DontHate

I want to get my coffee upgraded on here, so I'm posting on everything. Obviously I'm lonely and bored. Sigh

Ok, here's another one:

I think this is a good idea, though I wish Stanford wouldn't emphasize so much the whole alternate career path in industry. I think it's great to have that kind of counseling available for those who want it, but not everyone does.

Hey s_s_s, why are you applying to 16 schools? Are you sure they all "fit" you? Seems like a lot of "fitting" must be going on. You know what they say about locks that fit every key...

"People Like That Are The Only People Here: Canonical Babbling in the Peed Onk" by Lorrie Moore is an incredibly powerful short story about going through the healthcare system in order to treat a child with cancer. It's definitely one of my all-time favorites.

Actually, no one ever asked me my reason for applying to any of the schools I chose. People just assume things, don't they, Snarkystsnarkypants? I don't refer to the US News rankings at all. In fact, I doubt they even exist for my field. What I call a "top program" is a program considered strong by people in the field, like professors and hiring committees. CUNY has a very strong comparative literature department, in the top 15, and also Gregory Rabassa, who's basically translated every important contemporary Latin American writer. Also it's in NYC, where most of my family and friends are. I'm wondering what other people know about it?

In most cases, I think you'll be fine even if your essays go a bit long. As long as it's not 3 solid pages over the limit, an extra paragraph or two can't hurt.

NO. They can only read strings of 500 words at a time. That's why the word limits exist. If they even attempt to read 900 words in a row, their minds will overheat and they will DIE. IS THAT WHAT YOU WANT? DO YOU WANT TO KILL THE ADMISSIONS COMMITTEE? For shame.

What are some people's thoughts on the program?

Based on anecdotal evidence, I think you can even completely mess up the "fit" paragraph and still get in. One of my friends accidentally included the name of a different school about half a dozen times, and talked about why this other school was the perfect place for her. She still got in. The program was excellent, Ivy-league, and extremely competitive. She ended up turning them down anyway.

That video (while I get that it's a joke) is all about the clichés associated with getting an unfunded degree from a low-ranking school. The jokes don't really apply to funded degrees from good schools.

Just curious to hear people's ideas, hopes and dreams...

I actually think that when they ask about "publications," they specifically mean academic journals. I don't think being published in a different context is relevant. But that's just how I interpret the applications.

My GRE was 169 Verbal. I don't think the math score counts for anything. But it was a 157.

I like to use diminutives whenever possible, even though it doesn't make as much sense in english.

You still butthurt, little guy?

No, I'm not applying to Cornell. But I know they're considered super strong in critical theory. I know someone who got an MFA there and loved it. He's just dripping with theory, it oozes out of his pores. It's kind of annoying.

"Five years ago 33 percent of graduates in the humanities had no employment or postdoctoral commitments upon completion; that number rose to 43 percent in 2011." http://chronicle.com/article/Doctoral-Degrees-Rose-in-2011/136133/ That's 43% of EVERYONE WHO GRADUATED FROM EVERYWHERE. What schools do you think the bulk of those unemployed graduates came from? Harvard? Yale? Stanford? Just make a wild guess. I'm betting they came from the schools we can't name off the top of our heads.

LOOK, JUST BECAUSE I LIVE UNDER A BRIDGE DOES NOT MAKE ME A TROLL. THE RENT WAS VERY AFFORDABLE.

Interviewer: Would you confess to being an elitist? Alexander Nehemas: An elitist may be someone who thinks that people have different talents and abilities, and if that’s what an elitist is, I absolutely am one. I think that talents are not equally distributed. Elitism about talent has nothing to do with justice, the distribution of political power, or political privilege. With the same opportunities a few people are going to do better than most others, and those who do better are those I admire. But I would not deprive those who do worse of political rights, nor would I presume to know in advance who has, and who lacks, talent. That is determined only after the fact. It’s stupid to think you are a special person if you have not already done something special, and perhaps it’s stupid even then. What counts is what you do. I hope you all become the best community college teachers that god intended you to be. Or whatever. I don't even know anymore. Everything I say is taken the wrong way.

No can do, I don't wanna blow your minds.

Thin-skinned and deeply insensitive to sarcasm? Why did everyone assume I was looking for an ego boost when I posted my "what are my chances?" thread? I don't think of myself as some sort of stellar candidate. Seriously, the reactions were kind of bizarre. Is everyone else in such a different position from me? I took a few years off after undergrad, I didn't immediately have everything figured out, I changed disciplines, I went through excruciating bouts of uncertainty (and still do, all the time). I worked really hard over the past year to acquire the skills I felt were essential to my academic life. Where is all the misunderstanding coming from? Is it really my elitism that's the issue here, or maybe something closer to the populism of an angry mob?

I'm not trying to insult any professors you've had in the past. I'm saying that the mindset of "I want to become an okay professor, not a superstar" just sounds like a sad way of thinking about yourself. I doubt any of your great profs of the past woke up in the morning and said this to themselves in the mirror. I think ambition is a beautiful thing, and it's what we all need to harness in order to achieve any level of success. Becoming a prof at a SLAC is an achievement. It's not a secondary goal, or a fallback plan for people who undersell themselves, or feel unworthy of Harvard, and angrily belittle anyone choosing to apply to Harvard or to accurately state the merits of a Harvard education. If you really want to survive in academia, I suggest you all become a bit more comfortable with what you're calling "elitism," but what I would describe as a bit of realism. And you know what? I am an elitist, in the sense that I feel certain people are more qualified than others, more talented than others. I believe in a meritocracy. I also believe that everyone probably has something that they are very good at. It's not always the thing they want it to be. Charisma, for example, is a necessity to great teaching. It doesn't mean that you have to be Rico Suave to be a great teacher, but you do need to somehow hold the attention of a room. Your ideas need to be compelling in form, as well as content. Looks and speaking voice play a big part in hiring professors. Is that fair? Maybe not, but it's true.

Sadly, the truth is barely anyone responded to my "what are my chances" thread.