jrockford27

Thank you so much.
Feeling profound gratitude...
 

Hello Everyone,
Got a call yesterday from the head of English Graduate Admissions at Notre Dame with an invitation to fly out (at their expense) for a "recruitment" weekend.
Can't help but feel this is a good sign, yes?
 
 

Ummm... this is going to bother/upset some people but, I really don't see it as my job to manage students' mental health. Instead, I point them to the appropriate campus resources and encourage them to take advantage of them. Because I am not trained in mental health care so beyond general statements that almost anyone could find on the internet, I don't have much to offer students.
As far as grades themselves, I generally remind students who are freaking out that X assignment is worth only Y percentage of their course grade. That context can be helpful because it reminds them that they may have failed a particular assignment but that assignment is only worth like 5% of their course grade so they could still, in theory at least, get an A. Oh, and I frequently tell them that grades don't really matter, that you don't need a 4.0 to get into grad/law/med school, and that employers are going to care about things beyond your grades when hiring you. Better to have real experience and interests than anything else so I push them to do internships for credit, get summer jobs, do summer research, etc.

Warelin has made great points, but the jobs argument may not be effective at convincing a student of law, where the job prospects are almost equally as dismal!  We have an ex-lawyer in our program who just defended his diss and has a pretty nice job now heh.  Law firms are now offering positions for unpaid associates, "to get experience."  The more effective argument that it is longer, more involved, and potentially more stressful and difficult, for similarly meager prospects at the end (my dad is a lawyer and is stunned at the amount of work a PhD is compared to his law school experience).  Five years ago when I started I was very much of the mind that, "oh, I'm not worried if I don't get a job, I get to spend a half-dozen plus years getting paid to study things I love" -- but by the end of of year four my attitude was definitely "if I don't get a $&@*ing job at the end of this I'm going to be pissed."  This is not a unique experience based on my conversations with others.  Once you get knee deep in the process your attitude gets warped.  I still have few regrets, but my disposition is definitely quite different.  You're taking something you love and turning it into very difficult, high stakes, intellectual labor.
My first cycle I applied to exclusive interdisciplinary (y'know, MTL, MCM, HistCon, etc.) and poli-sci depts. with strong qualitative/cultural studies focuses  before I applied to English.  There were a great many reasons why I was completely shut out that year, but looking back it probably was a fool's errand to apply to poli-sci PhD programs straight out of my B.A. when the only true poli-sci class on my transcript was Introduction to Global Politics.
After my mass of rejections, I briefly considered going for an M.A. in poli-sci (I opted to cast a wide net for English programs closer to my interests), which seems like the thing for you to do (but, y'know, in English).  I would strongly recommend looking at funded M.A. programs, because you've probably already got a lot of debt stacked up from law school.  Funded M.A. programs.  At the risk of offending folks here: Do not go into debt for an English M.A. if you're planning to go into academia.  Do not be hypnotized by masters acceptances from big name schools that will want tens of thousands of dollars from you.  In my program we have M.A. students from unfunded name-brand schools and we have M.A. students from funded not-so-name brand schools and you can make of that what you will.   

Warelin has made great points, but the jobs argument may not be effective at convincing a student of law, where the job prospects are almost equally as dismal!  We have an ex-lawyer in our program who just defended his diss and has a pretty nice job now heh.  Law firms are now offering positions for unpaid associates, "to get experience."  The more effective argument that it is longer, more involved, and potentially more stressful and difficult, for similarly meager prospects at the end (my dad is a lawyer and is stunned at the amount of work a PhD is compared to his law school experience).  Five years ago when I started I was very much of the mind that, "oh, I'm not worried if I don't get a job, I get to spend a half-dozen plus years getting paid to study things I love" -- but by the end of of year four my attitude was definitely "if I don't get a $&@*ing job at the end of this I'm going to be pissed."  This is not a unique experience based on my conversations with others.  Once you get knee deep in the process your attitude gets warped.  I still have few regrets, but my disposition is definitely quite different.  You're taking something you love and turning it into very difficult, high stakes, intellectual labor.
My first cycle I applied to exclusive interdisciplinary (y'know, MTL, MCM, HistCon, etc.) and poli-sci depts. with strong qualitative/cultural studies focuses  before I applied to English.  There were a great many reasons why I was completely shut out that year, but looking back it probably was a fool's errand to apply to poli-sci PhD programs straight out of my B.A. when the only true poli-sci class on my transcript was Introduction to Global Politics.
After my mass of rejections, I briefly considered going for an M.A. in poli-sci (I opted to cast a wide net for English programs closer to my interests), which seems like the thing for you to do (but, y'know, in English).  I would strongly recommend looking at funded M.A. programs, because you've probably already got a lot of debt stacked up from law school.  Funded M.A. programs.  At the risk of offending folks here: Do not go into debt for an English M.A. if you're planning to go into academia.  Do not be hypnotized by masters acceptances from big name schools that will want tens of thousands of dollars from you.  In my program we have M.A. students from unfunded name-brand schools and we have M.A. students from funded not-so-name brand schools and you can make of that what you will.   

