Desert Island Discs is one of Radio 4's most enduring shows. It was first broadcast in 1942 and more or less instantly became a national institution. Appearing on the show is now more or less equivalent to a place on the honours list, and celebrity chefs, ballet dancers, prime ministers, are still queuing up to select the eight records they couldn't live without.
The basic format - imagine you're left on a desert island, tell us which eight records would you want with you, and sketch in your biography at the same time - shows no real sign of going stale. But I do wonder how much longer it will be taken for granted that every guest will want a copy of the Bible (or equivalent sacred text) and Shakespeare's Complete Works to while away the lonely hours along with one book of their choice.
The intention is presumably to force guests to make more original and interesting choices in their final selection. But how many castaways would automatically opt for the Bible these days? Should a religious text really make it into the rankings at all? The inclusion of the Bible suggests that a religious text is a standard human requirement. Is it?
Anti-religious texts by the likes of Christopher Hitchens or Richard Dawkins would be equally inappropriate. The difficulty, of course, is finding an alternative that provides the scope of cultural significance that religious texts do. The Bible, the Qur'an and the Torah certainly represent more than the religious beliefs they ascribe to - they are rich historical texts and grand narratives. What we need is something secular yet soulful, relevant and resonant - but never preachy.
The Complete Works are, admittedly, considerably less likely to come up for eviction. But one could argue that it is a body of work set in 16th century Britain and rather exclusively concerned with the drama of the court. Of course, I am aware that Shakespeare's works lend themselves to endless interpretation and adaptation, and have a message and beauty that is relevant, influential and important to a modern reader; but I'm not sure his works should have a monopoly over all others.
