Main Discussion Area > Cave Men only "Oooga Booga"
Billy Berger on Naked and Afraid?
Traxx:
Wish I knew how to make that suggestion to the writers.
Id suggest,that they put some damn clothes on.LOL
billy:
Hey everyone!
Yeah that was me on the show. Glad you caught it, and I really hope those who saw it enjoyed it. Ya'll have some questions and so I thought I'd address some of them here.
First off, I believe the naked aspect is two-fold. Being naked strips you of all protection and takes you back to our pre-human era before we had or needed clothes. When you're naked you're certainly exposed to whatever Mother Nature wants to throw at you (ants, wasps, poison ivy, biting insects, thorns, sharp twigs, chiggers, cold rain, etc.). It's a back to basics type of show where they want to take the most experienced survivalists they can find, strip them of everything, and see if they can REALLY do it. Like the Naked into the Wilderness books, only they wanted to do it for real. I've watched them all and I really like them.
However, being naked is also a draw for viewers and advertisers. The fact that people are naked certainly gets people's attention. Unfortunately that's what advertisers and networks need in this world, because we're constantly hammered by advertisements and movie reviews. Nobody believes it anymore, and the fact that people are trying to survive with absolutely no protection certainly sets the bar even higher. In that respect, the naked aspect really works. Naked and Afraid has been a smash hit, and is in the top 3 most watched series in Discovery Channel's history. Whether or not being naked is necessary is up for debate. But the fact that it's done as well as it has certainly means that being naked really is necessary. We're talking about it, aren't we? And that's what they want!
But I want you all to know that what you see is REAL. We were not given a script, or told to act things out, or told to do certain things. The struggles, the insect bites, the leeches chewing holes in my skin to suck my blood, it was all real and I still have leech bites on my ankles to prove it. It's no joke. And we did what we would do in that situation if we really were naked and trying to survive. And they just filmed it. There is so much that happens in 3 weeks that a tremendous amount of good material never makes it on the show. The mental challenge of being isolated and trying to survive is the most challenging part of the show. You guys have no idea how hard that was, even though we knew our time there was limited. Three weeks might as well have been three months. Yes, it felt that long and was a real test of what you've got deep down. Anyone here think they can do it? Go ahead and apply on Discovery Channel's website because they're trying to get people to take on the challenge for season 2!!!!
Of course the fact that anyone would end up naked in a survival situation like this is rather unrealistic. But people still die in the wilderness every year, even with clothes on. When I was living in Oregon I remember a guy from Pennsylvania climbed South Sister in central Oregon in early November. He had on jeans and a light vest. The day started out nice and he made it to the summit, but on his way down a snowstorm blew in and he never made it off the mountain. They searched for weeks but never could locate his body. He was eventually found (or what was left of him) the following August by another hiker who happened to stumble upon him. Hell, look at what happened with Hurricane Katrina, or Superstorm Sandy, or those mountain climbers who got snowed in on Mount Hood several years ago and froze to death when a blizzard blew in. Stories like that make shows like Naked and Afraid very real and they captivate viewers. The survival movement is growing by leaps and bounds, and there is opportunity for unknown survivalists to have their 15 mins of fame. Where that may lead you never know, but the I, Caveman show I did 2 years ago led to Naked and Afraid. Where Naked and Afraid will take me I have no idea. But I'm gonna enjoy this ride as long as I can and just embrace where it takes me. That's one lesson I learned from being on Naked and Afraid! By the way, I attached some pics from Naked and Afraid for ya. don't worry, it doesn't show anything inappropriate!
Dharma:
Hi Billy,
I dig what you're saying and appreciate your response. But I'm afraid I have a quibble with the part about taking us back to our pre-human era where we didn't have or need clothes. This is not the same thing. We're comparing apples to rutabagas here. Here's why.
If we're referring to Australopithecus or Homo Erectus, we know from fossil and artifact records that they did not have the same technology as we do. Point being, as far as clothes, the thought didn't occur to them and they accepted the insect bites just as an elk would. In other words, they didn't know any better. We do and that makes all the difference. Be that as it may, we don't know for certain that they didn't wear clothes. They wouldn't have survived as artifacts. So we can't really see what it was like for them because we weren't there and there is no way to quantify that history. Naked and Afraid cannot establish the experience because we don't know what their daily life was really like. However, humanity invented clothing for a reason and we do know it is beyond written record and, thus, is a well-established custom among humans. We might think we can see what it was like but we'll be no more successful than World War Two re-enactors are at re-creating the landing at Omaha Beach during D-Day. They can wear the uniforms and carry the weapons, but they cannot re-create the dismembered bodies and ordnance flying about. And that was in fairly recent history compared to early hominids.
It isn't really possible to take a modern human who has knowledge of science, medicine, and even mathematics and think they can know what, say Homo Erectus may have done in thus-and-so a situation. We know, for example, that if we do not take care of a wound, it gets infected. We know it requires antibiotics if it gets infected. But a Paleolithic person might have assumed evil spirits got a hold of that person and that is why he died. They may not have cleaned or dressed the wound at all, unlike us. Even people in the Medieval Period had little knowledge of medicine, often using relics and water from a holy well to "heal" wounds. We also know a lack of Vitamin C causes Scurvy, something even sailors as late as the 1700s didn't understand. So, we also understand dietary requirements which, perhaps, Australopithecus may not have known. Early hominids may have pushed scavenger animals off of animal carcasses over a week old and eaten the meat. Would we do that today? Probably not because we know you can get food poisoning. But early hominids wouldn't have known that, done it anyway, gotten sick, and not known why.
As far as the "sex sells" sensationalism, I'm afraid I still must find it deeply regrettable that this is what we've come to as a society, speaking of evolution. Or, perhaps, a lack of. I'm not interested in a return to the social values of the Victorian Era, but the fact that people are interested more in sex than what is supposed to be the key that travels with it (that being love and respect for the person you share that intimacy with) is somewhat sad. But that's just me. However, humanity developed the institutions of marriage and relationships for a reason and that is societal cohesiveness and an expression of an emotion we somehow happen to have, that being love. Sex became attached to it also as something reserved solely for your partner. That includes nudity, to be clear. Humanity learned that sex being unrestrained led to violence because we're a monogamous species by nature. So are many other animals, such as ravens, doves, and many others. This is where sexual values originate. Something needed to be done because Torg slept with Trug's wife and Trug ran his spear through Torg in retaliation and each one's clan fought a clan war over it and the tribe split apart. So, really, "sex selling" in our society is dangerous to our societal cohesiveness in the long-term.
Anyway, this is how I see it. Not trying to argue, but just wanted to offer the flip side of the coin.
RyanR:
I think that this 21 day survival situation is harder for the people on the show than say, someone living there several hundred years ago. With the inventions of flushing toilets, refrigerators, climate controlled buildings and other modern day advancements it makes for a real psychological an physical challenge for the individual. In my time spent in the Marine Corps we did not encounter many of the challenges these people faced. My hat is off to any that tried this challenge even if they didn't finish the 3 week challenge.
nclonghunter:
As stated before, it is the mental challenge that I enjoy in the show. BUT, I do believe they manipulate the show as it progresses, even if the involved "survivalists" are aware of it or not. Just like the bamboo luckily floating up onto the island. I believe Billy found a metal pot deep in a swamp that was needed for boiling water. Drinking that swamp water without cleaning it would not have gone well. It is a TV show....Live Action!
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version