Word: yearbooks
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: all
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
...want clues to how I functioned with all this stuff, I can always turn to my high school yearbooks, neatly stacked on one of my shelves. I went to a large and intellectually shoddy public high school, but somehow we always had a pretty good yearbook. Mine is full of "autographs"-cutesy inscriptions from friends promising a wonderful future and at least two marriages. I don't know where these fellow Woodrow Wilson graduates are these days, but at least I can piece together the never-never-land existence I shared with them once upon a time...
Harvard, too, has a yearbook, and I'm glad it does. Everyone may not share my feelings, but I feel there's a place here for a book which those who so desire can pick up and use to refresh their memories years and decades from now. So, I am more than sorry to point out that Three Thirty Five, this year's example of the genre, is utterly worthless as a chronicle of Harvard's 1970-71. It is neither comprehensive nor interesting. It is also boring past the point of no return...
...personality out of the portraits of a large percentage of the class. Secondly, about one-third of Harvard-Radcliffe '71 (or about 500 classmates) do not even have their photographs in the book-presumably because they did not want to spend the two-and-a-half bucks the yearbook charges for the privilege. To add insult to injury, the yearbook did not bother to print biographies of the half-thousand seniors who did not have their pictures taken. It would perhaps be easier to forgive the rest of the inanities of this opus if it had at least lived...
...contents, one can see that it is divided into five sections. Reading the book itself, though, it is generally unclear where different secions begin and end, and this gets at one of Three Thirty Five's major problems: design. For a coffee-table book, which is essentially what a yearbook is, this one is unremittingly ugly. The headline typeface is unattractive and unvarying, as is the body type. Photographs are thrown on the page with only the slightest attention given to notice of esthetic balance. The layout and typography make the thing look not unlike an oversized stockholders' report from...
...seeing-or even that the full title of the show was Rhinestones in the Rough -or exactly what the Pudding is-or what the show was about. Since Rhinestone was hardly a hot item, in this year's calvade of Harvard entertainment, one would think that the yearbook would be considerate enough to explain for the uninitiated at least in a cursory fashion the event they've devoted so much space...