Each episode of Survivor tries hard to make itself unique in some way. The standard procedure of putting people in a tribal council to vote one person off is embellished with lots of other features. Every aspect of the game can be varied: tribal formation, rewards, immunity (hidden or public), exile, loved ones, tribal switching, merging, jury, tie-breakers, living conditions, prizes (cars), return of old-timers, and so on. Some of these have more significant influence on the game-play than others, which are just variations of a theme.
The nature of the game is that the players are never certain of the rules, and the goalposts are subject to being moved rather arbitrarily. They do not know the exact details of what will happen, and an element of surprise generally adds interest after all. But one thing should not change, and if it does, it must be transparent from the beginning. The quintessential rule in Survivor is that a tribal council is convened, at which each person votes once for someone who is eligible to receive a vote. Once the votes have been read, the decision is final, and the person with the most votes has to leave the tribal council area immediately. Goodbye, and good riddance, we are tempted to add. Most crucially, this person is eliminated from the game, and is never to come back (other than to be part of the jury). It would not be Survivor if this did not happen.
Season 7 (Pearl Islands) decided that this rule could be varied. The first six people were voted out of the game the usual way. In any other season, this would have been game over for them. However, unknown to the other players, they had formed a tribe of Outcasts, eagerly building up their desire for cold-blooded revenge. They suddenly reappeared to compete for the chance to vote two of them back in the game at the expense of someone from each tribe - and succeeded. Lil and Burton were voted back in to join the merged tribe - and even received instant immunity.
How did the other players feel? Lil's tribe had voted her and her ally Ryan S out in orthodox fashion, as they felt they were the weakest players. Burton, in contrast, was blindsided. Having them back in the game implied that the dynamics had to change drastically. They were certainly going to be loyal to no one, and Lil's unpopular but nearly perfect game plan was to vote contrary to what she agreed to vote. Among the final eight, Burton came in fifth, and Lil did very well to go all the way to second. And these were people who had been thought to have been voted out long ago. Clearly something was not right.
The lesson learnt (or was it) was that while tinkering with game mechanics would generally make the game more exciting, the issue that should take priority is whether the game is fair to those affected. This particular rule (once out means 100% out) was never tampered with again, though the producers might have continued to imagine how they could do so. They concluded that it was unfair to the players not so much because opponents who had been voted out were back in it, but because their apparently successful efforts to vote them out were really in vain. Some fundamental principle that the game rules should be transparent had been violated.
Here is an analogous situation that may or may not be highly appropriate. Remember William Hung auditioning and making us laugh at his hilarious rendition of She Bangs? He was categorically chopped from the competition at that point, and rightly so. Now suppose that the producers suddenly decided that the viewers would vote for a contestant who failed in the auditions to come back into the contest at the semi-final stage (skipping Hollywood and preventing the unappreciative judges from cutting him there). William Hung would surely have been that contestant, and with public support (especially from those voting for the "worst") he could have gone quite far. Surprise of the century!
Back to the returning Outcasts situation, we had Lil and Burton going from ignominy to respectability due to an unfair twist in the game. However, if the players had been informed before the game that the first six voted out would form a tribe of Outcasts, then they could at least prepare for two Outcasts to come in and complicate the dynamics. The rule might not have been desirable, but at least it would not have been a nasty surprise if it had been made known.
On to the subject of the upcoming Redemption Island, the notion that someone who is voted out could be "redeemed" has finally been worked into a game. It is anyone's guess if it will be successful or not. We know that only one person can stay on Redemption Island and must win a challenge against someone else to earn this right. At some stage (or stages, perhaps?) someone will return to the game. How it impacts the voting cannot be predicted, and is another story. Is it fair? Yes in the sense of being transparent since the players know about it. The deeper question of whether it preserves game balance is more convoluted. When should the redeemed return, and how often? I certainly hope it is not the case that the remaining resident of Redemption Island progresses to the final 2 or 3, for example. We the viewers will find out if this twist to the most fundamental rule of them all will be a success or failure.
agree.it can be a great twist or a lame twist
and I have to say people really dont like the twist in S7.
S7 twist is probably one of the twists that people dont like.
OMG!!! Philomena,...This is your best blog to date!!! You really raised some very interesting points to debate...It will be very interesting to watch...and many of the things you've brought up here ...will be in the back of my mind...as always , great food for thought... <33333
plz ++++ and comment