Customer Reviews

Tonight in This Very Ring: A Fan's History of Professional Wrestling

5 star:		(8)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(6)
2 star:		(4)
1 star:		(4)

 

 

Todd Martin just wrote a comprehensive review on wrestlingobserver.com that absolutely destroys this book. That review is particularly informative as to the plethora of factual errors and unfounded rumors one finds in the book. I am a big fan of Scott Keith's work, but after two books, it has become immensely clear the former "Netcop" should confine himself to the net.

The title itself is misleading, as several reviewers have pointed out. The book is not a "history" of pro wrestling, but a chronicle of the last five years. The "history" of the previous 30 years is little more than a rushed introduction. Arguably, Scott Keith isn't a "fan" either. He admitted that after Owen Hart's tragic death, it's immensely difficult for him to be entertained by the WWF/E anymore.

I had two major problems with the book. Firstly, much of it is composed of material that can be obtained online for free .... While it may have made sense for Keith to include his "King Lear" and "Lazarus" rants, it was a huge mistake for him to include his match reviews of pay-per-view events, written when they had occurred. Since Keith simply pasted the reviews without editing them to fit the context of the book, they often seem out of place, confusing and at times, even contradictory to what he just wrote. They would refer to storylines and characters not mentioned in the book, and often Keith would speculate in a review about what would happen the next night on Raw (without informing the reader of what actually did occur). This was a double-edged sword. Readers who'd never read the reviews before would be confused, fans who did read the reviews when they were originally written would justifiably feel ripped off.

The other major problem is that despite the title advertising this as a "history" book, not one of Keith's assertions is backed up by a citation. This is particularly troubling given the rather gruesome drug (and sex)-related allegations Keith makes about people such as Missy Hyatt, Tammy Sytch, Jimmy Snuka and a whole host others. It is virtually impossible for the reader to distinguish between documented fact and unfounded internet rumor.

The really sad aspect of all this is that Shaun Assael (a writer for ESPN) came out with a book a year before this one detailing virtually the same time period in wrestling, Sex, Lies and Headlocks. Despite the fact that Keith has probably seen more wrestling in the past year than Assael has in his lifetime, the latter's book is clearly superior in terms of accuracy, writing style and research. I strongly recommend that book, especially if you want to learn about past WWF scandals such as the 1994 steroid trial. Tonight . . . In This Very Ring is not worth your money.

Keith's book is one of many that have come out within the past year that purports to be an accurate history of wrestling (or, at least, that of the history of WWE). And as with many of the others, it turns out to be mainly sour grapes by a writer who has a vendetta against many of the people he is writing about.
Saying that, Keith is at least a bit more upfront of his biases, stating quite clearly that the work is his perspective of wrestling in the past few years and not an indepth, balanced study. However, that is part of the problem with the book as well: the book reads as if talking with a drunk, angry - but knowledable - fan who hates watching, but is too compulsive (and likes arguing too much) to stop. Like being stuck in an elevator with a Star Trek geek who no longer likes Star Trek, only with the occasional laugh line. Keith covers a lot of material in the book, but none of it on a level that seems to say anything beyond whether he personally liked it or not.
To some, that may be the fun part about reading the book; to others, it may be like some type of Chinese water torture, especially as Keith's inability to review without sticking in personal, sometimes nearly libelous, comments gets a bit predictable early on. The best suggestion I can give for anyone curious about the book is to read several of Keith's reviews on-line. If you like his style there, then you'll probably like the book. But, beware - most of the material on-line is nearly word-for-word what you'll read in the book.
Overall, a bit bland, repetitious, and inaccurate in a few places due to the "rant" nature of the writing. It is also a bit short, with mediocre layouts and a rather weak photo section. Probably would make for a better buy used than new. Meanwhile, a more definitive book about the ups and downs of professional wrestling in the U.S. is still out of the reach of readers everywhere.

