Thursday, August 31, 2006

Is racially divided "Survivor" a bad thing?

At first, I didn't really care one way or the other what the producers of "Survivor" did on their show this season. I've only watched the last five minutes of any one episode, over the years, and that was usually because I was trying to find the start of one of my favorite shows on my videotape (yes, I'm still at VCR level. I can't afford digital reception, let alone a digital recorder).

For once, though, I'm actually interested in seeing how this show turns out. Not that I think dividing up teams into "black-white-yellow-red" is necessarily prudent under any circumstances, but if it's done in front of the cameras, there's a very good chance that what we will see is a clear demonstration of the worst and/or best that "diversity" programs can cultivate among ethnic groups.

After all, isn't the end result of quota programs like Affirmative Action that colleges and employment offices, etc., are dividing along racial lines before considering things like capability? It seems to me that, with "Survivor" putting people into this same superficial grouping, they're actually setting up a genuine social experiment, for once, instead of the usual "will-tits-or-testosterone-win-big-bucks?" game show.

And, the final score on this one isn't going to be over which race is superior. It will be about how racial perceptions affect individuals and small groups under stress.

The question begged is, will racism show itself to be an ugly motivator, an interference, or ultimately a real and positive bonding agent? And, whatever the results of this game, will anthropological scholarship change?

This is more than a twist. It's an honest-to-God study.

No comments: