hand-person that can talk; or that Muppets are as much real people as real people are. But even then, it wouldn't be so bad other than the fact that each of these incidents, all recent examples no less when WWE decided to go 'Looney Tunes' with their gaga segments, only occur once. Unlike, say, the random backstage dancing segments, which have occurred so much on WWE TV that they now become a part of the fabric of plausibility that at any random moment, a bunch of wrestlers backstage will start singing and dancing.

It's kind of like the Family Guy cutaway gags: they are so frequent in the Family Guy universe, even to the point that characters recognize their presence, that they come to make up the fourth wall instead of breaking it altogether. There aren't so much rules or laws when it comes the believability of the story world that is professional wrestling, but guidelines. But within those guidelines, you can't just make shit up without justifying why that is, which, with the examples I suggested, is ultimately what is lacking about WWE's recent attempts at comedy which I believe have come to signify those very wall-breaking moments that before were never even conceivable: imagine blowing up the Ultimate Warrior on the interview round with Gene Okerlund as witness to the event, or Mr. McMahon painting a hole on the wall to avoid getting beat up by Steve Austin. You'd swear off the program forever because it treated you like you were stupid for ever believing that such silliness could occur in wrestling (which is already quite the silly universe indeed).

Keep the cartoon stuff to cartoons and out of wrestling unless you're trying to turn wrestling into a cartoon (say, like CHIKARA) when such silliness is not only welcomed, but allowed.

Yeah, that's not breaking the fourth wall.

[Old Jack Burton]

WWE can, and occasionally does break the fourth wall by explicitly admitting that the outcome of matches are predetermined. The best examples of this are the segments which have shown footage of developmental talent being trained to sell an opponents offense.

Clips of trainees in a ring could be passed off as simply training them in the same way an MMA class might go about things, but there's really no other explanation at all of why they would train to sell a move other than wrestling is fake.