The thing that strikes me about the situation is its' inherent aberrant, inhuman conditions. Human beings have survived as well as they have because they COOPERATED in groups. In this situation, the group is forced to select and sacrifice members at regular intervals for the ultimate benefit of (ultimately) one individual. As well as compete against another group. Instead of cooperation and collective augmentation of skills, you have infighting and betrayals.
To show just how weird this is, just imagine if these people were put into this position by alien beings. Start to see how unnatural it is?
I must admit I watched perhaps 15 min. of the show before surfing elsewhere. However, suppose one of us were put into this position; how would you act? Here is what I would do:
First of all, hide a number of useful things on my body (knives, matches, compass, water purification tabs [unless they are provided with potable water]; you get the idea). Of course, such things would have to be employed covertly; a number of methods of fire starting might be employed simultaneously at different locations (to distract the cameraman), and one method would suddenly work magically...with the help of a lifeboat match.
I would first of all, get all the people together, explain the artificial conditions which go against human instincts, and then try and find out what our knowledge resources are. After that, consider what supplies we have not as what they are intended for, but what they could be better used for. Consider the fuel which was burned in the Tiki torch; better used for rust prevention, lubrication, fire starting, IMHO.
I saw the scene where the groups were brought together, and the MC complimented the group that had started the fire, but stated that there was no one tending it at that point, and it was probably out. Jeez; it looked like a fairly wooded island to me. They couldn't make a fire that would last a few hours? Not one of them has heard of an ember container?
The other thing I would do would be to declare myself a non-contestant. That is, at some point, when the group or I decided that my benefit to the group had peaked, I would voluntarily depart, not waiting to be voted out. I would also set an arbitrary number of people, say three or four, and if I made it that far, I would then opt out, whether or not the others still felt I was valuable enough to keep. This would accomplish a lot. People would be much more likely to listen to me and cooperate with me if they viewed me as non-threatening to their ultimate success; in fact, hopefully they would view me as an aid to their ultimate success. This would greatly aid in establishing a cooperative group dynamic.
Further, I would make every effort to corrupt and suborn the non participants. 'Jeez, Bob, that is a real nice video camera; I'll bet it would be tough to fix if it got accidently stepped on out here in the boonies; of course, no one here would do anything intentionally destructive to it (wink, wink). Now, about that illegal metal match you happened to see today; is their any reason you can think of that anyone except you and I need to know about it?'
Getting the others to actually cooperate with each other, viewing me as a non-competitor for the prize, and establishing a 'us against them' mentality regarding our tormentors (the TV crew) might be the best one could make of this situation.
What do the rest of you think? Walt
