The campaigns have been launched, the ballots have been cast, and today we're to back to discuss the Survivor Hall of Fame, once again joined by Gary Wise of former ESPN fame. In today's extended episode we consider the candidacies of the year's most qualified hopefuls, as well as some of those less qualified but more likely to join Survivor's most prestigious club.
Beyond individual candidacies, we also address what kind of considerations one should make when voting, if such criteria are even valid, and how the meta-game of Survivor impacts the Hall of Fame process. Should factors like gender play a role, and if so, is that fair? How might we compensate for inevitable recency bias? And is it possible for someone to get a ballot "wrong"?
Plus, can one-time players be justifiably enshrined? If so, what kind of implications does that have for the Hall of Fame itself? If not, does that signal that the consensus criteria may be flawed? How much weight should be placed on off-island contributions to the franchise? Conversely, do we deduct points from remarkable games played by people of questionable standing within the community?
After tackling these questions, we then look at something completely different: the idea of Survivor as a 'life game'. How should we think about the long-lasting impact of Survivor upon people who play it? What can we make of the 'success' (if it's appropriate to use that term) of people like Heidi Hamels or Boston Rob?
We go off on many tangents and cover a wide range of topics, so even if you're not interested in the Hall of Fame itself you can hopefully find something to enjoy in a podcast that's far too long for its own good. You can listen on the player below, here, or find us on iTunes here.
Like us on Facebook. Follow @mc_usher Follow @colinstone
Can't believe I listened to this whole thing. My thoughts:
ReplyDeleteI don't remember JT even being voted for once on the executive ballots that were posted. Strikes me as odd but it seems the voters vote for characters and players who have had multiple successful runs more than people who have had one good run (and possible dud returns), although I agree his HvV game wasn't bad. It seems like the Amandas and Stephenies are getting more votes than players like Cesternino and Kim. I think Kim and Todd were the only 1 timers I saw receiving votes, although players like Cesternino who had a dud return did get some votes too. I think the exception there is Ethan who was receiving a lot of praise for his work after the game, although I do respect his gameplay in Africa.
I'm not quite sure who would be on my ballot (I didn't really pay attention to this until after voting closed). I think Amanda and Kim would be towards the top of my list, and my third would probably be someone who had one standout performance, probably a winner. I think Amanda deserves a lot of credit for going so long before being voted out, and she was in a pretty good position on the Heroes tribe if they could somehow gain advantage at the merge. Kim played a completely dominant game which pretty much hasn't been seen from a female, although I probably have a bit of recency bias, as well as just being a Kim fan in general. I think JT might be my third vote just because he played so well in Tocantins and not too badly in HvV, but there are plenty of viable candidates, I'd think. I probably should rewatch Tocantins to see the original Coach again, but I got pretty tired of him in his two return runs, although he did play a good game in South Pacific.