There are a few questions that arise here:
What is your perception of what an English Graduate student does. There's a big difference between enjoying literature and being a dedicated scholar in literature. What makes you want to switch from Law School to English?  Are you aware of the terrible job market in the humanities? Did you know that In 1975, 30 percent of college faculty were part-time? By 2011, 51 percent of college faculty were part-time, and another 19 percent were non–tenure track, full-time employees. In other words, 70 percent were contingent faculty, a broad classification that includes all non–tenure track faculty (NTTF), whether they work full-time or part-time. Which areas in English are you interested in? Which time periods you're interested in? What questions have been unanswered that you hope to answer? Is there a way you can build a bridge to combine your previous interests to one in English to show committees why this should be your next step? Do you have professors who can give you a strong recommendation letter about your ability in English? Some programs prefer these be written by tenured or tenure-track professors of English. Some programs don't care. Do you have any experience  teaching, peer tutoring or working as a research assistant in Literature? While not necessary to gain admission, it might help you to get an understanding of what some of the field entails before diving into a MA/PHD program. Are you okay with failing? A considerable amount of PHD schools accept less than 10 percent of applicants. It's estimated that somewhere between 33 and 50 percent of students never finish their PHD. There are often hundreds of people applying for each tenure-track job. Are you comfortable living anywhere to teach in academia? Most jobs are not at R1 schools. A great number of jobs will be at lesser-known institutions. Some of these institutions can be in rural locations. The best course of action really depends on what you hope to achieve. "Fit" is less important in MA programs than in PHD programs. Location is a huge factor to some people but it isn't a factor for everyone. The GRE in English Literature used to be a requirement for a lot of schools. However, that number has been decreasing in recent years as more schools have chosen to make it either "optional" or to not consider it in its admission decisions. I'd consult your college's English department and ask them what they feel would be the best course of action based on your end goal.

I sent out a statement that had a subject-verb disagreement in the last paragraph.  This particular school allowed more space, so I took advantage of it to add an extra paragraph about my teaching philosophy (I think that was the reason they had more space than most apps) and that's where it snuck in.  This was the statement I sent to the program I currently attend.  So don't worry, that little mistake isn't going to submarine your whole application!

I am the Buffalo acceptance. I posted the standard package that they've offered me although they said they will nominate me for a Schomberg fellowship as well so my package offer may change. My first response from any program so far.

I believe, if memory serves, that there is a particularly nice SUNY Buffalo fellowship that is offered very early in the process.  I was accepted at SUNY Buffalo and as I recall, the main body of acceptances arrived in February, so fear not.
Also, don't feel bad about not getting the nice fellowship, as SUNY Buffalo's standard compensation package is quite nice, especially given the relatively low cost of living in Buffalo!

I believe, if memory serves, that there is a particularly nice SUNY Buffalo fellowship that is offered very early in the process.  I was accepted at SUNY Buffalo and as I recall, the main body of acceptances arrived in February, so fear not.
Also, don't feel bad about not getting the nice fellowship, as SUNY Buffalo's standard compensation package is quite nice, especially given the relatively low cost of living in Buffalo!

