World's Biggest Yawns?

Top 100 lists in magazines really annoy me. I've written an article about it.

If I pick up one more magazine that includes a Top 100 list I may actually have to rip my own eyes out to save myself from reading the recycled hyperbole and stating-the-bloody-obvious facts that construct such a list. Sure, these lists would be interesting if perhaps they delved into the details, the secrets and the processes behind each of their components. Or, if they just decided to live dangerously and include some forgotten gems, or explore some exciting or even entertaining subject. But no, instead it's the same old re-hashed Top 100 Greatest albums. You can bet your bottom dollar that the Stones and The Beatles will be sitting safely at the top and yawn as the journalist struggles to excite and increase the word count whilst mainly stating that Sgt Pepper's Lonely Hearts club was made on LSD and, oh my, what a shocking cover that Andy Warhol produced for Sticky Fingers. (Do you know it's actually meant to be homoerotic? How very controversial). But then if some how a slightly less obvious band such as Oasis tops the Greatest Gigs list, well that's just shocking. How dare they! Oasis above The Beatles? And surely everyone knows the best gig was Queen at Wembley/U2 at Slane/Steps at Butlins!

So really these lists are in a no win situation. They either bore the reader, reflecting what is predicted. Or disgust the reader ("How the hell is Robbie Williams in there? And where in the name of Englebert Humperdinck is Tom Jones?"). Likewise they either fill the reader with pride, at actually owning 30 of the greatest albums about homoerotic marshmallows, or make them feel ashamed at not owning one single album on the list. Worst of all is the actual need behind the inclusion of such lists in so many magazines. Is the current music industry so incredibly dull that this is the only way they can hope to fill their pages?

Vicky Eacott