Marie-Luise
-
Posts
89 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Marie-Luise
-
-
Hey there!
I am interested in medieval genre theory for both secular and religious texts and realise that most publications on the subject focus on modern genres like the novel. I know that there is the odd exception in medieval French genre and gender theory, but there does not seem to be too much out there with regard to medieval Latin or vernacular genre theory.
Are any of ye interested in the subject? Would you be able to recommend or would you know any specific literature which focuses on genre in the Middle Ages which I might have missed?
I am looking to do research which moves away from the traditional form/content-based approach and looks at broader strokes and concepts such as mysticism, imagination, the role of heroic protagonists and their treatment.
In addition, I am also interested in how modern genre theory is applied to medieval texts (perhaps out of a lack of adequate critical studies in the earlier period). Here I am thinking of Bakhtin's studies on open time and narrative temporality (for Dostoevsky's work originally) as well as Lacan on similar topics in, for instance, the Chrétien corpus in medieval French literature.
I would be happy to read your thoughts and comments on any of the above.
-
I'm currently trying to find master's programs that will give me a grounding in Anglo-Saxon, Norse, and Celtic languages, medieval literatures, and cultures in preparation for pursuing a doctorate in English Lit that draws on this background. I know that Cambridge has a department for this, but I'm looking to put together a list of everywhere that covers these areas so that I can look into more schools. Does anyone have suggestions of where I should look? I'm American, but location isn't an issue. Thanks!
Roos, you could look at MA programs at Notre Dame as well. They just got a new Old Norse/Anglo-Saxon specialist and the Keough-Naughton Institute just got an Old Irish/Medieval Welsh specialist. They are both lovely people. You can also contact me for more information about Notre Dame.
I also know the ASNaC crowd at Cambridge; they only do MPhils in the subject, ie research masters but you should definitely contact Paul Russell for that.
My own university in Cork (UCC) also has an MA in Early Irish or Celtic Civilisation with the option to do Middle Welsh. I think the English Department in UCC has an Old Norse specialist now. So contact them for more information.
Let me know if you need anything else.
-
From what I know about languages for medievalists/early modernists (the only fielsd other than comp lit for which languages *really* matter in most programs' eyes), there is absolutely no need to have your languages "match" those of your profs as long as you have the required language for whichever medieval/early modern field you plan on specializing in. But with that list, I doubt anyone would bat an eye at you not having the other languages, unless the only reason you're applying to that particular program is to work with that professor, in which case you may want to reconsider applying to such a program in the first place. Remember, it's never a good idea to apply to a program that only has one faculty member who really piques your interest. Hope this helps!
bdon, you're a star!
Thank you, that was the answer I was looking for in a long time and I will tell you why. I was in contact with my POI and he told me to definitely contact that professor to have him on board to support my application, but that's the one who does the languages I don't have. So therefore I thought 'how can I get his support in the ad com if I don't have his languages and can therefore not really work with him'. But your answer clarified that a lot!!!
Can I ask how you know this? Not that I don't believe you but I am just curious!
Thanks again
M
-
I have Engluish, German, French, Italian (reading only), Latin, Old English, Old French, Old Irish, Medieval Welsh, Ancient Greek, a little Russian and a little Modern Irish. I don't have Spanish or Hebrew or Arabic, but I am quick with languages.
Will this prof be interested in me even if I dont have his languages or what should I do?
He also works on allegorical and mystical literature in the Middle Ages...
Help? Advice? Comments?
-
I have accumulated quite a few languages, but my worry is program 'fit'. What if I am interested in a prof's methodology and his teaching subjects, but don't really know the languages he works in (Spanish, Arabic and Hebrew in my case).
Do programs allow for language learning in order to make a better fit?
I am confused. Answers will be appreciated!
-
I also have a general question about Comp Lit programmes. If I want to work with a professor who works on concepts of the epic hero in Greek, do I have to do Greek to be a fit or can I do something interdisciplinary in Greek and other languages.
Or another professor who works on medieval Spain but I dont know Spanish? Will the programme in general give me the opportunity to learn more languages or improve them before I start work with a professor or do I have to come in with a perfect fit?
This is important to me because of the 'fit question' which seems to be crucial in terms of admission.
Can you also go by professor's teaching interests?
-
-
This is not what was implied, nor, to my knowledge is it the case in American academia. What matters is that the applicant for a 2nd PhD have an extremely compelling reason, whereby they can demonstrate how the 2nd PhD will provide additional training for future scholarship that the first PhD does not already provide. International differences are all but irrelevant here--plenty of American PhD students have done their BA/Baccalaureate/MA/equivalent abroad.
