"Star" Gazing: Drawing Conclusions

[gomle]

I'm wondering when Bear Grylls is finally going to sprain his ancle running down a slope or a slippery mountain. Thats just plain stupid, if you want to get out alive. And he does it in every show.

 

[chopchop]

I think it takes a certain personality to become the star of a survival show. Like many have said, it's difficult sometimes to assess the real skill level of Grylls, Stroud, etc., but it is easy to tell why they are on tv. Most of them have enthusiasm and charisma that makes them interesting to watch. Not every survival expert can bring that to the table.

I personally prefer the style of a Ray Mears, for example, where the host talks to the locals with what at least appears to be sincere and have an appreciation for the way they have learned to do things in their own environment. As Mick and others have said previously, often times local experts have vital information, and I actually like to see the host interacting with them, rather than just seeing him by himself.

To me, even though a guy like Les Stroud comes off as relatively authentic in his desire to show and film himself doing specific survival scenarios, I can only watch it for a certain amount of time before I want to see somebody else's way of doing things besides his.

I think of some of the old PBS specials where reporters or researchers went along with mountain men or local boat builders to see how they did things. Those are the kinds of expert authorities that I most enjoy.

 

[JCavSD]

For the most part these are TV personalities...often little more than characters. My guess is that their behavior is mostly entertainment driven. When I find the entertainment to be good, I say so. If I don't dig it, then I'm okay with saying that too.

 

[SAKnives]

There is a fact that states that no man is an expert on everything. Just knowing more than most people can be condisered expert knowledge and if the television networks think that they can entertain folks and make a few bucks by placing Bear and Les in an uncomfortable situation then so be it. I can't really say anything bad about them or their celebrity status since many people sit down every week and watch them show what to do (and many times what not to do) in a given situation. Do they have to be the very best at surving everywhere? No. Most of the people who watch them will NEVER get that far from their own homes unless it is a family vacation to the local KOA, but it IS more information than the general TV viewing audience has seen before these shows gained popularity.

I say two blades up to anyone who helps bring an interest in the outdoors and information on how to stay safer out there to the everyman, even if Bear does survive at the Days Inn half the time.

 

[JCavSD]

I say two blades up to anyone who helps bring an interest in the outdoors and information on how to stay safer out there to the everyman, even if Bear does survive at the Days Inn half the time.

I agree with you to a point, but I also think that entertainment viewed as instruction can be a real problem. When I watch these folks I do so within the context of entertainment first and take the rest with a grain of salt.

 

[mdole]

I realize it's the internet... a place where you don't have to look someone in the eye as you speak to them... where claims can go unsupported if you simply choose not to respond or remove your subscribtion from that particular thread... It just frustrates me to see it popping up more and more around here.

Please be considerate when you post.

Rick

And this is why I love this site, professionals exhibiting professionalism. Thank you for sharing your craft with us.

 

[Erasmus]

Sure, just don't squeeze too hard. Everything alright ?

Gets my vote for most disturbing post!

 

[MustardMan]

Honestly the only one I've ever had an issue with has been Bear, and for two reasons:

1 - the crap he does is downright unsafe. Not just something I disagree with the way he's doing it, but MTV's Jackass-level stupidity. I don't care whether it's his natural way of doing things, or amped up for tv, it sends completely the wrong message to would-be outdoors enthusiasts.

2 - his outright lies. Telling people you are sleeping in the woods while you doze off in a hotel room, or pretending your show is "reality" when a guy in a bear suit is stomping around outside your shelter, are flat-out dishonest. I understand that kind of crap is par for the course in hollywood, but I would think we would hold people in the survival community to a higher standard.


I don't think it is fair to lump trashing bear in with trashing the others - bear has made a mockery of things that many of us here hold dear, and done so in a way that is dishonest and perpetuates incredibly unsafe ideas. It's not just a question of "selling out" or disagreeing with his opinions, it's an entirely different level.


I do get kind of irritated when I see people piling on to other survival celebrities in an attempt to show off how much they think they know, but I make a special exception for the likes of bear.

 

[Gadgetaholic]

I remember the first time I saw "Survivorman". I was outraged... How could this yahoo call himself a survival expert? He was making rookie mistakes and stumbling though techniques that looked as if he was trying them for the first time. The next week, I forced myself to sit through another episode... only to arrive at the same conclusion. After that, I refused to watch any more because I thought it was rubbish.

I got a different impression when I first watched 'Survivorman' - it seemed to me that it wasn't rehearsed and he didn't take 5 goes to get something right and then edit the footage to just show him doing everything perfectly. I liked that - you got to see mistakes and things that sound like a good idea when you hear/read about them, but don't work nearly so easily in practice. I think MUCH more can be learnt from the 'Survivorman' shows than from 'Bear vs Wild Hotel Rooms' (did I get that right). BTW - That was a dig at Bear's show, not at Bear himself.

