rbakshi

Anyone considering going to the University of Windsor should seriously reconsider their decision. This is, of course, my biased opinion, but I think it is important to present a fuller picture to contextualize the situation. In my experience, it is a highly disreputable institution (for many reasons details of which I shall refrain from going into).
It is a thoroughly bigoted environment, racist, homophobic, cliquey, and I would go so far as to say misogynist as well. Such rampant bigotry is visible amongst the students, the staff, the faculty, and the general citizenry. The University itself operates a "ponzi" scheme by recruiting international students to feed the much needed infrastructure developments on campus. None of its programs are well reputed, those that are are a far cry from sophisticated or analytical. An institution that has developed a means to survive through international student money without any adequate (let alone equal) investments in international student welfare (for instance, there are limited vegetarian options on campus, where such options exist "two spring rolls" form an entire meal, no facilities for food on campus past 11pm, little to no guidance from international affairs/recruitment staff, no scholarships/funding, no accommodation of gay/lesbian international students, and so on).  
The city itself reeks of desperation like a cinematic actress long past her prime hanging on to shards of long lost glory. Windsor's downtown is one of the worst I've seen in Canada, in fact, at first glance, it does not look like it is a part of Canada at all. As a country that prides itself on its multiculturalism (which in itself is debatable in our day and age but a point for another day) and diversity, Windsor refuses to accept that spirit of inclusion. There are far better options in Ontario, especially if you are spending good money on a graduate degree.

Excellent replies on the topic. I'm going to add some Canadian schools specializing in South Asian art (of which two I've studied at).
 
The best South Asian program in Canada is at the University of Toronto. The Department of Art History boasts not one but two South Asianists, Dr. Kajri Jain (affiliated to UTM) and Dr. Deepali Dewan (affiliated to the ROM). Apart from Art History, Toronto boasts a strong South Asian presence in other departments, such as English, Economics, History, and Political Science. The language programs are equally strong with Sanskrit, Hindi, Urdu, Tamil, and Panjabi on offer at any given time (though not all languages are simultaneously offered except Sanskrit, which is based out of the Department of East Asian Civilizations). Furthermore, the Department of Near and Middle Eastern Civilizations is an excellent source for studies in Islamic South Asia. Toronto also houses a strong South Asian diaspora population, which is reflected in the arts and culture scene of the city, most notably with the Aga Khan Museum based there. In coming years, this will be a strong South Asia program like Minnesota in its heyday under the Ashers (which is not surprising because Dewan was a student of Catherine and Frederick Asher).
 
The next best program is at UBC (the University of British Columbia) with an equally strong South Asia focus. Dr. Katherine Hacker is the resident South Asianist in the Department of Art History. Other departments also have a strong South Asia focus, and like Toronto, UBC also houses a separate Centre for South Asia. Vancouver has an equally large South Asian population, which results in a vibrant cultural presence in Van's urban fabric. There is also Dr. Hussein Keshani at UBC-Okanagan, who specializes in Late Mughal/Islamic art and architecture. Last time I checked, UBC was looking to hire an Islamicist as well, whether s/he focuses on South Asia or not can be judged only after the hiring has been completed. That being said, if UBC doesn't actively recruit students in South Asian art, especially those coming from India/Pakistan (i.e. international students) and starts to diversify from its traditional leanings, it will soon lose out on its competitive edge, which is as it stands rather flimsy.
 
Finally, a strong contender for a South Asia focus is the University of Victoria. Dr. Anthony Welch is a authority on India's Early Sultanate (particularly Tughlaq) art and architecture, which he teaches in a series of undergraduate courses. His graduate seminars pertain to two major areas: Mughal India and Safavi Iran. Apart from him, the Department of Art History and Visual Culture boasts another Islamicist, Dr. Marcus Millwright, and a Southeast Asianist, Dr. Astri Wright. As far as I'm aware, UVic is one of few Canadian art history programs offering courses in Southeast Asian art. The Centre for Studies in Religion and Society (CSRS) along with the Department of History complement the research and teaching in South Asia, and if things work out, then, there'll be two more South Asianists at UVic (a historian and an art historian). Incidentally, Huseein Keshain (at UBC) studied with Dr. Welch at UVic. Moreover, UVic boasts a significant number of graduate students in South Asian art history (both masters and doctoral level). Many of these M.A. level students continue in doctoral programs in Canada, the U.S., and the U.K.. A major drawback, though, is that Victoria is a small town with limited off-campus opportunities, if any at all. Like Toronto, UVic is slowly broadening its South Asia focus by investing in archives, graduate students, and new faculty.

