"If you ever find yourself stuck on an uninhabited island in the Pacific, it turns out that writing SOS in giant letters on the sand works."

"At least, it did this past weekend for three men whose small boat had run out of fuel and drifted off course among the hundreds of islands and atolls of Micronesia.... Writing huge letters in the sand has proved helpful to travelers stranded in the Pacific in the past. In 2016, three men whose boat was overturned in Micronesian waters swam two miles to reach a tiny island, from which they were rescued by the U.S. Coast Guard after writing 'HELP' in the sand.... Later that year, two other people who had been missing for a week were rescued from a Micronesian island after they wrote SOS in the sand...."

From "3 Men Marooned in the Pacific Are Rescued After Writing SOS in the Sand/Three days after their boat ran out of fuel and drifted off course in Micronesia, the men were found in good condition after a plane saw their giant plea for help spelled out on the sand" (NYT).

ADDED: My first question was: Did the "Gilligan's Island" castaways ever write "SOS" in the sand? Someone at Quora once asked: "If the castaways on Gilligan's Island had spelled out 'SOS' on the beach, with rocks, how long should it have taken before planes had noticed the distress signal?" The question suggests that they did not try this method! Click on the link if you want to read speculation about where the island was and how often planes might have flown over back in the 1960s. Or click if you want to see the many other "Gilligan's Island" questions people have asked, such as: "If the professor on Gilligan's Island can make a radio out of coconut, why can't he fix a hole in a boat?," "How did the Gilligan's Island survivors live on the island with no resources for several years?," "Why was Gilligan's Island named after Gilligan?," "What is something from Gilligan's Island that is really kind of dark, but gets ignored?"

And my favorite: "Why wouldn't the other men on Gilligan's island just kill Gilligan considering that he was constantly putting their lives in danger and he foiled every attempt they ever had of being rescued?" I like that somebody answered that question:

Beyond the fact that the series was a 1960s sitcom and that such a dark narrative would have proven to be difficult in the ratings department, assuming it got past CBS’ Standards and Practices?

1. Two of the four men were elderly - The Skipper and Mr. Howell could have died at any moment, and likely would have, living on a deserted island with fewer calories to consume, and no access to medications or health care. That would have left the Professor alone on the island and thus fewer hands for the heavier task (Gilligan was a pack animal)

2. They were afraid that someone else would tell - Let’s say that Gilligan’s antics grew to be too much for one of the men, and they decided to murder him: How do they get away with it? Since they were always just “this close” to being rescued, Gilligan’s death would have needed an explanation. Only Mr. Howell had the wealth to get away with it, and perhaps he wasn’t willing to take the risk. (Gilligan’s death would be a criminal act)

3. The women were protecting him - The women made it abundantly clear that they would not allow any harm to come to Gilligan. Anyone who violated their wishes would have been ostracized from the group. None of the others was willing to risk their “wrath”, and so Gilligan was safe.

4. The Skipper and Gilligan’s relationship had nuances that were not possible to air on 1960s television - Not only did they sleep together in the same hut, they frequently sat very close to one another during meals and discussions. They also spent a great deal of time alone together. Given that the only Mrs. Howell ever “pair-bonded” during the series, life on a deserted island would definitely have been rough for the other men. (Gilligan as the Skipper’s partner)

5. The Skipper viewed Gilligan as being his erstwhile son - If The Skipper made it clear to the others that Gilligan was as close to him as a relative, then harming him would have been out of the question. The Skipper was very protective of Gilligan, and he treated him in manners that approximated a father-son relationship in the 1960s. (Gilligan was The Skipper’s surrogate son)

While I doubt that Sherwood Schwartz, the series’ producer, was interested in creating a morality play (or that he saw anything in the show beyond the money that it might bring in) it’s clear that there was a lot of subtext going on and that a serious scholar might one day explore the program, and how it might be a cultural touchstone to 1960s America.

My question: If they had killed Gilligan, what arguments would each of the surviving castaways have made about whether or not to cook and eat him?