The correct response is:
"As of 2018 there are four TV series and ten movies."
![]()
I can agree with this!
JB
The correct response is:
"As of 2018 there are four TV series and ten movies."
![]()
As I enter my late 40s I'm beginning to realize that a lot of my pop culture references are going over the heads of my younger coworkers.
A couple of cases in point:
I once made a Simpsons reference to a coworker and his response was that was a cartoon his parents watched when they were teenagers.
Another instance was when a coworker said something and I ended my response by saying, 'And don't call me Shirley'.
It went completely over her head. She had never seen nor heard of the movie 'Airplane!'
I'm just going to have to get used to the sliding scale of cultural reference points.
No, no, please don't over-generalize from my quip about intelligence! I was responding specifically to the proposition that someone would think the Flash and Flash Gordon, or Green Hornet and Green Lantern, were interchangeable characters. Someone doesn't have to be familiar with those properties to know that they're not; you just have to understand how words work.Say whut?
I guess that gives me the right to go around saying that everyone who hasn't heard of my favorite authors or TV shows or movies is of below-average intelligence, hm?
I'm still a big fan of physical media myself. But my point is that one doesn't even have to visit a physical store any more to browse the options... and it's not as if the search engine on, say, Amazon has a filter to limit results to "products younger than I am." Seems to me like it would take a proactive effort for someone to remain ignorant of older books, music, films, or TV these days.I still get my music on CD, and the vast majority of my book collection is in the form of physical books.
Or reading.Just yesterday a visitor to my home noticed one of the Outlander novels I'm reading (the TV series was based on them), and was horrified at how thick the books are... [and] she'd never heard of Henry VIII, and I found myself wondering how that was possible.
But it just goes to show that not everyone is into either history or historical drama.
Are these things no longer done? If not, why not? (Honest questions! I have no kids, so I don't know...)For example, many suburban kids would be surprised to know that I never took a school bus to go to school, walking there instead. And that I remember when the crossing guards were older school children.
Same here (metaphorically speaking... I no longer read a physical paper). But even though I am decidedly not a sports fan, I know that a quarterback, a halfback, and a fullback are not the same thing, or what it means when a batter has And I'm not a businessman, but I can talk intelligently about the difference between equities and securities, or describe what a derivative is. For that matter I'm not religious, but I can hold my own about issues of theology, textual and historical criticism, and so on.Not everybody knows everything and the world is full of people who skip over the ENTERTAINMENT section in their favorite newspaper or magazine or whatever. Lord knows I toss out the SPORTS and BUSINESS sections unread.
Exactly. That's what I'm talking about. Seems like it would take more effort to be unaware of such things.That being said, the "Yoda" thing still amazes me since, even you've never seen one of the movies, how do miss STAR WARS as a huge pop-cultural phenomenon? There are tons of movies and TV shows and books and music that I've never sampled, but I've heard of them and know the basic idea.
But... but... but Airplane didn't even originate that joke. It's a classic pun. It works on its own! How could she not get it?Another instance was when a coworker said something and I ended my response by saying, 'And don't call me Shirley'.
It went completely over her head. She had never seen nor heard of the movie 'Airplane!'
1001001 said:
It's basic math.
Do people often pick up dictionaries to read for fun?tharpdevenport said:Even Webster's dictionary -- which each year removed old words not quite in use like they once were in include new ones -- put Klingon in the dictionary; even books worms would have encountered that.
Agreed. I'm often confronted by people on this very forum who think I'm somehow lacking in intelligence because I've never seen even one episode of Seinfeld, miss the pop culture references, and don't care.On other fronts, I agree that this isn't an intelligence issue. The individual who didn't know that "the Flash" and "Flash Gordon" were not the same person is, in fact, a highly-educated publishing professional who specializes in young-adult fiction. Just not a comics fan, that's all. And another story: I actually met someone not too long ago whose sole knowledge of Batman came from vague memories of the old Adam West show. ("Didn't he have a search-light on his roof or something?") And this was AFTER the nineties movies, the Christian Bale movies, etc. Again, not a dumb person, just somebody who doesn't care about movies or TV particularly.
True. It's all over the place, but unless I'm into it, I just ignore it. It becomes part of the background, the same way I ignore other things I'm not interested in. As another example, I collect both books and penguins. I've got stuffed penguins, penguin pictures, and penguin figurines all over my apartment. The only person who ever noticed them right away was the plumber who came over a few days ago to fix my sink drain - because he's into penguins, too. Other people who visit immediately notice the books, but the penguins might as well be invisible.On the Wal-Mart front, I wasn't just talking about toys. I'm talking lunchboxes, beach towels, tee-shirts, greeting cards, cereal boxes, calendars, Pez dispensers, etc. It's hard to miss. Ditto for Wonder Woman, Spider-Man, etc. That stuff has gone mainstream--unlike, say, Babylon-5 or Elfquest or whatever.
Timewalker: You may be amused to know that F.M. Busby was one of the featured guests at the very first science-fiction convention I ever attended, way back in the early eighties. I remember liking his stuff back in the day.
"As of 2018 there are four TV series and ten movies."
He startstelling me about bingeing on Netflix
someone would think the Flash and Flash Gordon
Highly recommended.I know that quote, but I didn't know it was from the movie "Airplane!" I guess I'll have to watch that someday.
Green Arrow will really blow their minds then...
Not really. Not based upon my interactions with people 18 and younger.I'm still a big fan of physical media myself. But my point is that one doesn't even have to visit a physical store any more to browse the options... and it's not as if the search engine on, say, Amazon has a filter to limit results to "products younger than I am." Seems to me like it would take a proactive effort for someone to remain ignorant of older books, music, films, or TV these days.
