Desert Island Books

[poliphilo]

Ever since it started- a lifetime ago- the lovely middle of the road radio programme Desert Island Discs (which interrogates famous people by way of their musical and literary tastes) has "given" its putative castaways a library consisting of The Bible, Shakespeare and their choice of one other book. Now there are suggestions- whispers- that the Bible is going to be withdrawn- and the usual suspects have been tut-tutting predictably.

The point of the proviso was, I would have thought, to stop the castaways from making the boring- and personally unrevealing, choice of either of the two shibboleths. It had little to do with reinforcing cultural norms (which is how the tut-tutters read it) and everything to do with keeping the programme lively. But things have changed. The Bible has lost its hold over us (No foundations trembled when castaway David Walliams said he didn't want it because he didn't like it)  and a candidate who chose it now would be revealing something quite interesting about themselves- if only a certain courage and willingness to go against the grain,

I say, Drop it.

Notice that no-one has suggested dropping Shakespeare. (Hooray!)

I've often wondered what my desert island book would be- and I still don't know. I'm not someone much given to re-reading favourite texts. Do you think it would be cheating to ask for the whole of La Comedie Humaine?

Comments

[steepholm.livejournal.com]

I can't remember what they offer to people of other faiths - do Muslims get the Qur'an? I'd assume so - in which case there's certainly an argument for not offering the Bible to people who have no faith.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

I'm afraid I haven't listened to the show in years. When I was still listening- back in my radio days- persons of other faiths was a category that just didn't arise.

I think it makes perfect sense to drop the Bible, but they won't for fear of the Mail.

[heleninwales.livejournal.com]

I have a vague feeling that I have heard mention of "the religious book of your choice" or something similar. But I always assumed that the provision of the Bible and Shakespeare was to prevent people either taking the lazy way out and naming one or the other without giving the question any thought or feeling that they ought to take one of them. Providing them as a default meant that people actually had to think of something they may genuinely want.