Being urged to apply by faculty is no guarantor of success (whether admission or waitlisting). It simply indicates that the faculty member(s) view your profile as nominally worth exploring further. I don't know if they read your writing sample and statement of purpose, or if their comments were based simply off your preliminary meetings. In either case, prior faculty encouragement is not a signifier of much at all.
And, really, when it comes to Harvard and similar institutions, I'm of the opinion that "Is this good enough?" is simply the wrong question.
I never approached professors with the questions "is this good enough". I approached with the question of whether they are generally opposed to the second PhD and they said no. So I applied. I never expected their encouragement to be a guarantor of success either. I am not that naive.
I'm not sure that you would need to complete an entire second PhD to learn how to do comparative work. The training in comparative literature and national language departments is largely the same, with perhaps more emphasis on theory in comp lit. Most faculty straddle comp lit and language departments. If you want to make new and interesting contributions to the field, you can start doing that right away simply by writing and publishing the work you want to do. If your PhD program has taught you how to conduct literary research, you're already fully equipped to work.
No, I don't need a second PhD do learn how to work comparatively, but I need it for the theory and the approaches of faculty members of the department and outside. As for my compelling reason (at least it is one for me), I wanted to work with one particular professor, who is in Classics actually, but I also wanted to do the programme because it taught theoretical approaches which are difficult to wrap your head around if you come from a background with purely philological training. I also felt that my (comparatively short) PhD programme had not taught me all the tools I needed to be a medieval European literary scholar, which is what I want to be and which said professor can help me with since his own approach is close to what I intend to do. I also want to get a research degree from a more mainstream field ( I am in Celtic now), not only because it is economically more viable, but also because I can contribute both to medieval European literary studies and to my first field like very few can if I do Comp Lit.
So no, I am unfortunate in that my degree spells PhD and not MPhil which is a step down but only a year less than the PhD whereas the discrepancy between the masters and the doctoral level in the States is much greater. So to sum up:
1. I want to work with a specific faculty member
2. my first PhD was not a satisfying experience in terms of academic skills due to its short duration and lack of formal coursework/organisation
3. I dont have a masters (this relates to point 2)
4. The programme at Harvard can give me what I need/want + I get to work with the professor
5. I get to employ skills and gain others which a Celtic postdoc would not enable me to do and you can't do a postdoc in another field even if you have the skills; no one would hire me for a Classics postdoc even if I had demonstrated that I had superb Latin skills in editing or whatnot.
6. No one hires you in the US unless you have a PhD from a US university or from Oxford or Cambridge. Let's be honest, exceptions to that rule are very rare. If I want to be on the US market, I need a US PhD. Might as well get one where the programme and the prof are a perfect fit and which has an excellent reputation.
Are these reasons compelling enough? Tell me if they are not and I'll stop trying so hard. I don't know how outspoken I can be in an actual personal statement. It would be interesting if you could tell me that.
-
Marie-Luise, why do you want to get a second PhD? Is your first PhD in something literary? While I'm in no position to know what the admissions committee is thinking, my guess would be that if you're finishing up your PhD, they would be expecting you to be turning your thesis into a publication, getting a university job, and publishing a lot of articles, not going for one more PhD.
I was thinking the same thing. Why would anyone need 2 PhDs?
^ This is actually something I thought about, but did not comment on earlier. That "two PhDs" may indeed be a cause for concern, especially at places like Harvard where, let's face it, the priority is on producing the next generation of scholars. There would have to be very compelling arguments for the second PhD in order to convince an adcom to take the risk.
Hi Marie-Luise,
What did you write in your statement of purpose about your interest in pursuing a second PhD? I imagine it would be fairly challenging to make an argument that both demonstrates that you will make a substantial contribution to the field AND somehow manages to explain why, in your first PhD, you didn't accomplish enough to make a postdoctoral fellowship or professorship your obvious next step. If you didn't accomplish enough in your first PhD, then why should Harvard believe that you will in your second? And if you did have impressive accomplishments in your first PhD, then why do you need a second one?