Well, it's like I've said a great many times on this forum: if you were a fully finished scholar, capable of drafting impeccable academic manuscripts, then you wouldn't need to be in grad school.  They likely don't care too much about how graceful your prose is, they care whether you demonstrated that you are capable of forming interesting and original ideas.  This is probably especially true of applicants whose first language isn't English.
I've personally taken @GreenEyedTrombonist's advice to the extreme.  I applied to grad school in 2012 and I haven't laid eyes on my writing sample, or any of my materials, since then.
Your committee will help you become a good writer.  I'm in my fifth year now and I still seem to catch a bit of hell from my advisor for technical issues every time I get feedback on a draft  For now, what's important is demonstrating you have potential.
 
@waltzforzizi, I'm sure the POI will make sure your documents get to the right place if they went through the trouble of asking you for them.  Try to imagine the faculty at the programs you're applying to as people not so different from yourself (after all, that's what they are, a more experienced version of you).  Would you cut yourself some slack in this situation?  If the answer is yes, you probably don't have that much to worry about.

Well, it's like I've said a great many times on this forum: if you were a fully finished scholar, capable of drafting impeccable academic manuscripts, then you wouldn't need to be in grad school.  They likely don't care too much about how graceful your prose is, they care whether you demonstrated that you are capable of forming interesting and original ideas.  This is probably especially true of applicants whose first language isn't English.
I've personally taken @GreenEyedTrombonist's advice to the extreme.  I applied to grad school in 2012 and I haven't laid eyes on my writing sample, or any of my materials, since then.
Your committee will help you become a good writer.  I'm in my fifth year now and I still seem to catch a bit of hell from my advisor for technical issues every time I get feedback on a draft  For now, what's important is demonstrating you have potential.
 
@waltzforzizi, I'm sure the POI will make sure your documents get to the right place if they went through the trouble of asking you for them.  Try to imagine the faculty at the programs you're applying to as people not so different from yourself (after all, that's what they are, a more experienced version of you).  Would you cut yourself some slack in this situation?  If the answer is yes, you probably don't have that much to worry about.

Well, it's like I've said a great many times on this forum: if you were a fully finished scholar, capable of drafting impeccable academic manuscripts, then you wouldn't need to be in grad school.  They likely don't care too much about how graceful your prose is, they care whether you demonstrated that you are capable of forming interesting and original ideas.  This is probably especially true of applicants whose first language isn't English.
I've personally taken @GreenEyedTrombonist's advice to the extreme.  I applied to grad school in 2012 and I haven't laid eyes on my writing sample, or any of my materials, since then.
Your committee will help you become a good writer.  I'm in my fifth year now and I still seem to catch a bit of hell from my advisor for technical issues every time I get feedback on a draft  For now, what's important is demonstrating you have potential.
 
@waltzforzizi, I'm sure the POI will make sure your documents get to the right place if they went through the trouble of asking you for them.  Try to imagine the faculty at the programs you're applying to as people not so different from yourself (after all, that's what they are, a more experienced version of you).  Would you cut yourself some slack in this situation?  If the answer is yes, you probably don't have that much to worry about.

Well, it's like I've said a great many times on this forum: if you were a fully finished scholar, capable of drafting impeccable academic manuscripts, then you wouldn't need to be in grad school.  They likely don't care too much about how graceful your prose is, they care whether you demonstrated that you are capable of forming interesting and original ideas.  This is probably especially true of applicants whose first language isn't English.
I've personally taken @GreenEyedTrombonist's advice to the extreme.  I applied to grad school in 2012 and I haven't laid eyes on my writing sample, or any of my materials, since then.
Your committee will help you become a good writer.  I'm in my fifth year now and I still seem to catch a bit of hell from my advisor for technical issues every time I get feedback on a draft  For now, what's important is demonstrating you have potential.
 
@waltzforzizi, I'm sure the POI will make sure your documents get to the right place if they went through the trouble of asking you for them.  Try to imagine the faculty at the programs you're applying to as people not so different from yourself (after all, that's what they are, a more experienced version of you).  Would you cut yourself some slack in this situation?  If the answer is yes, you probably don't have that much to worry about.

Well, it's like I've said a great many times on this forum: if you were a fully finished scholar, capable of drafting impeccable academic manuscripts, then you wouldn't need to be in grad school.  They likely don't care too much about how graceful your prose is, they care whether you demonstrated that you are capable of forming interesting and original ideas.  This is probably especially true of applicants whose first language isn't English.
I've personally taken @GreenEyedTrombonist's advice to the extreme.  I applied to grad school in 2012 and I haven't laid eyes on my writing sample, or any of my materials, since then.
Your committee will help you become a good writer.  I'm in my fifth year now and I still seem to catch a bit of hell from my advisor for technical issues every time I get feedback on a draft  For now, what's important is demonstrating you have potential.
 
@waltzforzizi, I'm sure the POI will make sure your documents get to the right place if they went through the trouble of asking you for them.  Try to imagine the faculty at the programs you're applying to as people not so different from yourself (after all, that's what they are, a more experienced version of you).  Would you cut yourself some slack in this situation?  If the answer is yes, you probably don't have that much to worry about.

Do you mean, by "faculty consulted", the extent to which the applicant has corresponded with faculty members?  It really shouldn't matter at all.  I didn't get into any of the programs where I corresponded with faculty, and the programs I was accepted to I never corresponded.
It's a good idea to have "faculty" of interest though, because it helps you make the case as to why the department is a good fit for you.

@WildeThing, while I think it's totally bizarre for your letter writer to pull that on you, and your letter writers seem a bit tactless, I think there is something to be said for casting a wide net.  Every single grad school offers a very low chance of acceptance.  Even a so-called "safety" school is only likely to admit 5-15 students out of hundreds of applicants.  Within this group, your list is dominated by the most exclusive of the exclusive.   While you may well have a very good fit at those institutions, I would encourage anyone to consider that people are doing big work with brilliant scholars at any number of institutions who may not be household names, as most of the schools you list are, and people also get jobs out of those institutions. 
Casting a wide net is also very advantageous because your application could be positively brilliant, but if the two profs on the adcom who happen to get it don't feel like they need another grad student in your subfield, then you're not going anywhere.  The profs you think you have a great fit with might not be on the adcom, might be on sabbatical, etc., and so you're then depending on another member of the committee to think, "Oh, they'd be a good fit for [x]".  This is really, I think, the most important aspect of admissions, and it's one over which you have no control, and is incredibly capricious.  It underscores the importance of going far and wide.  I was once told that one particular professor in my department fought very hard for my application.  If that professor wasn't on the committee, I'd likely be somewhere else!
I say this as a person whose first list looked very very much like yours and was shut out, and the feeling was absolutely devastating.  In my second round of applications, I opened my mind to other possibilities, and I ended up at a school that isn't an ivy (or ivy equivalent), but is top notch in my subfield and has a good record of placement, even if its name doesn't impress my aunts and uncles when I'm home for Christmas.

@WildeThing, while I think it's totally bizarre for your letter writer to pull that on you, and your letter writers seem a bit tactless, I think there is something to be said for casting a wide net.  Every single grad school offers a very low chance of acceptance.  Even a so-called "safety" school is only likely to admit 5-15 students out of hundreds of applicants.  Within this group, your list is dominated by the most exclusive of the exclusive.   While you may well have a very good fit at those institutions, I would encourage anyone to consider that people are doing big work with brilliant scholars at any number of institutions who may not be household names, as most of the schools you list are, and people also get jobs out of those institutions. 
Casting a wide net is also very advantageous because your application could be positively brilliant, but if the two profs on the adcom who happen to get it don't feel like they need another grad student in your subfield, then you're not going anywhere.  The profs you think you have a great fit with might not be on the adcom, might be on sabbatical, etc., and so you're then depending on another member of the committee to think, "Oh, they'd be a good fit for [x]".  This is really, I think, the most important aspect of admissions, and it's one over which you have no control, and is incredibly capricious.  It underscores the importance of going far and wide.  I was once told that one particular professor in my department fought very hard for my application.  If that professor wasn't on the committee, I'd likely be somewhere else!
I say this as a person whose first list looked very very much like yours and was shut out, and the feeling was absolutely devastating.  In my second round of applications, I opened my mind to other possibilities, and I ended up at a school that isn't an ivy (or ivy equivalent), but is top notch in my subfield and has a good record of placement, even if its name doesn't impress my aunts and uncles when I'm home for Christmas.

@WildeThing, while I think it's totally bizarre for your letter writer to pull that on you, and your letter writers seem a bit tactless, I think there is something to be said for casting a wide net.  Every single grad school offers a very low chance of acceptance.  Even a so-called "safety" school is only likely to admit 5-15 students out of hundreds of applicants.  Within this group, your list is dominated by the most exclusive of the exclusive.   While you may well have a very good fit at those institutions, I would encourage anyone to consider that people are doing big work with brilliant scholars at any number of institutions who may not be household names, as most of the schools you list are, and people also get jobs out of those institutions. 
Casting a wide net is also very advantageous because your application could be positively brilliant, but if the two profs on the adcom who happen to get it don't feel like they need another grad student in your subfield, then you're not going anywhere.  The profs you think you have a great fit with might not be on the adcom, might be on sabbatical, etc., and so you're then depending on another member of the committee to think, "Oh, they'd be a good fit for [x]".  This is really, I think, the most important aspect of admissions, and it's one over which you have no control, and is incredibly capricious.  It underscores the importance of going far and wide.  I was once told that one particular professor in my department fought very hard for my application.  If that professor wasn't on the committee, I'd likely be somewhere else!
I say this as a person whose first list looked very very much like yours and was shut out, and the feeling was absolutely devastating.  In my second round of applications, I opened my mind to other possibilities, and I ended up at a school that isn't an ivy (or ivy equivalent), but is top notch in my subfield and has a good record of placement, even if its name doesn't impress my aunts and uncles when I'm home for Christmas.

I deal with some of the same issues you do (including attention deficit, anxiety, depression) but over the last few years of grad school I've managed to refine my methods, maybe some of this will help.
First.  I find that a solid work schedule begins and ends with a solid sleep pattern, because this helps you establish a routine which I think is so important to dealing with some of these mental health issues.  If I go to bed on time, and wake up on time, the day goes well.  If I stay up too late and oversleep, surprise surprise, I have a hard time even getting grounded and it can be very hard to recover.  Have a routine, and have set work hours.  It doesn't matter if you work from 11am-7pm, 9am-5pm, or 9pm-5am, routine is important.  If you're struggling with getting to classes and meetings, pick a set of working hours amenable to that.  Keep that time sacred for work (though remember to take a break here and there - though don't get too far afield).  If you're like me, and struggle with focus, there are apps for that!  Don't rapidly snap into this new routine overnight, work your way up to it.  I find that even on the weekend I only deviate slightly from this sleep schedule, I shoot for 7 hours of sleep each night, your body may have different needs.
Second.  Protect some time for non-work stuff and keep that sacred as well.  Don't buy into the myth that you should be putting in 70 hours of solid work each week.  Nobody is really doing that, and even if they are, there is plenty evidence to suggest that working in small, intense bursts actually produces better output than dragging out your workday for the sake of being able to comfortably say you logged a lot of hours.  If you have nothing to look forward to then it will be very hard to stay committed to your work.
Third.  Never go into anything as important as a day in your life without a plan.  Even if you wake up and finish your breakfast and walk your dog and you're just itching to sit down and write until your fingers bleed, take some time to plan out your day.  I have used checklists, but I've found that I've had more success after I bought a small lined notepad.  Each day, I mark out the clock hours I'm going to work, each line represents a 30 minute increment, and I visualize how my time will be spent, accounting for time spent on the bus or walking from place to place, as well as any breaks.  Each day starts with a 30 minute block I label "planning/prep", in which I check my e-mail, check and update my planner, get any old coffee cups off my desk, and get whatever books or materials I'm going to need for the day.  After that, I turn on my website blocking app for the next 6-7 hours and I work.
Fourth.  Try doing creative/intense intellectual work in short, highly focused bursts.  There are studies that show that even highly trained and experienced experts in various skills have a very very finite amount of mental energy/willpower that they can expend on their practice before they start to see diminishing returns.  Since I've started actually producing my dissertation, I limit my actual writing time to two very intense 90-120 minute chunks of writing each day.  I've found that I'm having quite a bit of success this way.  In a typical day, I begin at 9:30 a.m., I take care of prep stuff and everyday tasks until 10, I then write until about noon, at which time I take a 30-60 minute break to eat, walk the dog, etc.  I then write for another 90-120 minutes.  These minutes of writing, of course, are focused and intense (I don't check e-mail, don't use my phone, etc., just write).  I then leave the rest of the day for reading and research, or other less intellectually demanding stuff.  I always take the last 15 minutes of the day to close everything down, make some notes on what I need to do tomorrow, and then I take like five minutes or so to just close my eyes, breathe, and disengage from the work.  The strategy of short, intense, flurries of output takes some practice, but I think is ultimately far more rewarding than the drawn out days I used to spend at my desk distracted and despondent.  If you're still in coursework, you may have to alter this formula slightly in order to keep up on reading and seminar prep, which is demanding in a somewhat different way, but I think the principle still holds true.
It goes without saying that this is a very fragile system, it takes some discipline to adhere to.  I have really excellent productive weeks using it.  There are also some weeks that nothing seems to go right with it, and I can't get a groove.  Consistency is key, good days beget good days, good weeks beget good weeks.  If there is something disruptive coming up like a holiday, or a conference, or research travel prepare yourself for it and figure out how you'll get your groove back when you return. I can't stress enough that the strongest indicator I can find as to whether a week is good or bad is a consistent sleep pattern that helps lock the routine in place.  Also, finding a workspace conducive to highly focused work is essential as well.
There is a book I've found very helpful called Deep Work: Rules for Focused Success in a Distracted World by Dr. Cal Newport.  Some of the strategies I talk about in this post come from that, though most are modifications of things I was already working about.  What Newport provides is a solid well researched basis for these strategies and ways of refining them.  It's not geared toward academics, but the author is a professor at Georgetown so the strategies are actually rooted in his academic life.  It's not without its problematic aspects, but overall very helpful. 

