I have a friend who is an art major. She doesn't have to work at a traditional job at all because her art brings in enough money every month to cover all expenses (rent, electricity, tuition).
I hate this attitude (usually one held by people who studied technical subjects at university) that all art/humanities/social science degrees are useless. I don't know where it comes from and why you people think you are somehow better than everyone else for studying a completely uncreative, unfulfilling subject at university. Have fun with your technical degree (if such a thing is possible), but quit it with the superiority complex.
Agreed. This is exactly what I was trying to say. But I'd add in "usefulness is defined as the likelihood of getting a traditional job." With the exception of the example above I already used, I know plenty of people in design, film, multimedia programs that already have jobs within their field before graduation or have jobs lined up.
Well,
somebody has to engineer the building that houses all of that art, not to mention your friend.
Usefulness is such a relative term, anyway. Useful to whom? Me? "Society?"
I think the current edu system has grown too full of itself, anyway. If someone wants to be an engineer, doctor, artist, dancer, electrician, whatever, let the schools provide the knowledge necessary and just certificate them. The grander "college experience" is such BS any longer. If you're talking about
any course of study the purpose of which is to lead to a saleable skill, it's a trade school, period, and should be managed as such.
The number of grads & post-grads I encounter on a daily basis that are barely functional, and functionally illiterate (and I deal mostly with folks possessing advanced degrees), makes me truly question the point and value of universities--in the US, anyway. As far as I can tell, it's nothing but a racket perpetuated by the NEA for job protection.
So I say study what makes you happy, and if you can make a buck doing it as well, you're ahead of the game.