How do we get to the Statue of Liberty, anyway?

'There’s something jarring and ultimately distasteful about watching the local residents of a harsh environment, who are generous and kind to strange travelers because such customs are necessary for survival, being used as pawns in the latest iteration of a multimillion dollar industry, all for the amusement of couch potatoes back in the States.'

 

 

'Lost,' yet more 
folks behaving badly

NBC reality romp speaks poorly for civilization

By Elizabeth White

   Regardless of whether it’s entertaining, reality TV unarguably celebrates and glamorizes the worst characteristics of humankind. 
   The selfish, the greedy and the dishonest succeed, while leadership is discouraged, honesty is manipulated, and trust is punished.
    And so far the worse people have behaved, the more entertaining the shows have been. We need look no further than "Temptation Island" and "The Mole" or "Big Brother" and "Big Brother 2."
    But for "Lost," NBC’s new reality show debuting this Wednesday at 8 p.m., the worse people behave, the more painful it becomes to watch.
    That’s because, unlike other reality shows, "Lost" is not set in an isolated vacuum of the TV show’s contrivance, where contestants are left to get the best of one another.
    Instead, NBC has dropped six contestants and three cameramen in the middle of nowhere, where they are expected to rely on the kindness of strangers--and their own ingenuity--to get back to New York City.
    It seems like a smart idea, one with lots of potential.
    But in actuality, as this theme unveils itself on the TV screen, one sees rather the huge gap between the reality show ethic, in all its artificiality and conniving, and the enduring innocence and good will of the locals upon which that false ethic is inflicted.
    It is not entertaining, and it speaks poorly for a society such as ours that appears to have nothing better to do with its resources than fritter them away on such nonsensical intrigues. 
    NBC has requested that we not reveal the drop-off location of "Lost," but I will say that the location is remote, sparsely populated, and not surprisingly, about as far as possible from the Western culture that spawned the reality-craze.
    That’s not to say that the locals are naïve or unwilling participants in the show. They quickly learn the game and have no problems playing it.
    If the Americans with backpacks and cameras will overpay for services, like water or motorcycle rides, then so be it. If they want to sabotage the other teams by paying the locals to give wrong directions to others, no problem. And if the locals can convince every team to do these things, then they just made a month’s salary in an hour.
    But there’s something jarring and ultimately distasteful about watching the local residents of a harsh environment, who are generous and kind to strange travelers because such customs are necessary for survival, being used as pawns in the latest iteration of a multimillion dollar industry, all for the amusement of couch potatoes back in the States.
    Imagine how upset the men who brought water to one team as an act of kindness were when they got back to town and realized they could have sold the water and made money. Or the women who brought food, or the family who offered shelter, and so on.
    And what does this bode for future travelers in the region, who aren’t there for prize money back in New York, but to learn about other cultures?
    Presumably, this cultural incongruity will lessen with later episodes, as the contestants get closer to New York and are among people who might enjoy reality TV. But it won’t ever go away, because a fundamental element of travel is trusting the assistance of locals. Even in New York, tourists rely on strangers to help them with the subway and with taxis.
    It's a shame that "Lost" took this approach, because everything else about the show works nicely, often putting a refreshing twist on what are now standard elements of reality TV.
     No one is voted off, there are no additional challenges, and the contestants work as teams–meaning that trust is essential and backstabbing may not be necessary to win.
    And most noticeably, the cameraman with each team is considered part of the game as well, instead of being ignored and magically excised in post-production.
    On "Lost," the players refer to the cameramen by their names, and you even get to see them in some of the shots. The contestants have to procure transportation, food and water not only for themselves, but also for their cameramen.
   The invisible camera is an unnecessary artifice of reality TV. The audience knows someone is operating the camera, that someone else is on the island. "Lost’s" acknowledgement of the fact actually makes the show seem more real.
   "Lost" is a short-run, six-episode series that will conclude just as the fall season gets going in October. The contestants are dropped off with limited survival gear, some cash–just over U.S. $300–and no credit cards, valuables or communication devices other than a satellite phone for emergencies. The first team to reach the Statue of Liberty wins $100,000.

August 27, 2001 © 2001 Media Life


- Elizabeth White is a staff writer for Media Life.


 
Send to a Friend| Printer-Friendly Version
Cover Page | Contact Us