If they ask for three, why provide more?  I would imagine that intentionally not following such a specific instruction would, indeed, be frowned upon?  The best case scenario is probably that they simply don't read the fourth letter, the worst case scenario is that the adcom senses that you're either incapable of following instructions or are being disingenuous and trying to get a leg up on your competitors.
If there is some very compelling reason why you need to submit a fourth, I would suggest asking the Grad Administrator for permission, and explaining in your SoP (and using valuable space under your word count) why you've included the extra.
The application forms universities use are usually used across the university, which would explain potentially why it allows the submission of more than three.  Some programs may require four, five, six, or however many.  I've been in the position of applicant and I know there is a tendency to overthink anything that seems like an ambiguity.  The only important thing here is that the program your applying to has specifically requested three.

A few things:
1. If you're at the beginning of your third year, it's definitely not too late to buckle down and find a focus. If you want to do this, then seek out rigorous classes with good professors for your next semester's worth of classes. Think about doing a senior thesis or an independent study, if you're so inclined. 
2. I don't know where you're getting the idea that funded terminal MA programs are rare. There are still plenty out there (though they are indeed growing rarer as funding structures keep changing). No, you won't find them at the top schools in the country. But you will find them at large state universities throughout the Midwest and South. I would recommend that you start looking at large flagships or other big universities in those areas. These English departments typically have large and well-developed rhet/comp programs, so they offer funding in exchange for teaching. They're in the not-so-glamorous places of Lafayette, Indiana, or Athens, Ohio, or Oxford, Mississippi, which is probably why people don't talk about them very much. But please don't think that your only options are to either pay for an MA or get into a funded PhD program. 
3. In terms of the application materials--writing sample and SOP are most important. But this doesn't make GRE scores or grades UNimportant. The entire application has to be strong. 

