01 September 2009 — Desert Island Disks
I was talking to my housemate Alex about a workshop he was in at uni, in which people were discussing what albums they would take with them to the famed desert island. Being classical music students, these lists were filled with Beethoven etc. which Alex found fairly depressing given his preference for new music. It reminded me of the Triple J hottest 100 controversy again, which I mentioned here.
The whole desert island idea, which is a prominent feature on ABC FM – I think there's a series of CDs they put out under that label – is a similar thing to the hottest 100 lists, only it has a built-in "of all time" part, because their listeners are generally talking about music written over a century ago. The very idea of these lists breeds conservatism. It encourages someone taking part in such a list-making exercise to choose canonical works over pieces that may not stand the test of time. What's odd about this is that we feel any need to cultivate a conception of "classic" albums. You either like listening to Jimi Hendrix or you don't, but if it doesn't feel relevant to your life right now, why should you elevate it above Lil Wayne? Why, given the massive quantity of music created each day, do we feel like a piece of music should stand the test of time?
Is art that endures more important than art that doesn't?