Also:
I have serious doubts about anyone here doing the same stuff as Les and not making rookie mistakes too - unless they edit them out. On TV everyone seems to do everything right most of the time - how many actors actually get it right on the first take though? Look at the outtakes from TV shows and you soon realise that real life doesn't actually go as smoothly as what you see on TV. Big ups to Les for making the most realistic survival show I have ever seen.

 

[Rick Marchand]

I got a different impression when I first watched 'Survivorman' ...

See, you saw it for what it was... I had preconceived ideas and was expecting Ray Mears type execution of skills. You had it right.:thumbup:


Rick

 

[Rotte]

I'd enjoy a campfire and beer with any of these guys.

 

[SouthernCross]

WOW

First up let me congratulate all who have contributed so far for their higher order discussion that has proceeded this post :thumbup:

Since I would like to continue the higher order discussion that has been the norm so far, I have taken the liberty of quoting the relevant sections of various posts that I would like to respond to.

I remember the first time I saw "Survivorman". I was outraged... How could this yahoo call himself a survival expert? He was making rookie mistakes and stumbling though techniques that looked as if he was trying them for the first time. The next week, I forced myself to sit through another episode... only to arrive at the same conclusion. After that, I refused to watch any more because I thought it was rubbish.

How this guy got his own show vexed me terribly. I began to research him a bit and stumbled upon "Snowshoes and Solitudes". I had a hard time believing this was the same man... the show was great! This caused me to revisit the remaining episodes of "Survivorman" season one... which by then, was available on disk. I began to understand where he was going with the show and eventually gained much respect for his approach to entertainment and education.

I am fortunate enough to email with Les a few times over the years. I got his contact info from a member on Doug Ritter's ETS forum and found him to be an extremely well versed bushcraft expert. I was first introduced to him by stumbling across "Snowshoes and Solitude" and was immediately hooked. He spent a year in the bush without modern equipment for his honeymoon. I asked him a few episodes into Survivorman why he was purposely failing at some of the tasks and he said that if he were to show what he could do after decades of practice, then the viewers would not be likely to try it themselves. He said that by showing a couple "failed attempts" he hoped to keep people from getting discouraged when they tried the skills themselves.

I got a different impression when I first watched 'Survivorman' - it seemed to me that it wasn't rehearsed and he didn't take 5 goes to get something right and then edit the footage to just show him doing everything perfectly. I liked that - you got to see mistakes and things that sound like a good idea when you hear/read about them, but don't work nearly so easily in practice…..

Seems to me that what is being "portrayed" in Survivor man is not genuine :thumbdn:

Based on the above comments on his apparent skill level, I've got to say that it appears as though Les actually has more skills than is being portrayed in "Survivor man". Isn't anyone who is portraying something that is not the case being deceptive irrespective of how they justify it?



@Rick

I have watched the video below on a number of occasions. I still have problems with the lack of shadow movement over what is claimed to be an 11 hour period. Is this yet another example of encouraging beginners?

[youtube]TPf_U48JA68[/youtube]


Does he have a disclaimer in his shows along the lines of "I am not as inept as I appear to be"?. Is this show designed to not discourage those who don't have the same skill level as him rather than portray reality? Because it doesn't appear to be a show designed to show what is posible with the practice that comes with experience (ie someone who has the necessary skills to survive?)

Really how is this any different to MVW?

Where does one draw the line when it comes to portraying anything that is supposed to be reality?

Is someone who is supposed to sleep outdoors but in reality sleeps in a hotel room (eg Bear), really any different to someone who acts like a novice when in reality they supposedly possess a greater level of skills (eg Les)?

With regards to Les, why doesn't he show what is possible with genuine practice & experience (kinda like the Sensei of a Dojo does ?)

Mick>>

Because not all survival "experts" (God, I hate that word), or the locals who teach the presenters make good presenters or television personalities.
It's not entertaining to the masses to watch some guy drone on and on for an hour about heat loss, or treating water, etc...If they want to learn, they'll go to school -- or so their thinking goes. They want blood and guts, action, suspense....entertainment......

Just as I thought, the commercial requirements of commercial TV should'nt be discounted :thumbup:

…. sometimes gems are found in the unlikeliest places…..
I have purchased several books from experts mentioned in this thread and practice the things they cross mention/teach. Those skills seem to be the ones best suited to practice to me since they are taught in basically the same fashion by all.

I take my hat off to anyone who is prepared to cross reference information & make an educated decision as to what information is reliable :thumbup::thumbup:

It's a real pity more don't do this

....I think of some of the old PBS specials where reporters or researchers went along with mountain men or local boat builders to see how they did things. Those are the kinds of expert authorities that I most enjoy.