Forget "completely original thoughts."  If your research concept doesn't overlap to some degree or another with other scholars in your area, you're either thinking too narrowly, or you're not in the area you think you are.
I've been writing the first chapter of my dissertation the last few months, and one of the most important things I've had to learn is that an intellectual discipline is a conversation.  You are entering into it to contribute, not to eviscerate your competition.
Read widely in your area, follow back footnotes, don't get defensive when you come across something that either seems to "steal" your idea, or contradict it.  Instead think about your place in the conversation.  Do not feel the need to recapitulate the secondary literature of your area in your writing sample - in fact, avoid this, using only what you need.  If you were already completely versed in your area, you wouldn't need to get a PhD.
My partner has recently been reading the book They Say, I Say: The Moves that Matter in Academic Writing and says it's been very helpful in this regard.  I plan to take a look when she's done.
Looking back, my writing sample wasn't even remotely original, but it showed that I had potential.  If you were capable of busting the lid off of your discipline already - again - you wouldn't need to get a PhD.  I recently got some advice about dissertation writing, "Do not think of it as the last great thing you will write, think of it as the first good thing you will write."  If that applies to dissertations, then put the writing sample in perspective.  Your originality is far less important than your potential.

Wow, this thread has gotten very pedantic since I last checked in!  I think it's funny when my students call me Dr. or Professor, I usually joke that "those are titles that come with pay and benefits that I don't receive, so you can just call me [firstname], or Mr. [Lastname] if you're not into the whole brevity thing."  Nevertheless, the undergrads still seem to want to call me professor or Dr.  I suppose if one of my fellow grad students told a local at the bar they were a "professor of English" I'd probably snicker a bit.  
The only reason the discussion of job titles is important to a discussion of admissions is because you want to get your letters of rec from tenured faculty wherever possible.*  If this seems unfair, this was advice I received from a non-tenure lecturer I asked for a letter of rec!  In American universities, this person will hold a job title that has the word "professor" in it, otherwise I can't imagine why this is relevant.
I suppose my goal wasn't to tell you that reading the secondary literature wasn't important.  It is.  But at the stage you are at in your academic career (finishing/recently finished undergrad, I think) nobody expects you to have expert knowledge of a subfield. You will go to grad school to develop expert knowledge of a subfield.  That is what your comprehensive exams will be.
How much do you need to have read in order to write a good writing sample: enough to be able to write a good 20ish page research paper.  Without trying to assume anything about your plans, I'd just warn that if you use too much of your writing sample to show off how much you've read you're going to write a very lousy paper.  Plan an argument that shows you can work interestingly with the sources you're already familiar with, show them what you're already strong at.  Or really, just use your best paper from undergrad, because you'll already have feedback on it, if it's not long enough, think about how you can expand it.
 
*A word I'd add to the job title discussion, is that I think it's useful for people (students, people outside academia, etc.) know how the system functions, they should know who is teaching them, and what titles mean.  For example, they ought to know they're being taught by a smart person with a PhD but who nevertheless makes minimum wage and receives no insurance, if that's indeed the case. If you're calling yourself a professor but are a grad student or contingent instructor you may be contributing in some small way to concealing the way the system functions.

Forget "completely original thoughts."  If your research concept doesn't overlap to some degree or another with other scholars in your area, you're either thinking too narrowly, or you're not in the area you think you are.
I've been writing the first chapter of my dissertation the last few months, and one of the most important things I've had to learn is that an intellectual discipline is a conversation.  You are entering into it to contribute, not to eviscerate your competition.
Read widely in your area, follow back footnotes, don't get defensive when you come across something that either seems to "steal" your idea, or contradict it.  Instead think about your place in the conversation.  Do not feel the need to recapitulate the secondary literature of your area in your writing sample - in fact, avoid this, using only what you need.  If you were already completely versed in your area, you wouldn't need to get a PhD.
My partner has recently been reading the book They Say, I Say: The Moves that Matter in Academic Writing and says it's been very helpful in this regard.  I plan to take a look when she's done.
Looking back, my writing sample wasn't even remotely original, but it showed that I had potential.  If you were capable of busting the lid off of your discipline already - again - you wouldn't need to get a PhD.  I recently got some advice about dissertation writing, "Do not think of it as the last great thing you will write, think of it as the first good thing you will write."  If that applies to dissertations, then put the writing sample in perspective.  Your originality is far less important than your potential.