Normally, I like Scott Keith's writing fairly well, but that's usually in short doses when he recaps various shows and videos. The problem is, his schtick kinda wears really thin over the course of a full-length book. There's only so many times in a book someone can write about how they don't like this person or they don't like this idea without it getting pretty repetitive. And what makes it worse is that Ketih is pretty unoriginal with his jabs at Triple H, Vince McMahon, etc. often repeating the same things several times. Not that he doesn't have valid points, but they lose their impact when he spends the majority of the pages saying some combination of the same things. There are moments of real insight and you tell Keith is really interested when he talks about some angles in such detail that he spends two or three pages on one or two months worth of shows. But, in contrast, sometimes he sums up half a year in the same amount of space as well.

Like I said, I normally like Scott Keith and his rant-style, but it just kinda gets old after a hundred or so pages. I guess that's why I'm dissapointed with the book, because I'm a wrestling fan, but Keith, whether he meant to or not, geared this book to the "marks" and the less knowledgeable of wrestling's history and backstage politics. I'll keep reading his Smark rants, but when I want long form wrestling writing, I'll stick with Chris Hyatte.

On page 98, Scott Keith tells you almost all you need to know about his perspective--he "can truly say he [hates]" both Vince McMahon and former WWF booker Vince Russo for "killing" Owen Hart, Keith's favorite wrestler, who in fact died in a tragic accident. Keith's hatred for McMahon, the WWF, and a strange, unprofessional Canadian bias destroys his credibility as a chronicler of wrestling history.

And despite the sub-title, this is not a "history of professional wrestling". Instead, it's one man's editorialized version of very recent WWF history. It's a shameful lie, and anyone expecting a serious consideration of Ric Flair's career, the steroid scandal, the Hulk Hogan era, etc., should look elsewhere.

Instead, you get a curious treatment of the WWF, which became an entertainment force (again) in the late 20th century. But Keith spends more time applauding Bret Hart (surprise! Owen's brother AND a Canadian), who in fact was "on top" of the WWF during its deep skid, then he does explaining Steve Austin or the Rock's celebrity. (You'll close the book unaware that the phenomenon of both men far eclipsed Bret Hart or any other WWF star.) Likewise, Keith offers that certain (Canadian) wrestlers were held back by the WWF, but fails to prove it other than by simply saying so, and he also misses opportunities to explain the differences in how, say, Kurt Angle and Chris Benoit were "created", or what benefit Shawn Michaels "received" that Chris Jericho has been denied. Without that explanation, Keith's rants and mocking (and he's negative on every page) ring hollow.

Included in the text are also several "reviews" of wrestling matches over the years, but they suffer from being written apparently years ago in some cases and without the perspective of hindsight and any effort to frame them in the current text. (By contrast, the brief interludes included, which were written contemporaneously with the rest of the book, are much better.) Further, the reviews are just plain boring: if Keith wrote movie reviews they'd look like, "Tom Cruise says 'I want the truth!' and Jack Nicholson says 'You can't handle the truth'. 3 stars." Keith usually substitutes dull play-by-play for historical reflection and context.

To his credit, Keith has written a page-turner. However, that's more a tribute to the fascinating WWF product of the period than his prose.

This is in the bottom tier of wrestling books that have been released recently. If you are looking for revelations or insight into the world of pro wrestling, stick to the Mick Foley, Dynamite Kid and Lou Thez books (or even the Jerry Lawler book for that matter).

The bulk of this book is cut and paste of reviews Keith wrote for the internet. These you can still find on the net for free.

Despite what Keith may think, he is not very funny and come across more as bitter than funny.

Infamous `Net Columnist Scott Keith takes us on a great ride through history with his take on the WWE's past, present and foreseeable future.

THE AUTHOR:

Scott Keith has long been on the forefront of the Internet wrestling scene with his opinionated and controversial recaps and coverage of wrestling events. His first book "The Buzz on Pro-Wrestling" was released to mixed reviews in 2001. His follow-up book, "Tonight In This Very Ring" shows marked improvement from the first effort.

