>>16257159He is the clearest case I've ever seen of a pseudo-intellectual. I know that phrase gets tossed about a lot now but he's the literal definition.
Kevin Nash does not understand jazz. He doesn't understand function and format nor how jazz and especially experimental jazz purposely plays with them. What he knows is that "smart" people like jazz.
Kevin Nash doesn't understand wine. He doesn't understand the difference in grape and the process of filtering that makes the specific flavours. What he knows is that "smart" people like wine.
Kevin Nash does not understand philosophy. He doesn't understand the power of playing with ideas, of squashing them and stretching them and turning them upside down not because you believe them but because it's interesting and could reveal truths. What he knows is that "smart" people like philosophy.
Whenever Kevin Nash is challenged on a shoot or podcast about any of these "intellectual" pursuits, he reacts by pausing for an overly long time as if he's scrambling for an answer that will not show the world how stupid he is. When he does answer, he answers in overly broad clichés that sound like something that someone educated might say but are actually bereft of even the slightest tint of originally or independent thought.
What Kevin Nash knows about mainly centres around things he is experienced in, situations that he either witnessed or was directly comparable to something he experienced. There is no deeper thought there, no journey into empathetic metaphor, just a straight "this happened to me" objective situational intellect. Even when he was working, neither Diesel or Kevin Nash could connect with an audience in a managed way, in a planned out way to manipulate the audience emotionally because Nash didn't know how to empathise and control the audience emotions like a Hogan or Austin. He just said things he thought were cool.
His expertise ranges from the tolerance levels of somas to big black dicks. And nothing else.
