Survivor
Producers: Maria Baltazzi, Jay Bienstock
Cast: as themselves, (host) Jeff Probst, B.B. Andersen, Dirk Been, Rudy Boesch, Greg Buis, Sonja Christopher, Gretchen Cordy, Ramona Gray, Colleen Haskell, Richard Hatch, Susan Hawk, Sean Kenniff, Joel Klug, Jenna Lewis, Gervase Peterson, Stacey Stillman, Kelly Wiglesworth
Regularly scheduled: Wednesdays, 8 p.m. EST (U.S.)
(CBS)
by Dan French
PopMatters TV Critic
e-mail this article
How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Survivor
It's easy as a critic to dismiss seemingly simple
shows when they come along, even if they are wildly
popular (maybe especially if they are wildly popular).
Such was my impulse when I first saw the CBS
juggernaut Survivor. A silly show watched by the
omnipresent, silly audience "out there," I smugged to
myself. A game show in a pretty setting, an adult
summer camp fantasy for the shallow and easily
manipulated. How little they know.
I was wrong. Now, I'd like to say, after watching the
show nearly to its conclusion, that I think it's a
wonder of modern television. I think this because
Survivor has that elusive quality that takes a show
from moderate hit to cultural phenomenon: it appeals
to multiple audiences on multiple levels,
simultaneously reaching and pleasing people who would
probably never even talk to each other if they met on
the street. I'd like in this article to delineate at
least a few of those audiences, and say why I think
Survivor appeals so strongly to each.
First, for those who admire how popular media can tell
stories, Survivor is a masterpiece of current
television technology and aesthetics. It takes
ordinary people and bathes them in the modalities of
tv narrative. Look closely at how well Survivor
executes the strengths of television, beginning with
setting. The visual texture of Survivor could
compete with the most beautifully shot beach films of
all time. Each week opens with postcard shots of a sky
blue ocean. An isolated beach. Tribal music. Exotic
and dangerous animals. Everything that happens is
captured in magnificent color and sound, spiced with
music, sound effects, camera angles and smash cuts.
Not only is the setting television-friendly, the
contestants themselves are smoothly transformed from
"people" to "characters." By this I mean they are
essentialized according to the roles they will play,
beginning with the introductory shots and continuing
through every emotion-laden close-up. Richard is gay,
corporate, and scheming. Rudy is an old ex-marine,
not very bright, and will be a pawn to Richard. Jenna
is overly sensitive and clumsy, where Richard is deft.
Sue is a truck-driving redneck with more on the ball
then people think. We know the characters in ways we
almost never know people in real life. We are privy
to their thoughts, their intrigues. And because we
watch them without them watching us, we gain this
intimate knowledge without the usual interpersonal
obstacles that we must negotiate. It's easy to feel we
know these people because they are presented to us in
discrete packets we can easily consume.
What's more, Survivor's plot is wonderfully crafted.
Boring days are edited into short vignettes tinged
with comedy, drama, even tragedy. Every episode has a
beginning, a middle, and end. Two or three contestants
are "foreshadowed" as most likely to be voted off, and
we focus on them throughout the episode. We begin to
feel suspense about who will leave, and our emotional
attachments are tugged when we believe a favored
participant might go. We start to urge characters to
do this and not that, and we are bothered when they
don't follow what we know would be the best course of
action. These are all classic audience reactions to a
well-crafted plot. And with events that are as easy
to follow and melodramatic as a soap opera, Survivor
is perfectly set up as for audiences who like their
entertainment neat, predictable, and above all,
artificial.
All of which makes Survivor a really great piece of
television, and explains why it appeals to a mass
audience that appreciates what television can do. But
the show doesn't stop there. It also offers much to
people who don't really like television's
manipulations. For those more "intellectual" viewers,
Survivor employs all sorts of documentary
techniques, for instance, interviews juxtaposed with
images to create irony or offer proof that a chosen
angle on a story is "legitimate." So, we see quick
interview-clips in which participants complain that
Gervase is lazy, Richard is duplicitous, or Sean (as
Sue loves to point out) is stupid, followed by shots
that demonstrate clearly that Gervase is indeed lazy
and Richard is indeed two-faced and Sean is indeed
stupid. And for people who like to take tv products
apart and interpret them for how they tie into broader
issues, Survivor offers a nudist homosexual,
practicing feminists, a witnessing Christian, all
acting out the effects of late capitalism on small
social structures. It sells itself as a sociological
study, and while there may be little that can be taken
from this and applied directly to larger cultures, the
focus on social processes makes them seem every bit as
compelling as they are when they take place in real
settings in the broader world.
And for those viewers who are even more
abstract-minded, Survivor teases us by wavering on
the line between complete naivete and postmodern
self-awareness. The way the producers craft and cut
the show suggests that they know this is all artifice,
but they never allow either the host or the
contestants to complete the wink that would allow us
to know that they know they are being ironic. Take,
for example, the supernatural element in Survivor.
The castaways receive mysterious messages from a Media
Presence. A "host" appears to direct important
rituals, administer rules, and reward the worthy. He
even tells tribal lore and points out how the torches
of those about to be voted off mysteriously go out
each night at tribal council. But at the same time,
he has this bizarre half-grin that says he is always
on the verge of not taking any of this seriously, even
as he is completely earnest about patently ludicrous
contests -- such as adults standing on a plank in the
ocean, trying not to fall off. The show constantly
moves between total contrivance and a solemn,
ritualistic respect for what it is doing. Its tone is
very difficult to locate, and while this elusiveness
may be more than the producers intend, it's just as
possible to surmise that they know what they're doing
and that teasing the audience with its own naivete is
their way of undermining the medium even as they
exploit it so well.
So, Survivor appeals to both the so-called masses
and the intellectually refined. It's also almost pure
pastiche, which means it appeals to Generations X and
Y, the "media" generations that understand
superficiality as an art form unto itself. For the
people who can watch things just because they know
that what they are watching is bad (i.e., all the
twenty-year-olds who actually watch the reruns of old
shows on Nickelodeon), Survivor is cheese, cheese,
cheese. I even know people who are hosting Survivor
parties where one guest every hour is voted out of the
party.
As in all great television, there is a lot more going
on in Survivor than immediately meets the eye.
Without a doubt, the strongest entrant in the reality
show derby, Survivor leads a list of television
series that seems to grow every day, partly because
they find ways to splinter their appeal across a
variety of unconnected audiences. There are reasons
why very different people can watch Cops, Big Brother, America's Funniest Home Videos, When Animals Attack, Rescue 911, The Real World, Road Rules, American High, The Awful Truth, and HBO's Taxi Cab Confessions. Taking time to find those reasons does far more to explain the popularity of reality meets television than simply dismissing the audience as too stupid to know what's good.
And so I stand corrected. Survivor is a truly
interesting, worthwhile, watchable show. Even if
it is about adults living out a summer camp fantasy.