Narrative tension – what I say versus what I do: Week 4 – Characterisation project

Seth Rollins – Raw

Coming off of a premium live event like Backlash, we, the audience, are looking for character response to the mini-climax, or resolution offered by such an event. In the case of Seth Rollins, he was defeated by adversary Bron Breakker. This may provoke introspection, an increase or decrease in intensity, or a change of strategy. 

Monday Night Raw opens with Rollins’ adversaries the Vision, and their manager Paul Heyman uses Rollins’ defeat to dispel Rollins’ previous narrative that Breakker, as a performer and competitor, was not ready, thereby devaluing Rollins’ experience in favour of Breakker’s youth.

This segment winds up in Rollins interfering in a six-man tag team match, to ensure victory for the babyface team of the Street Profits and Joe Hendry. The key point in character progression comes in the aftermath. Rollins offers Street Profits (Angelo Dawkins) his hand, but then as Breakker prepares to attack, Rollins appears to sacrifice Dawkins to Breakker, in order to save himself. We could read this angle as Rollins being unable to suppress his selfish instincts – he is caught between embracing teamwork/collaboration and protecting himself. For a progression narrative to emerge, perhaps Rollins has to understand and master his instinctual behaviour. This self-mastery could well mimic the process of psychotherapy. 

While this time Rollins gains the upper hand on Breakker, his confrontation with potential allies, the Street Profits, is defensive and aggressive, rather than apologetic. Remember his confessional one-to-one interview a week ago? Then he proclaimed a wish for self-improvement, yet here we are seeing obstacles towards this stated goal. However, he does resist further conflict or confrontation with the Street Profits, and keeps his focus on Breakker and the Vision. It appears Rollins cannot fully comprehend the tension between friendship and self-preservation, but may be on the journey to doing so.

Credit: WWE

Jade Cargill – Smackdown

After a replay of Cargill’s return the previous week, as Cargill makes her entrance, her status and dominance are emphasised by the use of low camera angles in which her physique – clothed in red – is framed by a symmetrical blue background. The commentators also play into this narrative: ‘These three women [Cargill and allies] are baddies’ and ‘They look spectacular and I’m terrified of them’. Note how this plays into a WWE tradition of female performers first valued by their looks, then their performance capabilities.

In Cargill’s short dramatic monologue, she keeps focus on competition and championships, physicality. Something Cargill repeats is equating silence [from the fans and her peers] with fear. She is a character who wishes to provoke fear. Yet, her promo is interrupted, offering tension to the narrative she has offered. 

Cargill’s allies then compete in a tag team match while Cargill observes on the outside. This can be seen as another show of status; she is positioned as a marque performer, and as such is too important to compete on a weekly basis. When Cargill interferes in the match to cause a disqualification, it is seen as reflecting not only her disrespect for rules, but also her inability to accept defeat or failure. Again, there’s a narrative tension here, given her defeat at WrestleMania a few weeks ago, which she still has not addressed.

In general, the two weeks we have seen Cargill post-WrestleMania she has appeared to avoid one-on-one confrontation, and has not addressed her defeat at WrestleMania, thus denying the audience any introspection. This may function to maintain her character’s status and mystique. As I suggested in earlier weeks, instead of questioning the morality of her decisions, it appears Cargill will lean harder on her allies. This keeps the question open to audience of whether her powers have been weakened by defeat to Ripley? The narrative tension here is whether Cargill is as feared as she claims, versus an avoidance of direct conflict due to self-doubt. She presents as high status and confident, yet her actions hint at a fear within herself.