Taking a cue from I've decided to put up a similar post on South Asian Art just to highlight the diversity of options that I came across in my own research into programs, funding, curatorial opportunities, and supervisors. 
 
SCHOLARS
 
Canada
 
Anthony Welch, Victoria (Emeritus professor now)
Melia Belli-Bose, Victoria (recent hire, so I'm not sure she will be supervising students)
Deepali Dewan, ROM/Toronto Kajri Jain, Toronto (at UTM but teaches graduate courses at U of T St. George) 
Hussein Keshani, UBC-Okanagan
Katherine Hacker, UBC
Marcus Millwright, Victoria (not a South Asianist, but is supervising one dissertation in Islamic South Asia)
Astri Wright, Victoria (not a South Asianist, but teaches courses on South Asia)
Gauvin Alexander Bailey, Queens (works on early modern Jesuit/European encounters with Mughal India, an interesting temporal tangent)
 
United States
 
Sugata Ray, Berkeley 
Rebecca Brown, Johns Hopkins
Pika Ghosh, UNC Chapel Hill
Mrinalini Rajagopalan, Pittsburgh
Madhuri Desai, Penn State
Jinah Kim, Harvard (though her area is mostly Buddhist, so I wouldn't see her as a South Asianist, but she is classified as such. Alternately, both David Roxburgh and Gurlu Necipoglu have supervised dissertations in Islamic South Asia)
Dipti Khera, NYU/IFA
Finbarr Barry Flood, NYU/IFA (an Islamicist by area, but is supervising three South Asia related dissertations at the moment) 
Vidya Dehejia, Columbia
Ifthikar Dadi, Cornell
Daniel Ehnbom, Virginia (there's also Mehr Faruqi at another department, so there's breadth to Virginia's South Asia offerings)
Nanchiket Chanchani, Michigan (there's also William Glover at Michigan's History department whose interests lie in British colonial architecture)
Michael Meister, Pennsylvania (not sure if he's still taking students)
Tamara Sears, Yale (Timothy Barringer also supervises South Asian topics, as does Kishwar Rizvi)
Anna Seastrand, Chicago (does not supervise graduate students, though, Chicago offers more research opportunities in the South Asia program)
Catherine and Frederick Asher, Minnesota (Emeritus professors now)
John and Susan Huntington, Ohio State (Emeritus professors now)
Swati Chattopadhyay, UCSB (primarily an architectural historian)
Sonal Khullar, Washington
Robert Brown, UCLA
Saloni Mathur, UCLA
Janice Leoshko, Texas-Austin
Sumathi Ramaswamy, Duke (not an art historian, but her work straddles our discipline)
 
MUSEUMS & INSTITUTIONS
 
Canada
 
Royal Ontario Museum, Department of South Asia, Toronto, ON
Aga Khan Museum, Toronto, ON
Museum of Anthropology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC
Art Gallery of Greater Victoria, Victoria, BC (mainly a strong Japanese and Chinese collection with some South Asian artifacts represented)
 
United States
 
Metropolitan Museum of Art, Department of South and Southeast Asia, New York, NY
Rubin Museum of Art, New York, NY
Los Angeles County Museum of Art (LACMA), Department of South Asia, Los Angeles, CA
Asian Art Museum, San Francisco, CA
Freer Gallery of Art and Arthur M. Slacker Gallery, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.
Harvard Art Museums, Division of Asian and Mediterranean Art, Boston, MA
Norton Simon Museum, Department of Asian Art, Pasadena, CA
Peabody Essex Museum, Department of Indian Art, Salem, MA
Philadelphia Museum of Art, Department of Indian & Himalayan Art, Philadelphia, PA 
 
INTERNSHIPS, FELLOWSHIPS, & FUNDING
 
J.N.Tata Endowment, open to students with a first degree from an Indian university as a part-loan, part-scholarship program.
Inlaks Scholarships, open to Indian nationals below 30 years of age as full scholarships.
Fulbright Nehru Awards, open to Indian nationals for Masters-level study (only) at a U.S. institution.
 
This is a start. Please add to this list, especially scholars/schools and funding, internships, fellowships, as it helps us all (we are in the same boat, right!).
 
 
 

Give it up, @northeastregional, you sound like a bully.

I'm sorry, but I REALLY disagree with this advice. From first hand experience coming from a low-income family (I did undergrad on the max. amount pell grant & other forms of aid,) banking on IBR and PAYE is not a fail-safe for your future. Your income tax bracket determines if you qualify for IBR, and if you get married & file jointly it will be an even lower threshold of income to qualify for this payment plan. Some private companies do not allow forbearance or deferment even in the event of unemployment. Graduated payment plans are only a temporary relief. The 10 year forgiveness for working at a non-profit requires consecutive payments. Qualifying for this is very uncommon and realistically, you will not be consistently employed for this period of time. It is also much more likely for government sectors than an "typical" non-profit. Student loans are real shit. They are not something to ignore now and figure out down the road. I would call your financial aid office and potential lender and get all the facts before trusting someone on a message forum, even me.

@Mirrorical_Return I'm surprised you downvoted me, as I think we're saying the same thing! I wanted to explain the specifics of financing at the IFA, as I know when I was considering applying for MA programs and people said the phrase "cash cow", I wasn't sure what they meant. Also, just as I said, if you're independently wealthy, the IFA is obviously amazing and nothing should stop you from attending! There are a few ways to mitigate debt from an MA, but not everyone will be so lucky as to work for a non-profit, etc., and not everyone wants a terminal MA. I agree, as far as job connections go, the IFA is tops, but if you're getting an MA to prep you for a PhD, there's no reason not to take a funded offer at a place like Stonybrook or Austin over going into an insurmountable amount of debt from attending the IFA. 
I certainly didn't mean to offend you or minimize your (or anyone's) accomplishment in being accepted into or attending the program, and I'm sorry if it came across that way. I just wanted to contribute what I've learned so far about the program so those still on the fence can make an informed decision.

"I am a doctoral candidate in a program that is discussed incessantly in this forum." 
And you say: "I have quite a bit more of it [anecdotal experience] than the opinions of two people" but we are two people working and studying in PhD programs, you are one person on the outside. I don't think you can claim to be more of an expert about what actually happens to students who enter PhD programs until you've been there. It's a matter of experience and expertise. Unless you, like my wife, served on an admissions committee this fall, we are more qualified to speak about graduate admissions in art history than you are. 
"it's about personality, self-awareness and experience" -- Who told you that? You will find that this is not true. Personality and self-awareness aside, you lack experience working towards a PhD unless, as previously mentioned, you have a PhD in another field.
"there is no reason I could think of that I would not be capable of finishing a program" -- the admission committees have thought of reasons. A low blow, maybe, but my last.

calling programs--by which I assume you mean calling the department administrator, who is generally not privy to any of the information you're seeking--to learn about your application's shortcomings is a fool's errand. It's a bit like asking the price of a dress in a fancy boutique: if you have to ask, you probably don't belong there. I'm not saying that's right or wrong, it's just how it is.
Along those lines, if any of you think getting a phd in art history is about being "mentored," you are in for a rude awakening. Professors don't bring you "on board" out of the goodness of their hearts; they do so if they think you will ultimately make them look good with minimal (if any) assistance, allowing them to accrue more of academia's chief currency: prestige. If you succeed (get fellowships, publish, land a job), they take credit; if you fail, it's because you weren't good enough. In any case, there is no liability: as long as their next book contract/cushy residential fellowship is secured, the rest is background noise. Nobody reaches the upper echelons of this business because they prioritize teaching or advising. Getting a phd is about internalizing rules (mostly of the unsaid variety), strategizing your relationships, shameless self-promotion, and offending as few important people as possible in the process. 

My knowledge is not secondhand - I am a doctoral candidate in a program that is discussed incessantly in this forum and I have close (even marital, gasp) ties to other programs in the field. I don't need to support my "claims" because my insight is anecdotal, not statistical. There are no articles in Chronicle/Chronicle Vitae or elsewhere that breakdown PhD completion rates in art history vs. the application round at which successful students were admitted and the total number of PhD admission offers they had at matriculation.
MaytheSchwartzBeWithYou, you say "persistence pays off" -- support that claim. "I do know I am capable of obtaining a PhD" -- you have no way of knowing if this is true unless you already have a PhD in another field.
This is a forum for practical advice, not a support group. Sometimes when you ask strangers for advice, you don't get the answers you want. Maybe I will see you all in the fall (or the fall of 2017, it seems) but statistically, I would wager that I will not (odds are about 5-7%).

I don't get why this is hard for you to follow. I am an art historian. My wife is an art historian. We are affiliated with different programs, we work in different subject areas and in different capacities, but art history PhD programs for us both. Unlike you, I have offered biographical details that are verifiable - I shouldn't be hard to find online.
An article where a student is "interviewed about why they dropped out," is no different than the anecdotal insight I have offered here. "How about all of the posters on the results board who have said this is their second or third time applying, and they were accepted to a number of schools?" is also anecdotal. The difference is that I actually know these people, whereas you are trusting a "results board."
"You have no way of knowing what I'm capable of, and it seems you have a very narrow definition of what "capable" is." -- you may very well be capable of finishing a PhD but you cannot support this claim, to borrow your phrase, until you have completed the degree. I also cannot say that I am capable of completing a PhD. I can say that I am capable of being admitted to a PhD program.
"I think most of the people on this board would disagree with you" - I don't care. "I know it's crazy, but message boards can be about more than one thing at the same time." -- right, exactly. 

I don't think that's what anonymousbequest is saying at all. There is nothing undesirable about the job in question. What has changed is that a job that might have gone to a University of Kansas PhD at some point has now been given to a Harvard graduate, which means that the job pool is getting more and more competitive. Moreover, the examples you list are completely outdated; Elizabeth Broun received her doctorate in 1979. The job market has radically changed over the eight-year period since the financial bubble & recession, so reaching back 37 years is completely ludicrous. It's like me claiming that a PhD from the Catholic University of America will give me a chance to be the next Marjorie Perloff. 

In regards to Ivy League Schools, your sarcasm gets it completely wrong. I do not have an undergraduate degree from an Ivy League, or from an elite LAC. I received a very good education at a public school, but I will never be buoyed by the name of that institution. Because of this I've been forced to think & act very pragmatically. Every professor I spoke with told me to aim as high as possible when applying to graduate programs. This wasn't because they're myopic elitists, it's because they know the realities of the current job market at the moment, either through departmental hiring or through their own job searches. When it comes to applying for jobs, I will be happy with any tenure-track position, because as the number of candidates for these positions rapidly grows, actual TT openings are being cut left and right. I am sure some people are ok with working as adjuncts, or have the independent resources to do a PhD without needing it to lead to some form of stable employment. I am not one of those people, which is why I pay such close attention to the job market, candidate placement, and the shift towards adjunct labour. There is nothing elitist about this; if anything, I am more aware of the reality at hand because I come from a working-class background, and therefore need to think very hard about any academic decision I make. 

As a last note, those of us in this thread who are being more critical are not doing so out of malice. This has been said over and over. It is one thing to be critical of the cultural capital involved in the field in question, and quite another to be oblivious to it. There are programs I did not apply to, not because of any perceived scholarly inferiority, but because I couldn't justify it based on their placement records. No matter how much I agitate or protest, I don't have the ability to change the material conditions of academia. My political beliefs are more or less full fucking Communist, but I will be able to do more good (assuming academia has any political power) working from a position of employment, than I will if I'm precariously employed, or unemployed. I would rather push for that than live in some sort of fantasy land where good jobs are plentiful and the discipline is without hierarchy. Sorry if that rubs you the wrong way. 

Commute from the valley is painful, but possible; same goes for downtown.

I'm in a MSc program, but in Canada, everyone starts grad school as a MSc student, graduates, and then applies for PhD programs (which can be at the same or a different institution). I'm finishing up my second and final year now.

First -- your question about time: It really depends on your program / department / research group / supervisor as well as your own goals in academia. For me, almost all of my research work can be done remotely (although I prefer to work in the office) so I really only need to go to school to attend class, TA, talk to my friends, attend seminars, and meet my supervisor. None of these things happen outside of 9-5 so I tend to stick to a 9-5 ish schedule and do extra work from home if necessary. I usually try to not do any "work" outside of 9-5 and not take my "work" home. However, I don't count course-work as "work" and I try to do that at home so it doesn't cut into research time too much. But if you work in, say, a chemistry lab, you might have stricter requirements as to when you need to be in the lab.

Many of my friends in school have dogs. Some of them take a break in the middle of the day to go home and walk their dogs or see them, if they live close. I try to treat grad school as a "job" -- unless there are deadlines approaching, I don't feel bad leaving at ~5pm even if there is stuff left to be done since it will still be there tomorrow! I know this means I'm not working to my fullest potential, and I'm okay with that. I'm not aiming to be the best in my field, and I choose to have other priorities.

Which comes to the second thing I want to say -- grad school is as much work as you want it to be. To use a cliche -- you will get out of it what you put in. So it's important to think about what you want to get out of your PhD program and then schedule your life accordingly! I think it's really important to budget your time and energy so that you don't neglect your priorities (whether it's courses, research, teaching, family, dogs, whatever). I think graduate school is hard enough even when you have a positive/healthy mindset, so maintaining whatever makes you happy is important.

I got some advice from my mentors (previous supervisors) that I thought was really valuable. They said to pick your supervisor and project in a way that will help you get a post-doc job (if that is the goal after PhD). If so, your PhD project will be the strongest argument you have for yourself when you apply for jobs. Pick something that will be interesting to people ~5 years from now, don't work on a super specific field that only you or your supervisor cares about (instead, do these as side projects). You don't have to love your thesis topic, just don't hate it! Next, make sure your project contributes to the field in a meaningful way, so that ideally people will start to connect the concepts you are working on with your name.

As for picking supervisors, my mentors told me that I should find someone who is a good mentor, not just a good researcher. We will need to trained in other skills such as how to write papers really well, how to apply for grants, how to give compelling presentations, how to get ourselves known. Many good researchers have these abilities but not everyone is good at teaching these abilities too. Also, if possible, find someone who will care about their students' success and will give us opportunities like attending conferences and so on. If you have an external scholarship and thus your supervisor may not pay you at all (or very little), it's common in the physical sciences to actually negotiate non-salary things like having a budget for travel or equipment, and so on. (Last piece of advice -- apply for external fellowships whenever possible, even if you are already funded by internal means. You probably won't get any more money, but you will get a lot more freedom and independence).

Those were some of the important (in my opinion) things I've learned in the last 2 years as a graduate student and from many conversations with my mentors while applying for PhD programs for this fall! Hope that gives you some things to consider

About your dog: I think that depends entirely on you and your program. I am in a social science program where the majority of my analysis and writing can be done from home, and I prefer to work from home or from a library (as opposed to my cube in the windowless cube farm). When I was taking classes I was generally there from 9-6 or so, but now that my coursework is finished I am rarely at the school itself. I go for meetings, seminars, interesting kinds of things and I do most of my work remotely. My time is verrry flexible, and if my building didn't prohibit it I would get a dog in a heartbeat. Another thing to keep in mind: a dog can be a great comfort when you're all stressed out over graduate school.

Advice?

Age:
-Don't feel like you have nothing to offer just because you are younger. I was 22 when I started graduate school. You got accepted to the program for a reason, and chances are you are just as equipped as any older students are to successfully complete the program, just in a different way.

-Your older classmates may be just as terrified as you. Talk to them. You have a lot in common. You are, after all, in the same place.

-You will feel like an imposter, like you don't belong, or like you are constantly behind. Or all three. It's normal. It will pass. (Well, sort of.) People of all ages go through this.

Adviser related:
-If you are lucky enough to get both research interest fit and personality fit perfect, congratulations! But sometimes, personality fit is more important than research interest fit as long as the research isn't too different. A great adviser is interested in your career development, likes you as a person, advocates for you, and wants to hear your ideas. Even if his or her research is quite different from yours, they may give you the autonomy to work on your own projects and just supervise you. A bad personality fit will drive you nuts, even if you love his or her research. Consider that when evaluating your adviser fit. (This will vary by field: research fit may be less important in the humanities, more important in the natural and physical sciences. Social sciences are somewhere in-between.)

-Don't be afraid to be straight up blunt with your adviser when it comes to asking about your progress. Ask if you are where you should be both academic program wise and getting-a-job-after-this-mess-wise.

-Be proactive. Advisers love when you draw up an agenda for your one-on-one meetings, come with talking points and progress to share, have concrete questions to ask, and have overall shown that you have been thoughtful and taken control of your own program. Of course, this won't immediately come easily to you, but in time you will work up to it. Every semester I type up my semester goals, and at the beginning of the year I type up annual goals. I show them to my adviser and we talk about whether they are too ambitious, or whether I need to revise them, and how I can meet them.

-Don't expect your adviser to actually know what courses you have to take to graduate. They will know about comprehensive exams and the dissertation, but a lot of professors don't really keep up with the course requirements, especially if their program is in flux. Get you a student handbook, and find out what you need to take. Map it out in a grid, and check off things when you finish them. Show this to your adviser every semester. You may have to explain how such and such class fills a requirement.

-Nobody loves you as much as you, except your mother. Keep this in mind as you take in advice from all sources, including your adviser. Your adviser is there to guide you, but that doesn't mean you have to do everything he says.

Studying:
-You will have to read more than you ever did before, in less time than you ever have before, and you will be expected to retain more than you ever have before. The way that you studied in undergrad may need some tweaking. Be prepared for this.

-Corollary: you may find that your methods change with age or interests or time. I preferred to study alone in college, but in grad school, I prefer to study in groups. It keeps me on task and the socialization keeps me motivated. You may find that you shift from being a more auditory learner to a visual learner or whatever.

-You will feel behind at first. This is normal.

-At some point you will realize that your professors don't actually expect you to read everything they assign you. This, of course, will vary by program, but there will be at least one class where the reading is actually impossible to do in one week. The point is to read enough that you know the major themes and can talk intelligently about them, and then pick some of the readings to really dig into and think more deeply about.

-For most programs, don't worry so much about grades. If you stay on top of your work and do what you're supposed to, you will probably get an A. How much grades matter varies from program to program. In some programs, a B is a signal that you are not up to par, and more than a few Bs will warrant a discussion with your adviser or the DGS. My program isn't like that - A, B, it's all meaningless. My adviser doesn't even know what my grades are. But at almost all programs, a C means you need to retake the course, and two Cs means you have to convince the DGS not to kick you out.

Extracurricular activity: What's that? No, seriously:
-A lot of your time will be unstructured. You will have coursework, but most grad classes meet once a week for two hours and you may have three classes. You may have meetings with your adviser every so often and some seminars or things to catch (like we have grand rounds and colloquia that are required), but a lot of time will be unstructured. However, since you have so much more work than you had in undergrad, you actually will have less free time than you had in undergrad. This may initially cause you great anxiety. It did for me. Some people love unstructured time, though. (I don't.)

-Because of this, you'll have to be planful about your non-grad school related stuff.

-TAKE TIME OFF. DO it. It's important for your mental health. However you do it doesn't matter. Some people work it like a 9-5 job. Some people take a day off per week (me) and maybe a few hours spread across the week. Some people work half days 7 days a week. However you do it, there needs to be a time when you say "f this, I'm going to the movies."

-Find your happy place, something that keeps you the you you were when you came in. I love working out. It gives me energy and I feel good. I stay healthy. I also love reading fiction, so sometimes I just curl up with a good book, work be damned. You have to give yourself permission to not think about work, at least for a couple of hours a week. You may also discover new hobbies! (I never worked out before I came to graduate school.)

-Your work will creep into all aspects of your life, if you let it. This is why I hate unstructured time. You will feel guilty for not doing something, because in graduate school, there is ALWAYS something you can do. ALWAYS. But since there will always be more work, there's no harm in putting it aside for tomorrow, as long as you don't have a deadline.

-You may need to reach outside of your cohort for a social life. None of my close friends are in my doctoral cohort. I've met master's students in my program, master's students in other programs, and I know a few non-graduate students I hang out with, too. Go to graduate student mixers. (If your university doesn't have any, organize some, if you like planning parties.) Join a student group that doesn't take up too much time. I had a doctoral acquaintance who kinda laughed at me because I joined some student groups other than the doctoral student one, and I was usually the only doctoral student in those groups, but I met some close friends (and future job contacts) and had a good time.

-DO NOT FEEL GUILTY FOR WANTING A LIFE OUTSIDE OF GRADUATE SCHOOL. This is paramount. This is important. You are a well-rounded, complex, multifaceted human being. NEVER feel bad for this. Everybody wants some kind of life outside of work. Yes, you may loooove your field, but that doesn't mean you want to do it all day long. Some other doctoral students, and perhaps professors, may make you feel bad about this. Don't let them. Just smile and nod. Then disappear when you need to.

Career:
-This is job preparation. Remember that from Day One. Always be looking for ways to enhance your skills. Read job ads and find out what's hot in your field, what's necessary, what's in demand. For example, in my field statistics and methods are a hot commodity, and they're not a passing fad. I happen to really like statistics and methods, so I have pursued that as a concentration of mine.

-Don't be afraid to take on volunteer work and part-time gigs that will give you skills that will be useful both inside academia and out, as long as it's not against your contract. Your adviser may be against it, but he doesn't have to know as long as it doesn't interfere with your work.

-If you want to work outside of academia - if you are even *considering* the possibility - please please definitely do the above. Even if you aren't considering it, consider the possibility that you won't get a tenure-track job out the box and that you may need to support yourself doing something else for a while. You will have to prove to employers that you have developed usable, useful skills and this is one of the easiest ways to do it. But don't overdo it - get the degree done.

-For more academic related ones - always look for opportunities to present and publish. Presentations look good on your CV. Publications look better. When you write seminar papers, wonder if you can publish them with some revision. Write your seminar papers on what you maybe think you may want to do your dissertation on. Even if you look at them three years later and think "these suck," you can at least glean some useful references and pieces from them. Discuss publication with your adviser early and often, and if you have the time and desire, seek out publication options with other professors and researchers. But if you commit to a project, COMMIT. You don't want to leave a bad impression.

-If you can afford it, occasionally go to conferences even if you aren't presenting. You can network, and you can hear some interesting talks, and you may think about new directions for your own research. You can also meet people who may tell you about jobs, money, opportunities, etc.

-Always try to get someone else to pay for conference travel before you come out of pocket. Including your adviser. Do not be shy about asking if he or she can pay. If he can't, he'll just say no. Usually the department has a travel fund for students, but often it's only if you are presenting.

-If you are interested in academia, you should get some teaching experience. There are two traditional ways to do this: TAing a course, and teaching as a sole instructor. If you can help it, I wouldn't recommend doing a sole instructor position until you are finished with coursework. Teaching takes a LOT of time to do right. You should definitely TA at least one course, and probably a few different ones. But don't overdo it, if you can help it, because again, it takes a LOT of time. More than you expect at the outset. If you are in the humanities, I think sole instructor positions are very important for nabbing jobs so when you are in the exam/ABD phase, you may want to try at least one. If your own university has none, look at adjuncting for nearby colleges, including community colleges. (I would wager that the majority of natural science/physical science students, and most social science students, have never sole taught a class before they get an assistant professor job. At least, it's not that common n my field, which straddles the social and natural sciences.)

-Always look for money. Money is awesome. If you can fund yourself you can do what you want, within reason. Your university will be thrilled, your adviser will be happy, and you can put it on your CV. It's win-win-win! Don't put yourself out of the running before anyone else has a chance to. Apply even if you think you won't get it or the odds are against you (they always are), as long as you are eligible. Apply often. Apply even if it's only $500. (That's conference travel!) Money begets money. The more awards you get, the more awards you will get. They will get bigger over time. If you are in the sciences and social sciences, you should get practice writing at least one grant. You don't have to write the whole thing, but at least get in on the process so that you can see how it's done. Grant-writing is very valuable both in and outside of graduate school.

-Revise your CV every so often. Then look and decide what you want to add to it. Then go get that thing, so you can add it.

-The career office at big universities is often not just for undergrads. I was surprised to learn that my career center offers help on CV organization and the academic job search, as well as alternative/non-academic career searches for doctoral students. In fact, there are two people whose sole purpose it is to help PhD students find nonacademic careers, and they both have PhDs. This will vary by university - some universities will have very little for grad students. Find out before you write the office off.

-It's never too early to go to seminars/workshops like "the academic job search inside and out", "creating the perfect CV," "getting the job," etc. NEVER. Often the leader will share tips that are more aimed towards early graduate students, or tidbits that are kind of too late for more advanced students to take care of. This will also help you keep a pulse on what's hot in your field. It'll help you know what lines you need to add to your CV. And they're interesting.

Other:

-Decide ahead of time what you are NOT willing to sacrifice on the altar of academia. Then stick to it.
I'm serious. If you decide that you do NOT want to sacrifice your relationship, don't. If it's your geographical mobility, don't. I mean, be realistic, and realize that there will always be trade-offs. But you have to think about what's important to you for your quality of life, and realize that there is always more to you than graduate school.

-If you don't want to be a professor, do not feel guilty about this. At all. Zero. However, you will have to do things differently than most doctoral students. Your adviser will probably never have worked outside of the academy (although this may vary depending on the field) so he may or may not be able to help you. But you have a special mission to seek out the kinds of experiences that will help you find a non-academic job. Test the waters with your adviser before you tell him this. My adviser was quite amenable to it, but that's because I told him that my goal was to still do research and policy work in my field just not at a university, AND because it's quite common in my field for doctoral students to do non-academic work. If you're in a field where it's not common (or where your professors refuse to believe it's common, or it's not supposed to be common)…well, you may be a little more on your own.

-Every so often, you will need to reflect on the reasons you came to graduate school. Sometimes, just sit and think quietly. Why are you doing this to yourself? Do you love your field? Do you need this degree to do what you want to do? Usually the answer is yes and yes, and usually you'll keep on trucking. But sometimes when the chips are down you will need to reevaluate why you put yourself through this in the first place.

-To my great dismay, depression is quite common in doctoral students. Graduate work can be isolating and stressful. Luckily your health insurance usually includes counseling sessions. TAKE THEM if you need them. Do not be ashamed. You may be surprised with who else is getting them. (I found out that everyone in my cohort, including me, was getting mental health counseling at a certain point.) Exercise can help, as can taking that mental health day once a week and just chilling. Don't be surprised if you get the blues…

-…but be self-aware and able to recognize when the depression is clouding your ability to function. Doctoral programs have a 50% attrition rate, and this is rarely because that 50% is less intelligent than, less motivated than, less driven than, or less ambitious than the other 50% that stays. Often they realize that they are ridiculously unhappy in the field, or that they don't need the degree anymore, or that they'd rather focus on other things in life, or their interests have changed. All of this is okay!

-You will, at some point, be like "eff this, I'm leaving." I think almost every doctoral student has thought about dropping out and just kicking this all to the curb. You need to listen to yourself, and find out whether it is idle thought (nothing to worry about, very normal) or whether you are truly unhappy to the point that you need to leave. Counseling can help you figure this out.

-Don't be afraid to take a semester or a year off if you need to. That's what leaves of absence are for.

Lastly, and positively…

…graduate school is great! Seriously, when else will you ever have the time to study what you want for hours on end, talk to just as interested others about it, and live in an intellectual community of scholars and intellectuals? And occasionally wake up at 11 am and go to the bank at 2 pm? Sometimes you will want to pull out all of your hair but most of the time, you will feel fulfilled and wonderfully encouraged and edified. So enjoy this time!

Anyone considering going to the University of Windsor should seriously reconsider their decision. This is, of course, my biased opinion, but I think it is important to present a fuller picture to contextualize the situation. In my experience, it is a highly disreputable institution (for many reasons details of which I shall refrain from going into).
It is a thoroughly bigoted environment, racist, homophobic, cliquey, and I would go so far as to say misogynist as well. Such rampant bigotry is visible amongst the students, the staff, the faculty, and the general citizenry. The University itself operates a "ponzi" scheme by recruiting international students to feed the much needed infrastructure developments on campus. None of its programs are well reputed, those that are are a far cry from sophisticated or analytical. An institution that has developed a means to survive through international student money without any adequate (let alone equal) investments in international student welfare (for instance, there are limited vegetarian options on campus, where such options exist "two spring rolls" form an entire meal, no facilities for food on campus past 11pm, little to no guidance from international affairs/recruitment staff, no scholarships/funding, no accommodation of gay/lesbian international students, and so on).  
The city itself reeks of desperation like a cinematic actress long past her prime hanging on to shards of long lost glory. Windsor's downtown is one of the worst I've seen in Canada, in fact, at first glance, it does not look like it is a part of Canada at all. As a country that prides itself on its multiculturalism (which in itself is debatable in our day and age but a point for another day) and diversity, Windsor refuses to accept that spirit of inclusion. There are far better options in Ontario, especially if you are spending good money on a graduate degree.

Anyone considering going to the University of Windsor should seriously reconsider their decision. This is, of course, my biased opinion, but I think it is important to present a fuller picture to contextualize the situation. In my experience, it is a highly disreputable institution (for many reasons details of which I shall refrain from going into).
It is a thoroughly bigoted environment, racist, homophobic, cliquey, and I would go so far as to say misogynist as well. Such rampant bigotry is visible amongst the students, the staff, the faculty, and the general citizenry. The University itself operates a "ponzi" scheme by recruiting international students to feed the much needed infrastructure developments on campus. None of its programs are well reputed, those that are are a far cry from sophisticated or analytical. An institution that has developed a means to survive through international student money without any adequate (let alone equal) investments in international student welfare (for instance, there are limited vegetarian options on campus, where such options exist "two spring rolls" form an entire meal, no facilities for food on campus past 11pm, little to no guidance from international affairs/recruitment staff, no scholarships/funding, no accommodation of gay/lesbian international students, and so on).  
The city itself reeks of desperation like a cinematic actress long past her prime hanging on to shards of long lost glory. Windsor's downtown is one of the worst I've seen in Canada, in fact, at first glance, it does not look like it is a part of Canada at all. As a country that prides itself on its multiculturalism (which in itself is debatable in our day and age but a point for another day) and diversity, