Smoke Break Psychology: The Lost Art of Criticism

Anyone who has read my stuff knows my “gimmick.”

I put that in quotation marks because, while it is a gimmick in the sense that I present it as part of my column persona, it is also real. I truly do smoke a bowl, let some of my anxieties and mental-health issues fade into the background, get myself into a better headspace, and write.

I do not have to express it the way I do in these columns. I use it for flair. It gives me a through line—the kind they taught us about in creative-writing classes—to add coherence and keep people interested.

But for one column, let’s drop all of that.

No gimmicks. No character. No filter.

This is not That Donnie, TD, or any of those versions of me.

This is the man behind the mask.

I struggle with writing columns sometimes. Not because I lack content or ideas. I have a plethora of ideas sitting in my Keep Notes. I have a small handful of finished columns waiting to be edited, proofread, and organized in my cloud storage. And I have even more ideas tucked away in what could be called my mind palace—if you know, you know.

The issue for me is always this:

What is part of the problem, and what is part of the solution?

I try to hide behind gimmicks and clever writing techniques, but the truth is that I reveal plenty of myself in my writing. I wear my proverbial heart on my sleeve. So, for a brief moment, I want to provide some insight into who I am.

Not to preach. Not to climb onto a high horse. Not to proselytize.

Just to provide some understanding.

On the surface, I probably come across as a laid-back, modern-day hippie. In a lot of ways, I suppose that is accurate. But at my core, I identify as a Bahá’í.

I know most of you may not know what that means, and even fewer of you are going to Google it, so here is the brief version.

The Bahá’í Faith began in Persia in the mid-1800s. At its core is a simple belief: unity.

Bahá’ís believe there is one God and that religion is progressive. Abraham, Moses, Muhammad, Jesus, Krishna, Zoroaster, Buddha, the Báb, Bahá’u’lláh, and many others are all seen as divine messengers. The belief is that they taught the same essential truths, but each brought the message humanity could understand and needed for its particular time, culture, and stage of development.

Another central teaching is that science and religion are the two wings of one bird. They must work together. Anything in religion that directly contradicts science is superstition.

There is much more to it than that, but the word that always comes back around is unity.

The whole hippie idea that we are one human race and should work toward unity rather than division is deeply prevalent in the faith. We should embrace our differences while also putting them aside when the greater good calls for it.

And when unity is the key teaching, anything that creates division or invites judgment has to be approached with caution. If I am standing back, judging people, and taking part in the same forces that drive division, then I am not working toward unity.

That is how I try to approach daily life.

I am not saying I am a pacifist, because I am not. Ask anyone: if you push my buttons, I have a fierce temper. But I try to be careful about what I put into the world. I try to ask myself:

Will this create something positive or negative?

Is this meant to spark positive change or positive thought?

Or will my words and actions create more division and feed into a world already divided over damn near everything imaginable?

One path can give something back, even if it is only making one person’s day a little better or a little easier.

The other serves no purpose beyond a brief dopamine hit—instant gratification that gets thrown out into the world and leaves everyone wanting more.

That is where I struggle with writing a wrestling column.

Take Tito, for example. How often do we see the same braggadocious behavior?

“My columns get the most clicks.”
“I have the most engagement.”

Maybe he does. Maybe he does not.

But why does it need to be quantified?

If a piece of writing is good, and it truly says something that can be defended—something that is not clickbait—then it should stand on its own. It should not need to be constantly measured and advertised.

Read those columns, though. Read the comments. The tone is often standoffish. The same tired arguments get rehashed again and again. I call them tired because they are the same points repeated endlessly, just polished up to look new with fad phrases and clickbait terminology.

The goal is not positive feedback or real discussion. The goal is to stoke the flames of discontent and division.

But can he really be blamed?

Because even when I do not write, I am part of the problem too.

I come here. I see a new Tito column. I read the headline. Before I ever click the link, I already know what I am in for.

Some bragging.

Everything getting pigeonholed into what our generation wanted to watch, without realizing our generation is closing in on 50 and the world is moving past us.

Blaming TKO.

And then, here is the key:

A few sentences designed specifically to generate comments.

Be a little controversial. Be standoffish. Be brash. Take a page from the current political landscape.

How many times have you, the reader, hit refresh on a Tito column’s comment section just to see who said what? To see who he is trolling now, or who is trolling him?

I hear the clicks.

They are not unique.

They are manufactured.

They are not earned.

Wrestling is not perfect. But let’s be real: nothing is.

As fans—scratch that, as human beings—we should always want better. We should always strive for progress. There is nothing wrong with criticism when it is rooted in wanting something to improve.

But let me offer an example.

“Greed” has been a Tito staple for a while now. TKO is pricing people out. TKO is raising ticket prices. TKO is making fans pay for Netflix, cable television through USA, ESPN, Peacock, and everything else just to keep up.

Then a title changes hands on free television, and suddenly there is outrage because it happened on free television. I thought people are supposedly being priced out?

Just because the new champion was not the choice of one writer, we have to pretend it is some great injustice?

Did you not, at least partially, get what you were asking for?

Then there is the question of cohesive storytelling.

For months, Johnny Gargano has been in a funk. For months, two men have tried to pull him out of it: CM Punk and Sami Zayn.

Anyone who cannot see the logical path toward Johnny becoming a heel stooge for Sami has not been paying attention to wrestling. It is Wrestling 101.

Nobody is saying Gargano suddenly needs to be a main-event-level world champion. He is a heel stooge. Do I really need to list all the heel stooges who have stood beside heel champions throughout wrestling history?

And Sami does not deserve the belt? Why not?

He is over as a heel. He does strong mic work. And as a heel, he does not need to have the same clean-cut, heroic presence as Cody Rhodes or CM Punk.

That is Wrestling 201: the face chasing the heel is almost always more compelling than the heel chasing the face.

Is it perfect? No.

But what would you do differently?

Criticism without solutions is just oral masturbation.

If engagement is the name of the game, and clicks and hits are what drive a website, then why not try to create engagement the right way?

So here is my challenge to you, the reader:

Make engagement matter.

Not just for trolling. Not just so I can cherry-pick questions that may or may not have been sent to me privately. If there is something you want me to write about—topics, questions, feuds, wrestlers, booking ideas, whatever—ask below.

Anything that gains traction through comments and likes, I will write about to the best of my ability. I will put my own spin on it, and I will try to make it worth your time.

Meanwhile, I do have a joint rolled and ready. Then I have to make a decision: do I work on the book I have been writing, or do I finish the book I have been reading?

Seriously, if you get a chance, read Tender Is the Flesh by Agustina Bazterrica. It is a great book. If you are that interested, hit me up. I may be able to hook you up.

Next time, I will try to get back into character.

I promise.