+1,000,000




Kind regards
Mick


BTW, if any one believes their "outdoor survival hero" has been slurred, please let fly, as I'm more than happy to justify this post (as though there's not enough justification already provided after 2 years of contributing )

 

[Rick Marchand]

@Rick

I have watched the video below on a number of occasions. I still have problems with the lack of shadow movement over what is claimed to be an 11 hour period. Is this yet another example of encouraging beginners?

The shadows are moving Mick:thumbup:... I don't think the edit job shows an even "clock-like" movement of shadow. I wouldn't think that anyone could kneel there for 11hrs trying every 15mins. From beginning to end, regardless of how long the breaks were inbetween filming, the shadows move in atleast a 120deg pattern around the square rock to the right marging of the screen. This was in Summer... the Sun is high. From 10am to 4pm it seems like it is right above you. Only in the early/late hours do the shadows get long.

I definately don't think Les is portraying himself in a completely realistic fashion. Infact having spent many weeks in the bush with his mentor, I KNOW he is not sticking to the "plan". I think to have a show that satisfies everybody's definition of realistic and can withstand the scrutany of such a huge viewing audience (skilled or unskilled) is unrealistic to begin with. Les tries to portray realism and bases his POV from the average semi-educated outdoorsman.

In the end.... he still has to make it worthwhile to watch. Seeing somebody fail repeatedly, then finally overcome.... sets an example that things don't always go off without a hitch and perseverance pays off. If it's all faked, I respect him for trying to convey that feeling of reality, as best he can.

I really don't think I could do it all (skills, scouting, filming, surviving) and have something worth watching. You have to make the majority happy.... Mick..... I'm afraid WE are the minority, my friend.:thumbup:

Only Oprah gets to do whatever she wants with her show.

Rick

 

[Mentor]

A few thoughts on the conundrum of authenticity, from an educator's perspective.

Pedagogy is a complex, challenging, and constantly evolving process. There are many different styles of instruction to choose from. You can attempt to teach by demonstrating expertise and a high level of proficiency, and encouraging students to pursue excellence. This works best when dealing with self-directed and confident students who already have a grasp of the basics and a desire to push their limits. Alternatively, you can attempt to build both confidence and knowledge by facilitating self-clarification through structured teachable moments. This seems to work best when you are dealing with an interested and enthusiastic but less capable audience.

I often use the latter approach when teaching introductory or foundational material, and especially when it is possible to use the classroom environment to recreate a major debate, turning point, or the emergence of a new theory or method (ie. to walk through a problem and its resolution). Frequently, this involves me taking on the position of a devil's advocate or, better yet, someone who clings tenaciously to orthodox thinking despite its (if I am doing my job right) apparent weaknesses. The result, when everything goes well, is that the students benefit from a hands-on approach to learning that yields some personal 'aha!' moments, where trial and error lead to a more contextualized and authentic process of knowledge acquisition. The irony, of course, is that from my perspective, facilitating this authentic experience requires a fair bit of deception and contrivance .

Now, I don't teach anything that even remotely resembles wilderness survival, so you can take this with a big grain of salt, but from a strictly pedagogical perspective, I can understand why Les Stroud would underplay his own abilities and deliberately portray himself as being engaged in a trial-and-error approach, even though he could probably nail a given task or problem on the first try. It has been my experience that pairing a problem with an immediate and effective solution often serves to illustrate little more than the educator's own expertise, whereas pairing a problem with a solution that involves a degree of trial-and-error draws the learner in and helps to solidify the lesson.

Just a thought.

All the best,

- Mike

 

[Rick Marchand]

Yeah.... that's what I said...

Excellent post, my ejumicated brother:thumbup:

 

[SAKnives]

I'd be curious to get Mykel Hawke's opinion on the sum of television "survival experts". He has always seemed to me to be as genuine a guy as there is.

 

[Rick Marchand]

All chicks go crazy for Myk Hawke.

 

[dberry]

Of all the survival type shows on now. I like survivorman the best. His show while still a "show" is not over the top like some are. I think alot of people in our society are so out of touch with reality that they actually think they can use some of the skills on the show without practicing them or learning other methods to start a fire,trap,etc that may save them valuable time and energy. Its one thing to watch someone else do it it is quite another to do it yourself.

 

[dberry]

I'd be curious to get Mykel Hawke's opinion on the sum of television "survival experts". He has always seemed to me to be as genuine a guy as there is.

I agree. All the name jokes aside he seems to know his stuff and has served our country in some tough situations and areas.

 

[KEmSAT-Survival]

All chicks go crazy for Myk Hawke.

Of course they do Myk Hawke is hot.