Since I resubscribed to the Space Channel, I've seen plenty of advertising for a variety of movies and TV shows. But to me, most of it is just background noise. I don't go to theatres anymore, and I got out of the habit of too much TV watching (being without cable or even a working TV for enough years will do that). The only SF I watch these days are Star Trek, The Handmaid's Tale, and Timeless.Fair enough that you wouldn't have heard of say DS9 or Enterprise, and/or grew up with no interest in Sci-Fi in general so would never think to investigate that kinda thing. But to have never heard of the original Star Trek, Captain Kirk, Mr Spock, Beam me up Scotty, etc...
And the recent three movies, I mean they just never saw any advertising or anything whatsoever for those?
Well, hopefully the audience knows the difference!I've been introduced as a "STARS WARS author" more than once. Always a bit awkward:
"Hello, everyone. Today's speaker is the author of many best-selling STAR WARS novels . . . "
"STAR TREK."
"Excuse me?"
"Um, er, no big deal, but I write Trek, not Wars."
(Baffled look from librarian or English teacher who clearly doesn't know the difference.)
Thanks for clarifying. But do keep in mind that to people who aren't into superhero comics or TV shows or movies, or aren't familiar with that genre, it all sounds like the same thing.No, no, please don't over-generalize from my quip about intelligence! I was responding specifically to the proposition that someone would think the Flash and Flash Gordon, or Green Hornet and Green Lantern, were interchangeable characters. Someone doesn't have to be familiar with those properties to know that they're not; you just have to understand how words work.
All it takes is a school system where the curriculum doesn't include Shakespeare or poetry or classic novels, or parents who see no point in having books around. It's disheartening that so many of the younger generations have such a lack of regard for older literature, music, and TV/movies.I'm still a big fan of physical media myself. But my point is that one doesn't even have to visit a physical store any more to browse the options... and it's not as if the search engine on, say, Amazon has a filter to limit results to "products younger than I am." Seems to me like it would take a proactive effort for someone to remain ignorant of older books, music, films, or TV these days.
I was very lucky that way; both my parents read, and so did my grandparents, in a wide variety of genres; my grandfather even started reading science fiction, once I started bringing SF books home. I was actively encouraged to read, and my family started teaching me when I was about 4.Or reading.
(No surprise there, sadly. Only 72% of American adults report having read at least one book in the previous year. And the median number read is just four — whereas the mean number is 12, suggesting that most of the reading is being done by an even smaller share of the population.)
I predict this will continue, as people are already used to the idea that all the wisdom on the internet is found on Wikipedia.Intelligence aside, intellectual curiosity is definitely not distributed evenly across the population. I teach undergrads. It's a challenge I face on a regular basis...
I can relate to @MAGolding on this point. The only times I ever took a bus to school was when I lived on an acreage and the county school I attended was located within the nearest city, and many years later when I went to college. When I moved into the city, I was expected to walk to and from school. We got rides maybe 3 times during those years, during a really vicious cold snap in the early '70s.Are these things no longer done? If not, why not? (Honest questions! I have no kids, so I don't know...)MAGolding said:For example, many suburban kids would be surprised to know that I never took a school bus to go to school, walking there instead. And that I remember when the crossing guards were older school children.
MAGolding said: ↑
For example, many suburban kids would be surprised to know that I never took a school bus to go to school, walking there instead. And that I remember when the crossing guards were older school children.
Are these things no longer done? If not, why not? (Honest questions! I have no kids, so I don't know...)
Hey, don't dis Wikipedia. It has standards, and it's scrupulous about citing its sources. I've read countless undergrad papers that would have been considerably better if they'd just taken the trouble to crib from Wikipedia.I predict this will continue, as people are already used to the idea that all the wisdom on the internet is found on Wikipedia.
I walked roughly a mile to school each day, in elementary and again in high school. (The only time I rode a bus was for one year of middle school.) I also served as a crossing guard when I was all of nine years old. And I'm not exactly old. My parents are Boomers. I ask again, sincerely: do kids no longer do these things?......I'm absolutely baffled by parents who wail and start brandishing verbal pitchforks when it turns out that their kids have to walk to a bus stop. And I've seen complaining about the "hardship" of kids having to walk a few blocks to school.
Yeah, it's so scrupulous that I found a rather egregious error in a diagram of the Julio-Claudian dynasty that ruled Rome (from Augustus to Nero). No way to correct it, and who knows if it ever got fixed?Hey, don't dis Wikipedia. It has standards, and it's scrupulous about citing its sources. I've read countless undergrad papers that would have been considerably better if they'd just taken the trouble to crib from Wikipedia.![]()
Yeah, it's so scrupulous that I found a rather egregious error in a diagram of the Julio-Claudian dynasty that ruled Rome (from Augustus to Nero). No way to correct it, and who knows if it ever got fixed?
Yes, I reported it and asked someone (whoever was able) to fix it. I checked back a couple of months later and absolutely nothing had been done. It wouldn't surprise me to find it still unfixed.Did you tell anyone?
I agree though, I've never seen any undergrad papers with an error in
Not really. Not based upon my interactions with people 18 and younger.
My wife, who has never read Shakespeare, at least knew that!!I just about fell off my chair. I honestly do not understand how anyone, let alone a teacher, could not know that Shakespeare is not, and was not, American.
The correct response is:
"As of 2018 there are four TV series and ten movies."
![]()
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.