# Classics Scholar?

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/classics-scholar/54755>\
**Category:** Cecil's Columns/Staff Reports\
**Created:** [February 16, 2001, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/classics-scholar/54755 "2001-02-16T16:06:58Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 4\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![bungie\_us](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/b38774/32.png) [@bungie\_us](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bungie_us)\
**Post date:** [February 16, 2001, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/classics-scholar/54755/1 "2001-02-16T16:06:58Z")

</div>

In [http://www.straightdope.com/columns/010216.html](http://www.straightdope.com/columns/010216.html) Cecil wonders if Letraset was hiring classics scholars back in the olden days of the 60s. I don’t know about that, but I will share one little observation of mine about graphic designers.

Generally they seem to fall into two camps: the intentional graphic designers who went to school for it, etc.; and the failed-something-else graphic designers, like me. Among the failed something else types, I’ve noticed a preponderance of English and philosophy majors (though, of course, lots of fine arts types as well).

Seems like, given that, a classics scholar isn’t unlikely at all.

(By the way, when I say “failed-something-else,” I don’t mean to suggest ANYTHING about quality or talent, either as a graphic designer or as the something-else.)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![BunRab](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/258eb7/32.png) [@BunRab](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BunRab)\
**Post date:** [February 16, 2001, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/classics-scholar/54755/2 "2001-02-16T17:52:27Z")

</div>

Seems as though the only classics scholar I can think of who ever managed to succeed anywhere other than in academia (creating more classics scholars) is Henry Beard. Or, if you prefer, Henricus Barbicus.

_Me transmitte sursum, Caledoni!_

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Arjuna34](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/eb8c5e/32.png) [@Arjuna34](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Arjuna34)\
**Post date:** [February 16, 2001, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/classics-scholar/54755/3 "2001-02-16T18:54:05Z")

</div>

Does anyone else think this was a little too easy to merit a genuine response from Cecil himself? A search on “lorem ipsum” on [http://www.google.com](http://www.google.com) turned up many explanations just like Cecil’s, including [_the very first link_](http://nwalsh.com/comp.fonts/FAQ/cf_36.htm) from the search.

Should I demand a refund?? 🙂

Arjuna34

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![pricciar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/f4b2a3/32.png) [@pricciar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pricciar)\
**Post date:** [February 17, 2001, 1:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/classics-scholar/54755/4 "2001-02-17T01:01:09Z")

</div>

**Arijuna34** , I came to this forum to ask the same thing. I checked Google myself, and the answer was easily found. I don’t mind that Cecil answered it, because he supplied more information. (The fact that the professor still hadn’t found a pre-Letraset example.) But, the questioner needs a web search lesson or two.

pat