(I was going to just tack this onto the Survival Show Critique as an addendum to the existing column rather than starting a new one in order to keep the information all in one place and because the comments weren't really long enough to warrant a whole new blog entry when I started. But once I got started and realized I was going on three pages I decided to make it a new blog entry. If you haven’t read Survival Show Critique I'd suggest you do, for context and clarity before reading this entry.)
-------------------------
I'm falling in love with the Man Woman Wild show. The man/woman, husband/wife camaraderie/friction that's evident throughout the shows is both amusing and enlightening. For example:
Mykel is showing Ruth how to drink from/eat an Amazon plant when she turns to the camera and says: "How can he remember all these plants? If I send him to the grocery store he comes back with the wrong detergent time and time and time again." The 'pained husband' look on his face while she's complaining to the cameraman is priceless. Yeah, guys, we've all been there.
Beyond Survival with Les Stroud
Les Stroud is back with a new version of Survivorman entitled: Beyond Survival with Les Stroud which I find not only less entertaining but less informative than the original shows.
The show's promo says it all:
Les Stroud seeks out the true masters of survival - the last indigenous tribes in the most remote corners of the planet - to learn their techniques, experience their rituals, and share the secrets of how they've survived in the wild for thousands of years - before they vanish forever.
I watched the first episode and frankly turned the sound down about halfway through the show. Watching Les chew, get high on and spit "betel nuts" as he mixed with the local population just wasn't my cup of tea. According to the promos the remaining shows will be the same as Les minimises the survival aspects and concentrates on going native.
Stuntman vs. Wild?
Man vs. Wild (or maybe it should be called Stuntman vs. Wild?) promises some changes this season as Bear Grylls will be taking two fans along for the ride as he hops hundred foot deep chasms and "gets trapped without light deep in the heart of an enormous limestone cave." We'll see if his two fans are up to eating rotting flesh too.
BTW Bear is doing more hawking of survival stuff than any of the other survival hosts. Bear has an official "survival knife" and official "survival clothes" listed online.
Mentioning knives reminds me Mykel & Ruth consistently carry large sheath knives that verge on being Roman short swords and the sheaths are often festooned with little pouches which presumably carry sharpening stones and other survival gear although I haven't seen any of it demonstrated yet. Mykel sometimes wields a large Gerka knife (Kukri) and I wouldn't be surprised if the Man Woman Wild show soon has an official knife or two.
The guys over at Blade Forums have some interesting ideas on new survival shows staring the same cast members:
trichos writes:
"I'd love to see an episode where Dave teams up with Bear. It would be action packed! On the other hand, it'd be great to see Cody and Les work together sans crew. They seem to share a similar vibe."
To which quick kill replies:
"Dave&bear would be a mad house! Then you have Les&Cody.It would be informative but I think it would be to calm to harmonic. And probably not be as entertaining. Now if you through les, Cody, bear, Dave, and Mike & wifey all on an island or up in the mountain. And they had a drawing for their partners and grab a random bag of gear. Then each had to make it to a randomly selected... but different point for "rescue"now that would be an interesting show.. "
The only problem with that is that idea is that although Cody + Dave + Bear + Les + Mykel + Ruth = six survivalists I doubt Mykel would be willing to have Ruth taking insane chances with Bear Grylls on an island OR a mountain top.
Likewise Les and Bear's styles are so completely different that I can't see them teaming up for anything more than a pre show cup of coffee at Starbucks.
Perhaps if the stars of the four shows maintained their current partners (or none in the case of Les & Bear) and then were to grab random bags of gear and head for four equidistant points for rescue…
Mmmmmmmmmmm… now that would be a good one hour show or series of shows as the cameras showed us ten minute* segments of each "team" as they trekked through jungles or forests, across deserts or tundra and mountains or savanna.
(* Your average TV show half hour has about twenty-two minutes of actual show. The other eight minutes or so is taken up by promos and commercials so a one hour show with four "teams" could be broken down into five or ten minute segments for each team.)
Another variation I'd love to see would be each of the four shows do a show or series of shows on disaster survival applying the same survival skills they use in the wild to deserted and destroyed urban and suburban environs.
Worst-Case Scenario
Bear Grylls did a mercifully short series entitled Worst-Case Scenario in which he mixed his usual tour de force of recklessness with a few good survival tips. Running in the open in broad daylight (while lecturing on the importance of remaining hidden from looters & outlaws), climbing up the outsides of buildings and repelling down elevator shafts in a survival situation is a recipe for further disaster not survival.
