ZELLA COMPTON: I've survived the desert, but could I survive naked in the jungle?

I have a temporary addiction to an American TV show called Naked and Afraid.

By The Newsroom
Tuesday, 2nd January 2018, 11:48 am
Updated Tuesday, 2nd January 2018, 3:50 pm
Zella is hooked on the American show, Naked and Afraid

The premise is that a man and a woman – complete strangers – are dropped, starkers, into inhospitable jungle-ish surroundings and left for 21 days to survive.

It’s a fantastic display of humans thinking they’re all-that because, not only can they light a barbecue in their yard, they’ve also watched previous episodes.

Each participant can leave if they want to – like one young lady who left after four days because bugs were crawling into places they should not have been.

Sign up to our daily newsletter

Fair enough in her case.

There’s a distinct similarity to Dragons Den, in which none of the people on the show have actually taken in one thing from previous episodes.

It makes me wonder, with the occasional puritanical nature of American television, why the participants need to be completely naked as the whole show has fuzzed out both genitalia, and women’s nipples (so much ruder than mens’)?

Put undies on them, and rename it Semi-clad and Whining.

Before they’re inserted into the terrain and have to purify water, stab and eat snakes etc, each person is given a primitive survival rating based on their previous expertise and experience.

It got me thinking what my PSR would be.

I’ve camped before, without a tent. That was in the Sahara desert, under a meteor storm and was probably the most beautiful ceiling I’ve ever had.

The sky was so magnificent that I almost believed in a deity.

But there I was in a sleeping bag, drawn tightly enough to strangle around my neck so that the scorpions couldn’t crawl in during the night.

And I was also with a hundred other people, a support team, a truck carrying my stuff including the spare clothes that I wasn’t wearing.

Probably a zero rating for that.


There has been much debate about the new Star Wars film, The Last Jedi.

For what it’s worth, I thought the visuals were spectacular, and if you can go for the stars, and the wars, then you’ll be quids in.

If you’re going for a story, a continuation of a life long-love affair with the galaxy, you’ll be out of luck.

It’s not dire, but given the resources and hope, it’s close to it.

You can feel the force used in ramrodding characters into a pseudo storyline, the force of ticking boxes in one way or other, the force of set pieces.

The originals were never subtle, but at least they had pace and had a point for each part of the story.

This? Bleurgh


Here’s an annoying invention for you, the Smart One toilet tissue dispenser.

I can imagine the thought process, about saving money.

After all, if someone is only going to pull out one sheet at a time, they’re not going to go for a luxury wipe are they?

It’s bound to save money as people will use far less paper.

But I wonder if the time taken to access each sheet was factored into that equation?

The lost working hours as people patiently eke out one sheet and then the next.

Does that then cost more, or less? It’s an intricate sum of time, balancing cost of loo roll to workers’ absence from the shop floor.