A recent survey indicated that most people graduating from college are not proficient in English.
Of course, as usual, they break it down by race. But what would interest me much more is how it breaks down by major. How do engineers compare to science majors compare to English majors? How about “Womens” or “Ethnic Studies”?
Especially sad, I suspect, might be the results for schools of education, and journalism. But they don’t show them.
A recent survey indicated that most people graduating from college are not proficient in English.
Of course, as usual, they break it down by race. But what would interest me much more is how it breaks down by major. How do engineers compare to science majors compare to English majors? How about “Womens” or “Ethnic Studies”?
Especially sad, I suspect, might be the results for schools of education, and journalism. But they don’t show them.
A recent survey indicated that most people graduating from college are not proficient in English.
Of course, as usual, they break it down by race. But what would interest me much more is how it breaks down by major. How do engineers compare to science majors compare to English majors? How about “Womens” or “Ethnic Studies”?
Especially sad, I suspect, might be the results for schools of education, and journalism. But they don’t show them.
Andrew Stuttaford has watched all of the Kong movies, so you don’t have to.
I haven’t seen the movie (and have no intention to, based on anything I’ve read about it) but apparently it isn’t about gay cowboys, but rather, it’s about gay sheepboys. That actually makes more sense (and I’ll grant a lot of credibility to the take, given that it’s a lesbian source). They’ll put it in anything…
[Wednesday morning update]
Mickey Kaus explains to the apparently clueless why many of us are uninterested in seeing the movie:
My wild hypothesis is that more people will go see a movie if it features an actor or actress they find attractive! If heterosexual men in heartland America don’t flock to see Brokeback Mountain it’s not because they’re bigoted. It’s because they’re heterosexual. “Heterosexuals Attracted to Members of the Opposite Sex“–for those cultural critics wondering what a commercial disappointment for this much-heralded movie will Tell Us About America Today, there’s your headline…
I’m not part of the 94% of the public who believes in God.
King Kong barely got a mention at the Golden Globes. If Peter Jackson had been smart, he would have remade it with Kong as a giant, gentle, misunderstood gay gorilla, and replaced Naomi Watts with Jake Gyllenhaal as the love interest.
No matter how much the media and the glitteratti want me to, I simply cannot muster up the will to even contemplate, let alone actually drag my weary carcass to a movie theatre, to watch a love story about gay cowboys.
I guess that makes me a homophobe.
Just who is the demo for this flick?
Tom Purcell writes about a perennial yuletime classic television show that probably couldn’t be made today.
[Update at 8:40 PM EST
Apparently, it was hard to make it even then:
“We told Schulz, ‘Look, you can’t read from the Bible on network television,’ ” Mendelson says. “When we finished the show and watched it, Melendez and I looked at each other and I said, ‘We’ve ruined Charlie Brown.’ ”
Good grief, were they wrong. The first broadcast was watched by almost 50% of the nation’s viewers. “When I started reading the reviews, I was absolutely shocked,” says Melendez, 89. “They actually liked it!”
I have to confess, that I wasn’t a great fan of it, though I did like the Guaraldi soundtrack.
Jeez.