Survival Soap Opera
And now we turn to the problem of the "Survival Shows" turning into Survival Soap Operas.
Yes I'm talking about The Colony that contrived soap opera that's trying to pass itself off as a survival show. Every scripted scene in the promos I've seen (I refuse to watch this farce because it refuses to admit to the use of weapons & deadly force being used in an all out TEOTWAWKI situation) is just a shabby version of something from the TV soap operas. Replace the dirt smear on the protagonists faces with lipstick and you've got an episode from Days of Our Lives or any of the other melodramas.
To Comment on this article E-Mail Me Unless you specifically ask me not to, I'll post your reply here in the blog so everyone can read it. Of course I'll remove your last name, email address and any other specific information for privacy purposes.
Showing posts with label Survivorman. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Survivorman. Show all posts
Monday, August 30, 2010
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
Survivorman vs Man Woman Wild vs Dual Survival vs Man vs Wild
First off, before anyone thinks I'm putting on airs, I want to stipulate that with the possible exception of Man Woman Wild's Ruth England* I'm quite certain that all of the survival experts critiqued below know more about wilderness survival than I do.
I've enough survival knowledge to evaluate most of the survival tips given on the shows, and the likelihood that you will ever encounter the "survival situations" they put themselves into.
Also I realize these are commercial shows that must entertain to reap ratings and so I accept that they will occasionally do things that are contrary to good survival practices. But I expect them to clearly label these exceptions and to keep them within the realm of realistic survival situations.
(*Ruth is the only one who doesn't list survival expertise in her résumé or biography.)
-----------------
Showmanship
When it comes to showmanship Man vs. Wild is a Barnum and Bailey Three Ring Circus compared to Dual Survival's Abbott and Costello; Who's On First routine. Continuing in the Vaudeville vein Man Woman Wild is a George Burns and Gracie Allen Show compared to Survivorman's Bill Cosby's one man standup routines.
Entertainment Value
Bear Grylls' antics on Man vs. Wild are, I think, more for ratings than instruction. Although he cautions against doing what he's about to show you how to do his examples speak louder than his words and his examples sometimes go way beyond survival.
The Abbott and Costello backwoods bickering of Dual Survival's Cody ("The more you know the less you need") Lundin and Dave (Patience my ass I'm goin' out and kill somethin') Canterbury is fun to watch. Cody's minimalist's 'at one with nature' eat shoots and leaves while foraging for bugs and snails style contrasts with Dave's 'hunter/killer "eating furry critters", snakes and alligators style.
Likewise watching survival expert Mykel Hawke instruct wife Ruth England in various survival techniques is entertaining as the normal give and take between husband and wife are added to the survival show mix. Mykel's explanations are more interesting because of the husband/wife aspect. I find myself looking forward to the next Man Woman Wild show.
Les Stroud uses neither outrageous antics nor verbal give and take between survivalists in his shows which makes him the best and least entertaining instructor of the lot. Still, if I had to recommend one show to learn survival techniques Survivorman would be my pick.
Relevance to Reality
If watching someone eat eyeballs from rotting carcasses, haul around half inch steel cable to slide down on from the top of a cliff to the top of a tree and repeatedly jump off of cliffs of indeterminate height into waters of indeterminate depth is your idea of relevant survival instruction then Bear Grylls is your man.
Walking around barefoot for twenty years is a great marketing gimmick for a Sonoran Desert survival school proprietor, but deliberately going unshod in a real survival situation is just plain stupid. Already Cody has had to resort to thick wool socks and field expedient sandals in the face of glaciers and cactus spines. The claim that having to go slow to look out for sharp rocks and scorpions somehow makes one more observant of one's surroundings reeks of excuse to me. Going slower or faster may be the difference between making it to the next waterhole or not. A discalced wilderness traveler is looking at the uneven ground immediately underfoot, not at surroundings.
Neither Bear's nor Cody's survival strategies is realistically defensible much less recommendable. The difference between the two survivalists is that Cody gives sensible advice while demonstrating realistic survival situations.
Survivorman
Survivorman Wiki
Survivorman on Discovery Channel
Les Stroud
Man Woman Wild
Man Woman Wild Wiki
Man Woman Wild on Discovery Channel
Mykel Hawke Wiki
Ruth England Wiki
Dual Survival
Dual Survival Wiki
Dual Survival
Discovery Channel
Cody Lundin Wiki
Dave Canterbury Wiki
Man vs. Wild
Man vs. Wild Wiki
Man vs. Wild Discovery Channel
Bear Grylls
Wiki
To Comment on this article E-Mail Me Unless you specifically ask me not to, I'll post your reply here in the blog so everyone can read it. Of course I'll remove your last name, email address and any other specific information for privacy purposes.