I see your explanation about the UK/Irish system working differently, but to be honest it doesn't come across as a very compelling argument. You write that you were "not particularly encouraged to present/publish until well into the PhD" and you felt you were expected to wait until you had "something to say"... This is understandable, but aren't you now "well into the PhD" and haven't you discovered that you have something to say? I don't think top-tier American universities "just want everyone to conform to their system" -- I think they want to see concrete proof that you've already made a significant contribution to research/academia. And if you DID provide impressive examples of your work in your application, then it's hard to understand why you're essentially starting over instead of moving on up. Maybe it would be easier to make an outstanding impression as a first-time PhD applicant, if the bulk of your application shows that you demonstrate great promise. But if you've spent several years in a PhD program already, and you still only show great promise without any evidence that you went above and beyond what was expected of you, that's a red flag.
Also, there's this explanation on the Harvard GSAS admissions site: "Persons holding a PhD or its equivalent, or who have completed most of the work required to earn the PhD elsewhere, may apply to a PhD program in the Graduate School only if it is an unrelated field of study. In view of the large number of excellent applicants for the limited number of places in the Graduate School, preference for admission and financial aid will be given to those who have not already had an opportunity to receive a doctoral degree here or elsewhere."
So even if you put aside the tricky task of explaining why a second PhD will be useful to you and a good investment for the department, it looks like Harvard takes a firm stance against the second doctoral degree, if only because the university wants to offer their limited spots to applicants who haven't otherwise been able to pursue doctoral degrees. Again, I think one subtext of this argument is that if you've successfully completed a PhD in this field or a closely related field, or if you've come close to earning a PhD but haven't successfully completed it...then why do you need this degree? What will a second PhD give you that a first PhD didn't or that a postdoctoral position wouldn't?
Thank you for all your responses. This is precisely what I talked to Harvard professors about, who, in fact, didn't see a red flag there at all. It is not a matter of either of these two:
a) being not that great and therefore not having publications which is why Harvard would doubt I could do it well with them
or
being pretty great and having publications, so Harvard would wonder why they should accept someone who is already well under way.This stance is very binary.
I have also read that Harvard prefers accepting people who don't already have PhDs; the GSAS website was my first go-to.
Why do you think I took care to talk to various professors in Comp Lit in the first place? I would never have applied if I hadn't been encouraged by them. My POI further took care of this by talking to the Chair. The Chair emailed me saying he looked forward to my application.
But yes, this is a perfectly valid concern and I would indeed have to make a strong point as to why I'd want to pursue a second PhD. Please don't downplay the difference between US and European systems. In Italy for example, this is actually far more common. There is an Italian graduate student here at Notre Dame doing a second PhD. When I was a student in Berlin, one of my profs had two. In Europe, it's considered incredibly ambitious, but by no means negative. I realise that there is a difference in mindset when it comes to the US.
As for my SOP, I made of point of saying that I have studied and researched literatures and approaches which receive very little scholarly attention due to the linguistic difficulty of the languages they are written in and are thus marginalised in Eurocentric Studies. Since I have the linguistic ability I would like to demonstrate the benefit of studying them in a more comparative way and hence make a new and interesting contribution to the field of Comparative Literature. Perhaps this reason was not good enough. I am happy to accept criticism.
What do I get from all these reactions? I am not starting over, I am building upon a solid base. What will I do? I will contact the department once matters have quieted down and see if my rejection was due to factors that I have control over or not. If not, I won't bother reapplying. And if the American (or just Harvard for that matter) stance is that you shouldn't have two PhDs because you are in the way of other people even getting just one, then I understand and accept it. It's not the European one.
Until then, I will work on my publications and on finishing PhD number one
-
Ah, I see. I trust I did not come off as too arch in my comment earlier. Not getting accepted to Harvard (a possibility) is definitely no reflection on your merits. For what it's worth, I am (was) an international student as well, in 2005. I've since changed residency status, but when I took the GRE in 2009, it was still as an international student. I don't know where you're from, but I found that the GRE rewards simply playing by the GRE rulebook. You're discouraged from writing in your own voice and it works best if you simply spit out a rather banal essay in the GRE style. You may want to take it again, if you decide to reapply.
As far as publications go, I can't really help you there--I'd suggest speaking to any faculty member you've been in contact with. I'm sure Harvard, like any top department, has international representation in their student body, so it may be worth reaching out to them.
I am German, but doing the PhD in Ireland. I will defo retake the GRE; I guess I didn't play with the book enough and I also ran out of time in a lot of the sections.
I have been in contact with two Comp Lit grads, one in person and one on Academia. And one Faculty member. I'll ask their advice when the time is rife.
As for feedback, I will do that in April. What I need to know is if the rejection was based on elements that I have control over (GRE, writing sample, SOP or publications) or elements that I have no (longer) control over (the fact that it's for a second PhD; focus of the dept etc). Because if it is the latter, then it's a waste of my time to reapply.
Thanks for the heads-up though.
-
You applied to Harvard Comp Lit with 69% V 27% Q and AW 4.0?
I'm not at all saying that you're a bad applicant or anything, but those numbers would raise eyebrows at much lesser places. Also, why are you at the end of your PhD and not a single publication? I know that the humanities do not require publications as frequently as is common in the sciences--still, it is common to have at least one or two by the time you are finishing up. I imagine Harvard and the like will expect this.
Anything else is intrinsic to your application and you will only discover this by asking them candidly for feedback.
As an international student I found the GRE incredibly hard; we aren't used to this type of standardised testing.
As for publications, in the UK/Irish system PhDs work differently and in my programme we weren't particularly encouraged to present/publish until well into the PhD. This is changing now and I wish I had known this earlier. A lot of people start publishing articles once they have finished the thesis. The attitude is pretty much "wait until you have something to say".
I am not trying to find excuses; I should have known that American universities and especially Harvard don't really care for the differences. They want everyone to conform to their system.
-
Not particularly.
I also have received no news from Harvard, but actually AM considering it an implicit rejection. I don't particularly feel like emailing the department, although I'd rather have an official rejection now. Apparently there is some sort of budget meeting going on tomorrow regarding funding, but I don't know if the one acceptance on here was notified as the first person or as the last person.
I thought I was a perfect fit topically for my POI and that I had the skills they wanted too.
If I get rejected, I assume is for any combination of the following reasons:
1. It's for a second PhD and Harvard doesn't want to do this
2. My GRE was too low (69%V/27%Q/4.0W)
3. My writing sample was too weak
4. This one is tentative: maybe I wasn't explicit enough in my writing sample
5. I said I wanted to focus on Med Latin although my training is in Celtic; I have done a number of Latin courses
6. I have no publications even though I am at the end of my PhD.
That's what I think. I have great language skills and really good letters of rec. So, I don't think they were the reason.
And then people kept saying how political these meetings get; that profs will fight other profs to get certain candidates in.
I will reapply next year.
-
So one acceptance is up, how soon is if safe to
a) assume you didn't make it
contact them to see if you didn't make itc) request feedback on your application
Suggestions welcome!
-
Anyone want to claim the Harvard acceptance?
Yeah anyone want to claim it?
-
What about Notre Dame Literature?
Notre Dame literature has invited people for interviews next week. if you have not gotten an invitation, then I am sorry to say that you haven't made it this time.
-
No. Maybe today? My thesis defense is tomorrow morning.
Nothing for me today. Sigh. I learned from a guy (his name is Guy actually) on Academia that he got his notice in March. Was an acceptance of course.
Good luck with your dissertation defense!!!! I hope we both get good news this week!!!
-
Has anyone heard back from any of the Ivies?
-
3) Also, in my experience, funding for international students is less dependable than funding for Canadians. Canadians have better options for funding through their federal and provincial governments, so I think that there is a reluctance, however unconscious, to take on the financial burden of an international student. You will probably be dependent entirely on the university's funding while your Canadian peers will be eligible for numerous other (better) financial opportunities. These financial challenges will not necessarily be taken into account when competing with other, better-funded students for TAships, RAships, etc.
You are talking about MY experience as an international student in the United States. They pay me s*** and they are sitting on a ton of money.
-
You got into Stanford Comp Lit? Congrats!!!Dear "wat" Stanford acceptance, Thank you for making me laugh in the midst of my Rutgers misery. Congratulations! -
Ahem... ??????????
Have you heard from any of your programmes?
-
No Stanford acceptances and lots of rejections. How big a slice of the iceberg is that?
-
Anyone claiming the other UPenn acceptance for Comp Lit? Have ye heard from Stanford? I saw nothing but rejections!
-
Anyone gotten accepted for Comp Lit at Stanford or UPenn?
-
Ok. Congratulations!
Question: Has anyone gotten into Comp Lit at Stanford? There are nothing but rejections? Anyone wanna humbly claim those, tail between the legs? What about Penn State? Don't be shy people. I promise to post my Harvard rejection is that's what it's gonna be.
Harvard Celtic Studies PHD
in Literature, and Rhetoric and Composition
Posted
Katia_chan,
I have several friends in that department. Just send me a message with your questions. I can help you get in touch with faculty. I also did medieval Welsh and am doing a PhD in Celtic, so I can also help you with subject matter.
Hope this helps.
Marie