the end of the road! :(

I liked watching this season of Survivor, especially because I never would have found the time to watch the season on my own. Prior to this year I never followed an entire season of Survivor, so I don't know if it was the best yet or not. I liked it though.
Watching this show I learned the people of all ages are allowed the shot at a million dollars, but similar to Darwin's theory of "survival of the fittest," the prize is likely to go to a person who excels at the various challenges. I also realized that EQ played a role in competing on Survivor, more so than book smarts. The contestants live a primitive lifestyle for 39 days and have to depend mainly on their bodily/kinesthetic, interpersonal and even intrapersonal intelligences.
This show is valuable to Psychology class because we applied our knowledge of psychology to describe the behaviors and personalities of the different contestants.
I liked the reunion show because it was nice to see everyone together again, and most of them forgave one another for events that occurred while they were on the show. It seems like many of them will be friends for a very long time.

Finale!!

1. I think Mick presented himself well, and he made it almost convincing that he had been more passionate about the game than it seemed throughout the season. Natalie was honest and charming with her speech; Russell's was honest as well, and he tried to appeal to the jury's logic by saying that Mick or Natalie should deserve the votes only if they had outwitted or outplayed him. I think his would have been more effective if the people on the jury were not so against him.

2. I loved what Eric had to say about Natalie. He gave her credit for the way she played and stated that her way was no less valuable than Russell's. I also found it interesting that Jaison suggested that the jury look to other criteria than monetary need when they were voting for the winner. Also, Kellie doubted that Russell could be a good person in real life when he lied, cheated and stole throughout the game. I see where she is coming from and I think it is a valid point to bring up, but I believe that Russell has a good heart in real life.

3. I feel that Russell would have deserved to win. However, Natalie deserved the win as well, for although she played with a completely different strategy than Russell, she made the right decisions along the way. She was more humble than Russell throughout, and was always a positive person for the others to be around. One of the biggest moves made by Foa Foa was to get rid of Erik, and that could not have been done without Natalie. Had Natalie not talked the Galu girls into voting off Erik, Foa Foa probably would not have prevailed.

4. I would have voted for Russell because I would hate to see him fail after he worked so hard to win the game. From the start he was completely focused on winning and even when the others wanted to give up or were just relaxing, he was always thinking of his next move.

Final Five

I think it would be a little challenging to separate emotions from the game because they could change the way you think.  However, it seems like she is going to be rational and still focus on winning rather than love.  Real friendships can definitely build in this environment, even though sometimes alliances have to be broken.  Once the game is over, the contestants will still have the memories they made and some of the friends they met over the 39 days, regardless of who won or did better.

As for what Shambo had to say, I am not sure if she was being serious or sarcastic.  Either way, she is not one to talk about being loyal to one's tribe because she clearly preferred the Foa Foa tribe members to her own tribe mates, and often voted with Russell.  In general, I don't think it really matters if you stay loyal to your tribe because there can be only one winner; you just have to do whatever it takes to win.

Moral dilemma

I think it is possible to form friendships with the other Survivor players, but that doesn't mean they can always trust each other on the show.  There can only be one winner, so ultimately it comes down to every person for themselves.  Once they have been voted off, they can forget about the competitive nature of the game and focus on the relationships they made; in Ponderosa they all seem to be better friends because there is little tension among them now that it is over for them.  

The nature of this game is to do whatever it takes to make yourself come out on top.  A promise is a promise, but it's a sign of weakness on Survivor to give away a secret that could later hurt you in the game.  You should be loyal to a certain extent so that other people will not resent you, but if you're in trouble and breaking that promise is the only way to save yourself, it's justifiable.  After all, this isn't real life... it's a game show.  You just have to do what it takes to win the game.

Going once.... going twice! ...... SOLD to the man wearing a chicken hat

I would have bought food (but only if I could see what it was) but if I felt that there was a chance that I would be the next one voted off, my priority would have been to buy immunity.  I feel really bad for Shambo because she spent a lot of money to get something that nobody would have actually wanted.  She's a trooper though so I think she could get over it.  John, on the other hand, was pretty selfish.  He had a choice of either getting a piece of apple pie for himself, or letting four other players have a piece instead.  Even though he spent his own money on it, there are multiple reasons why he should have chosen to share, such as: 1. to be nice, and 2. so that other people don't harbor resentment against him.

I'm pretty sure I would have bid on a shower because I can't even imagine how it would feel for going that long without being clean.  By getting refreshed and feeling clean, I would probably feel better about myself and be even more energized for the next challenge.