I've enough survival knowledge to evaluate most of the survival tips given on the shows, and the likelihood that you will ever encounter the "survival situations" they put themselves into.
Also I realize these are commercial shows that must entertain to reap ratings and so I accept that they will occasionally do things that are contrary to good survival practices. But I expect them to clearly label these exceptions and to keep them within the realm of realistic survival situations.
(*Ruth is the only one who doesn't list survival expertise in her résumé or biography.)
-----------------
Showmanship
When it comes to showmanship Man vs. Wild is a Barnum and Bailey Three Ring Circus compared to Dual Survival's Abbott and Costello; Who's On First routine. Continuing in the Vaudeville vein Man Woman Wild is a George Burns and Gracie Allen Show compared to Survivorman's Bill Cosby's one man standup routines.
Entertainment Value
Bear Grylls' antics on Man vs. Wild are, I think, more for ratings than instruction. Although he cautions against doing what he's about to show you how to do his examples speak louder than his words and his examples sometimes go way beyond survival.
The Abbott and Costello backwoods bickering of Dual Survival's Cody ("The more you know the less you need") Lundin and Dave (Patience my ass I'm goin' out and kill somethin') Canterbury is fun to watch. Cody's minimalist's 'at one with nature' eat shoots and leaves while foraging for bugs and snails style contrasts with Dave's 'hunter/killer "eating furry critters", snakes and alligators style.
Likewise watching survival expert Mykel Hawke instruct wife Ruth England in various survival techniques is entertaining as the normal give and take between husband and wife are added to the survival show mix. Mykel's explanations are more interesting because of the husband/wife aspect. I find myself looking forward to the next Man Woman Wild show.
Les Stroud uses neither outrageous antics nor verbal give and take between survivalists in his shows which makes him the best and least entertaining instructor of the lot. Still, if I had to recommend one show to learn survival techniques Survivorman would be my pick.
Relevance to Reality
If watching someone eat eyeballs from rotting carcasses, haul around half inch steel cable to slide down on from the top of a cliff to the top of a tree and repeatedly jump off of cliffs of indeterminate height into waters of indeterminate depth is your idea of relevant survival instruction then Bear Grylls is your man.
Walking around barefoot for twenty years is a great marketing gimmick for a Sonoran Desert survival school proprietor, but deliberately going unshod in a real survival situation is just plain stupid. Already Cody has had to resort to thick wool socks and field expedient sandals in the face of glaciers and cactus spines. The claim that having to go slow to look out for sharp rocks and scorpions somehow makes one more observant of one's surroundings reeks of excuse to me. Going slower or faster may be the difference between making it to the next waterhole or not. A discalced wilderness traveler is looking at the uneven ground immediately underfoot, not at surroundings.
Neither Bear's nor Cody's survival strategies is realistically defensible much less recommendable. The difference between the two survivalists is that Cody gives sensible advice while demonstrating realistic survival situations.
Survivorman
Survivorman Wiki
Survivorman on Discovery Channel
Les Stroud
Man Woman Wild
Man Woman Wild Wiki
Man Woman Wild on Discovery Channel
Mykel Hawke Wiki
Ruth England Wiki
Dual Survival
Dual Survival Wiki
Dual Survival
Discovery Channel
Cody Lundin Wiki
Dave Canterbury Wiki
Man vs. Wild
Man vs. Wild Wiki
Man vs. Wild Discovery Channel
Bear Grylls
Wiki
To Comment on this article E-Mail Me Unless you specifically ask me not to, I'll post your reply here in the blog so everyone can read it. Of course I'll remove your last name, email address and any other specific information for privacy purposes.
Friday, November 13, 2009
Foraging for Food
On the joys of foraging or why you'll need stored food for short term crises and farming/ranching skills for long term cataclysms.
Foraging i.e. wandering in search of food cannot be planned on as a viable option for either short term emergencies WTSHTF (When The $#!t Hits The Fan) or long term cataclysms TEOTWAWKI (The End Of The World As We Know It) because, at best, foraging provides sufficient food for only small groups and requires constant relocation.
City slickers whose experiences "roughing it" in the wild consist of weekends in National Forest campgrounds without cable TV will be surprised to learn wild flora and fauna are harder to find and catch in sufficient quantities to feed their families than is shown on the television survival shows. Just how many days will a half tame park squirrel feed a family of four?
Besides that wild things aren't anxious to jump into the cooking pot requiring the expenditure of energy to gather them. Expending more energy catching, cleaning and cooking food than it gives back is slow starvation.
To get an idea of just how hard it is to forage for food in the wild watch Survivorman or Man vs. Wild sometime. Both shows illustrate just how unsanitary and grubby (pun intended) eating grubs, gophers and gulls can be in the wild.
Les Stroud of Survivorman is the more responsible of the two showing how everyday items can be turned into field expedient tools. Bear Grylls, on the other hand, is prone to preface survival demonstrations with phrases like "This is very dangerous, you should never do it" before jumping in and doing the very thing he just warned you against doing.
For the purposes of this article it's sufficient to note that both men barely survive on the food they forage while losing weight and constantly moving to find more food. They are experts. They are feeding only one person; don't expect you'll do any better feeding your family.
WTSHTF
Try to maintain a weeks worth of food, a month would be better, in your home. Maintaining a stock of canned goods, of the foods you normally eat, with expiration dates printed on them is a good way to do this. Try to rotate your stock eating the older stock as you replace it with new. Got a manual can opener?
In the event of a crisis WTSHTF (When The $#!t Hits The Fan) where you expect power may be disrupted eat only frozen and or refrigerated food until that food is gone or the crisis is over. If the power does go out, plan refrigerator raids with a list of the foods you're going to take out so as to keep the door open for as short a time as possible.
TEOTWAWKI
If the short term crisis turns into a long term catastrophe TEOTWAWKI (The End Of The World As We Know It) your food stocks will enable you to remain (hidden) in place while chaos reigns around you. You'll have a better chance of survival after things have stabilized.
To Comment on this post
E-Mail Me Unless you specifically ask me not to, I'll post your reply here in the blog so everyone can read it. Of course I'll remove your last name, email address or any other specific information for privacy reasons.
Foraging i.e. wandering in search of food cannot be planned on as a viable option for either short term emergencies WTSHTF (When The $#!t Hits The Fan) or long term cataclysms TEOTWAWKI (The End Of The World As We Know It) because, at best, foraging provides sufficient food for only small groups and requires constant relocation.
City slickers whose experiences "roughing it" in the wild consist of weekends in National Forest campgrounds without cable TV will be surprised to learn wild flora and fauna are harder to find and catch in sufficient quantities to feed their families than is shown on the television survival shows. Just how many days will a half tame park squirrel feed a family of four?
Besides that wild things aren't anxious to jump into the cooking pot requiring the expenditure of energy to gather them. Expending more energy catching, cleaning and cooking food than it gives back is slow starvation.
To get an idea of just how hard it is to forage for food in the wild watch Survivorman or Man vs. Wild sometime. Both shows illustrate just how unsanitary and grubby (pun intended) eating grubs, gophers and gulls can be in the wild.
Les Stroud of Survivorman is the more responsible of the two showing how everyday items can be turned into field expedient tools. Bear Grylls, on the other hand, is prone to preface survival demonstrations with phrases like "This is very dangerous, you should never do it" before jumping in and doing the very thing he just warned you against doing.
For the purposes of this article it's sufficient to note that both men barely survive on the food they forage while losing weight and constantly moving to find more food. They are experts. They are feeding only one person; don't expect you'll do any better feeding your family.
WTSHTF
Try to maintain a weeks worth of food, a month would be better, in your home. Maintaining a stock of canned goods, of the foods you normally eat, with expiration dates printed on them is a good way to do this. Try to rotate your stock eating the older stock as you replace it with new. Got a manual can opener?
In the event of a crisis WTSHTF (When The $#!t Hits The Fan) where you expect power may be disrupted eat only frozen and or refrigerated food until that food is gone or the crisis is over. If the power does go out, plan refrigerator raids with a list of the foods you're going to take out so as to keep the door open for as short a time as possible.
TEOTWAWKI
If the short term crisis turns into a long term catastrophe TEOTWAWKI (The End Of The World As We Know It) your food stocks will enable you to remain (hidden) in place while chaos reigns around you. You'll have a better chance of survival after things have stabilized.
To Comment on this post
E-Mail Me Unless you specifically ask me not to, I'll post your reply here in the blog so everyone can read it. Of course I'll remove your last name, email address or any other specific information for privacy reasons.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)