auroras

Hey! So, I didn't mean to suggest that I think the only way to get into these programs is by knowing a well-established writer or being published. Not at all. My main point was that successful applications seem to have subjected their work to rigorous prior scrutiny, whether it be in a workshop setting, by submitting to publications (getting rejected many times, and being forced to revise in order to get published), or even just working on their own for years. Or applying for MFAs multiple rounds and having to intensely revise their sample. I myself have been out of undergrad for seven years and went to a workshop last summer for the first time in about ten years. It's not like a two-week workshop developed my voice, my ambition, my interests: those had already been churning and stewing for years beforehand. But the workshop took me out of my own echo chamber, and that was crucial. Is it true that having a great mentor or having access to great workshops is helpful? Of course-- which is why we are applying to these MFA programs in the first place, to have access to those great mentors and workshops and time to write. In terms of opportunities available for revision: Draft people have suggested UCLA Extension, which has online courses and scholarships available. There are also often workshops available in your local city as well as many online workshops. I live in NYC and there are a wealth of opportunities, like the 92Y, Brooklyn Poets, etc-- many of these also offer scholarships. I know Brooklyn Poets has online workshops, so those who don't live in NYC could participate. There are quite a few summer workshops (Bread Loaf, Tin House, Kenyon Review, NY State Summer Writers), some of which don't have much in the way of scholarships. Not to constantly cite my own experience, but I attended a program which only offered scholarships to matriculated students, which didn't apply to me. I had to save for about six months beforehand to afford the workshop on my own, but I viewed it as an investment in my future. My version of going to an unfunded MFA, I guess. I googled an Iowa poetry acceptee and saw that they had previously crowdfunded their way to a residency. Everyone has their own path, but I do think that opportunities exist. My response is not meant *at all* to be comprehensive or cover all the bases-- I recognize the many obstacles that are in the way of especially more marginalized groups. I hope this a bit helpful, and certainly I think this is one place where the hive mind of Draft might be helpful in suggesting other opportunities.

Hi, Draft and Gradcafe lurker here, with much gratitude for those who have kept this thread alive in the past couple months. It's definitely been a safe harbor from Draft. I agree with several of the points being made about Draft, but I also think there is much to learn from it if you take a step back and evaluate the tumult of information. For instance-- yes, while it did seem like a few people were getting into numerous top programs, the truth is that no one was admitted into every program. Even the most successful applicants (Michener acceptances, Iowa, etc) were rejected from other top programs. I think that is actually evidence of some aesthetic diversity, or at least indication of a desire on the part of admissions committees to cultivate that diversity. I myself was accepted into one fully-funded program and have been rejected by several other top programs. My work is quite polarizing so I sort of expected the rejections, and am very grateful for the program that did take a chance on me. When I went for an on-campus visit, I was impressed by the range of work being workshopped and expressed that to a professor. She told me that this was an explicit goal of the committee: they didn't want to be a training ground for a certain kind of work and actively tried to put together a cohort where students would be distinct from one another and could learn from each other. More so than a specific aesthetic, what set apart the multiple-acceptance crew seems to have been really, really polished work. Many of those who were accepted had either extensively workshopped their work before, or revised multiple times before getting published in great journals. Quite a few seem to have been mentored by celebrated writers in undergrad or beyond. I think that right there is the magic ingredient in MFA admissions: having run your work through some prior gauntlet. I was privileged to attend a workshop last summer with some incredible poets, and I don't think I would have been accepted without that experience. It taught me how others would respond to my work, and what I needed to work on. I still don't think my work was as polished as it could have been, but no doubt the workshop made a huge difference. For all the downsides of Draft-- and it was straight-up terrible for me at a certain point and I had to quit-- I think there are a lot of sincere people on there trying to do their best to muddle through this very trying process. It is lovely to see people congratulating others on acceptances, even after themselves receiving bad news or being in limbo. You have to take what you can, but I do feel I learned more about the MFA admissions process, and by extension, perhaps something about the landscape of creative writing in general. Edited to add: my post is largely in response to the question raised by @oc.bmjc