THE BOOK:

Keith starts off with a very quick intro into the history of the business and the founding of the WWF and its early years. The vast majority of the book covers the recent history of the WWE from their doldrums of the mid-90s through the late 90s boom period before wrapping up with the events of the past year. In it he discusses not only the events we saw as fans on TV but also a lot of the "behind-the-scenes" real-life stories about the talent and much of the backstage turmoil that went on. In between Keith also highlights many of the key matches that took place over the years by including many of his infamous "Smark Rant" match reviews.

THE COOL STUFF:

Keith's writing style is easily described as either "you love it, or you hate it." You'll either find the biting sarcasm hilariously funny or you'll find it pompous. What I personally enjoyed about this book was Keith's comparison of the WWE story to other literary works or historical events. For example, his equating of the WWE doldrum years to both the King Lear story (McMahon's burial of the loyal Bret Hart to the "less-than" sincere Shawn Michaels and Kevin Nash) as well the Biblical story of Lazarus (their rise from the Doldrums to the Heights of the Attitude Era boom period) was pure genius.

THE CRITIQUE:

Admittedly, much of the material in the book (like his Match Rants and other remarks) can be found in the collected writings on his website so many long-time Keith readers have already heard a "good portion" of what he has to say in this book. So, if you are a Keith reader don't be surprised if a lot of what you are reading sounds familiar.

THE VERDICT:

Overall, "Tonight In This Very Ring" is a great collection of the WWE's history as seen through the eyes of one of its fans (not matter how jaded). If you are a fan of WWE you'll appreciate seeing the Fed through Keith's unique point-of-view, whether or not you agree with his take. If you are a Keith fan then you definitely want to pick this up. If you are not, then by all means take a pass.

Highly Recommended

If you're a fan of Scott Keith, you're probably going to look into buying this title. And if you do, be prepared for a slick and glossy recap of the WWE's misfortunes and miscalculations from 1993 on up. Hyped to be chock full of those famous Scott Keith rant-worthy opinions, this book disappoints. After that "The Buzz on Professional Wrestling" mediocrity, anything would be better but, it still feels as if Keith is holding back from ranting in favor of giving the reader a basic rundown of the WWE's stupidity of recent years, most of which is common knowledge to begin with. Hopefully, third time is the charm and we'll get a true Rant-styled read that will not seem so much like a text book. In the end though, this title (while slightly disappointing) warrants a thumbs up and is worth the read on a dreary and rainy day.

There are two types of professional wrestling fans. The first kind, which is about 75% of the
population, are just casual fans that watch for fun. They cheer their favorite wrestlers, and boo the
ones they hate. These fans are dubbed "marks" by the wrestling industry. Most "marks" know
wrestling is fake, but believe in the characters that they are watching. Wrestling is cool to them.

The second kind of fan knows practically everything about the business, from the real names of

the wrestlers to what goes on backstage. They visit "insider" web pages and get the inside scoop
on what future story lines will occur. These fans are called "smart marks" by the industry,
because they are more knowledgeable about pro wrestling.

Scott Keith, the author of this book, is a "smart mark", or "smark" for short. This book
appeals to that group of fan. This is not a book just about the story line history of the WWF, it's a
look behind the curtain at what went on backstage from 1995-2001. It's quite a read, especially if
you never knew any of the backstage information before.

However, there are a few things which make this book less than perfect. First and foremost,
Scott Keith is just a FAN of pro wrestling, just like most of us. He never worked for the WWF,
and none of the information in this book came from them. Because of that, Keith gets all his
information from inside sources who claim to have witnessed these occurrences. Because of that,
it's hard to believe EVERYTHING contained in this book, since Keith never saw it for himself.
However, I would say 80% of the information in the book probably IS true, but it can't all be
confirmed, which hurts it a bit.

