TakeMyCoffeeBlack

Here's the problem with your analogy: theatre is visual performance just as much as it is text on a page. One can analyze opera from a strictly musical perspective (and many do). The best scholarship will not forget the performance part of its analysis, but that does not mean that it can only be examined as a performance piece. The same goes for theatre. Why is it that many playwrights are also poets and authors? Well, probably because they create their plays with attention paid to the literary elements, just as much as the staging potential.

Look, Loric, I have no doubt you are extremely qualified on the topic, especially in comparison to me. But there are facts and there are opinions. As far as "theatre as literature" goes, there isn't much "fact" to go on. For that matter, there isn't much sure "fact" to go on when it comes to the source of our contemporary Shakespearean texts before the first folio.

I bought a bottle of Blauer Zweigelt from the vineyards of Austria! About to pop it open. (in my defense, it's after 9:00 here)

For someone so sure of your own intelligence, you do take an awful lot of pride in an absurd comparison (e.g. having studied theatre history for four years - which by no means makes me an expert, nor would I ever claim as much! - vs. picking up tubes of paint).

There's a logical issue in your assertion. You're suggesting that what we read as Shakespeare "is a complete fabrication" (which is an absurd statement in itself, as 1.) there's evidence to suggest that the first folio is a compilation of cue scripts, actor's scripts/notes, and perhaps Shakespeare's own notes - and even if it were just a cue script and much of it were (is) fabricated, that does not make it a complete fabrication), which should then divorce it from performance (which is not what good Shakespearean scholarship does) and permit it to be evaluated on its own as a literary piece. What about later theatre? I don't think anyone would have much trouble placing Arthur Miller or Tennessee Williams within their respective literary epochs. I agree with you that written theatre needs to be evaluated within the context of the playwright's intention for it to be performed, but the idea that we can't consider theatre literature is a bit absurd, no?

Who heard from Washington for an interview???

Actually, everything I wrote was because I have taken theatre history classes (for four years, in fact). I changed course when I decided I didn't much care for the people who actually do theatre. I'm glad to see the personalities haven't changed much.

Deflated...

That is to say nothing of the idea that written theatre shouldn't be categorized as literature. An argument could be made for performance theatre, but the way we see a play and the way we read a play are often very different.

They most certainly were, just likely not in a complete script (since that would take forever and cost a lot of money). They weren't just recorded twenty years later for posterity (well, they kind of were) based on memory, written pieces already existed. Shakespeare didn't dictate extemporaneously to the leads, and the leads, no matter how good their memories, did not just jump on stage having heard it from Shakespeare.

Ha! Don't you love all the graduate school experts who may not have even gone to graduate school, and most likely don't have a Ph.D. (or even know what that actually entails)? It's great that they try to comfort us, but...

You have a lot of faith in me!

Bayern-Muenchen?

I wonder if our Emory or UIUC people will hear anything today/this week. Next week should bring with it some movement (and a lot of stress).

Audiences are easier than person to person interaction. I've had a lot of introverted professors and teachers in the past.

I wouldn't worry. I'm sure he saw the e-mail but was just busy. As for the other, do you still have the old e-mail? I'd respond directly to it and say something like: "I was wondering if you'd still have time to talk. Of course I haven't yet heard about whether I've been admitted, but..."

alles Gute zum Geburtstag, IRToni!

Of course my situation is a bit odd. As many of you already know, I applied simultaneously for Ph.D. programs and a Fulbright last year. I won the Fulbright AND got into a program (unfunded). I've deferred with the program, but applied elsewhere in the event that money does not come through... Anyway: I applied to a dual program, where I'd receive a masters from another school at the uni simultaneously with the masters/Ph.D. in political science. A few weeks after the application deadline, I realized that the university required dual program applicants to submit TWO applications (application fee, materials and all). I called the masters part of the program, for which I had not officially applied, to see what could be done to correct course. They were very accommodating and just asked that I get it all in before the week's end, when the ad com would receive the materials (I got it in the same day - even though I needed a prof to fill out a supplementary form on a specific skill, etc.). A week later, the master's program contacted me to let me know I'd got in! WOW! I was actually at Alcatraz Island when I got the e-mail on my phone and I was ecstatic! I had already been rejected from a few programs at that point. I e-mailed to ask about financial aid/scholarships for the master's program (i.e. when I'd hear), and they responded that they were awarding me their very highest scholarship. Talk about putting me in a good mood! About a week passed and I still hadn't heard from the Ph.D. program. Here on GradCafe, people were already reporting acceptances, and it seemed pretty clear I wasn't getting one. I reached out to the master's program to ask about whether I'd be able to apply to the Ph.D. program for the dual degree in my first year at the master's program, if I were to take that route. The response I received really threw me off. It was something along the lines of: "I'm a little confused, because we had been told you were accepted. So I called the program and, congratulations, you have been!" Wow! Of course it turned out that the administrative assistant for the Ph.D. program just kind of forgot about my letter, and so when she sent it to me about an hour after the master's program from the other school contacted her, it had all sorts of wrong details meant for someone else (including - ouch - funding information). I hope this provides some comic relief for others. It certainly put me on a rollercoaster.

Tip: Hola Unblocker Tip: BBC One Tip: Get on it! But I only know this cause my gf is in love with Sherlock. I've been meaning to watch it. I've seen a couple episodes.

I'm counting down to the next season. I'll be getting back from a conference in Brussels a day before it's available, and have about 3 weeks before I fly to the States for another conference. Should be a perfect time filler.

How's everyone holding up? Any good Netflix shows those looking for distractions should be aware of? I'm delaying the final season of The West Wing with Revenge (guilty pleasure... so bad and yet oddly entertaining).

It's Sunday so stores are closed. Fortunately for my health and reputation, I have just the end of a bottle (one glass) available for the evening (my gf's mother bought me a great wine sealing system, highly recommended to any oenophiles out there).

And the game begins... I should make an Excel spreadsheet!

Of course whether I'm drinking socially or enjoying a glass by myself would play a role too... So that I don't come across as an alcoholic.

Something in between. Let's say that I would never exceed a bottle and a half in a night if I were drinking solely wine (I think that's why beer is more dangerous for me, especially in Germany in social situations - there are fewer boundaries). Considering that some nights I'm just as happy with a cup of tea or a single glass of wine, the waiting period might certainly play a role. I wonder if anyone could quantify the probability that I will have more than one glass (and whether there might be a clear corollary, like how soon I should hear from programs).