The anthropological grapevine reports that the Discovery Channel is looking for anthropologists or other people interested in foreign cultures (but not “in a tourist or host/reporter way”) for a new TV show and have started posting flyers around UCLA:
Discovery Channel is looking for a host for a TV pilot about
immersion in other cultures.“We’re seeking a male and female (late 20s – late 30s), any ethnicity, with a background/education/experience in anthropology, sociology, archaeology, or similar studies. Ideally this person has overseas expedition experience/interaction with other cultures. Must be outgoing, adventurous, low maintenance, TV attractive, have a real thirst for learning about other cultures (mostly third world), yet NOT in a tourists way or host/reporter on “the scene.” It is likely, the man and woman would both immerse themselves in other cultures, and see in part how their experiences differ because of gender.
The time commitment will be rather intensive and extensive so must be able to be out of the country weeks, if not a couple of months on, end depending on if this television pilot goes to series. Flyers are posted on the boards for how to submit audition tapes.
Unfortunately there were no instructions on how to submit audition tapes for people who do not live in Los Angeles, which is a pity since I am sure that most if not all of SM’s regular readership are “TV attractive.”
For a while I thought about the possibility of subsidizing field research by taking endorsements — you know, walking around my fieldsite like a nascar racer covered in ads for my sponsor. However this looks like a much better way to fund research — what could sound more hip than a field project which had “a reflexive research methodology with a strong multimedia component”?
This requirement of being “TV attractive” was what struck me about a previous Discovery Channel audition call, for a show about urban expolorers. While I understand the need for Discovery to get ratings, it seems to downplay the intellectual accomplishments of the presenter in favor of rather more superficial issues. I mean, the best anthropological minds are not necessarily housed in the most attractive bodies. More than that, though, I wonder how much actual input these anthro-hosts will have in the substance of the programming. I mean, in additition to the demands TV production places on the appearance of its stars, there are limits to how (let’s be blunt) smart programming intended to be popular can be. I can imagine an insightful meditation on the meaning of some ritual observed or even participated in winding up on the editing room floor to make room for the segment in which one of the hosts eats a bug…
See, “TV attractive” could be interpreted in so many ways. Someone who is attracted to the TV constantly?
The simple truth is that people switch channels if they see someone who looks “different.” Fareed Zakaria once said that whenever he appears on a talk show their ratings drop because people switch away, and he’s not ugly – just foreign.
For the record, the phrase used in last year’s Discovery call was “videogenic”, not “TV attractive”. In any case, I think Nancy has it backwards — one who is TV attractive would not be attracted to TVs but vice versa — TVs would be attractive to him/her.
On a more serious note, though, the question is (to paraphrase an old Jewish joke) “is this good for anthropology or bad for anthropology?” Is no publicity bad publicity when it comes to breaking into the public sphere in a more meaningful way, or do shows like this water down our credibility and/or build up a false image of anthropology as the Xtreme sport of the academic world? Given that your average anthropologist is a bearded man with a bad haircut or a hairy-legged woman with chunky jewelry (and a bad haircut), can we afford to accept that a hot bod and a hipster trim are prerequisites to a meaningful public anthropology?
i admit, the phrase “tv attractive” could be discussed to no end. the thing that got me was that they were looking for a “low maintenance” person. they could damn themselves here as well. i would assume they’re trying to screen out histrionic divas but they could also wind up with someone with low maintenance in the personal hygiene department. now THAT would be “tv attractive.”
The punchline: a richly overwrought reflexive ethnography of being filmed while playing an anthropologist–at last, a form of self-flagellation that expiates the collective guilt incurred by thousands of unproblematically unobserved ethnographic observers! As per Herzfeld, the show would of course have to be dubbed and syndicated for the natives. Disaster ensues as the natives do MST3K style voice-overs commenting mainly on the ethnographer’s appearance and taste in clothing…