The second, and most glaring problem with this book is Keith himself. While he hits the nail on
the head with a lot of his views, he is incredibly biased towards the actual wrestling aspect of the
product, or the "work rate". Because of this, someone like Hulk Hogan, perhaps the biggest pro
wrestling star ever, gets practically no praise from Keith at all, simply because he isn't a good
actual "wrestler".

Another problem is Keith, a Canadian, is heavily biased toward wrestlers from Canada. Never
is this more apparent than in the chapters detailing the real life feud between Canadian wrestling
legend Bret "Hitman" Hart and Texas native Shawn Michaels. Keith spends page after page
bashing Shawn's backstage politics, but barely even mentions Bret using his backstage pull to get
the tag team titles for his brother Owen and his brother in law Davey Boy Smith. Shawn gets
paragraph after paragraph bashing him for refusing to lose certain matches to certain wrestlers, but
it was just fine for Bret to refuse to lose the world title to Shawn at the "Survivor Series" in 1997,
because he was a "Canadian Hero". Uh huh. Bret's refusal forced WWF owner Vince McMahon
to screw him out of the title, making Shawn and Vince seem like monsters, and Bret seem like a
martyr. Now, I'm not saying Shawn was a saint or anything, but Bret sure wasn't an innocent
victim like Keith makes him out to be.

All in all, this book is a terrific read if you can tolerate Keith's biased views. However, most of
what is in this book can be found on the internet, so if you really want to search, you can get the
book for free. However, it's good to have it all in one good volume, though.

This book is funny, but there are way too many grammatical and factual errors.

I find it amusing that a lot of the reviewers who didn't like this book seem to be upset about Keith's opinions. Hey, I don't agree with every word he says, but I appreciate the humor with which he writes. Keith's a passionate fan and he has an understanding of the long-term effects of various angles and matches - something the WWE lacks right now. He has an incredible knowledge of the product and a bunch of backstage stories. Even if some aren't true, they're definitely interesting. It's obvious he favors certain wrestlers and hates others, but he's always fair when it comes to the in-ring product.

I do have problems with his writing style. If you've read his stuff online, you're probably familiar with his horrible grammar, but I thought the editors would clean that up for this book. Instead, there are numerous example where he screws up the difference between "who" and "whom," writes "it's" instead of "its," ends sentences with prepositions, writes "myself" and other reflexive pronouns in situations where he shouldn't, writes "whether or not," and throws in weird commas where they're not needed. He writes like he's in grade school - passive voice is everywhere.

He also makes all kinds of errors about wrestling. Example - on page 21, he talks about how Bret Hart defeated Owen (actually Owen beat Bret) at WrestleMania X before going on to win the title. He misspells all kinds of names. There are references to Matt "Bourne," Mike "Rotuno," Debbie "Micelli" and her alter ego "Medusa." Often times, he can't make up his mind, so he'll use multiple spellings in the book. He writes "Badd Ass" Billy Gunn and "Bad Ass" Billy Gunn. Steve "MacMichael's" wife is Debra McMichael. Debbie "Micelli" is both "Medusa" and Madusa. Marlena is both Terri "Runnells" and Terri Runnels. Is it "Bubba" Ray Dudley or "Buh Buh" Ray Dudley? Keith uses both.

These things are minor annoyances. I think the editors didn't do their job, but if you're reading this book, it's probably not a big deal.

Keith has strong opinions about wrestling, and I think that makes his jokes even funnier. If you, like me, and unlike some of the other reviewers, can keep your mind open long enough to laugh along with Keith even when you don't agree with him, you'll get a kick out of this book.

This book is incredibly poorly written and there are several factual errors. I might recommend it to someone who's just starting to watch wrestling or just learning how to read. You're better off saving your money and going to one of the many wrestling history sites on the internet. Mr. Keith would be advised to do a little more research before writing his next book.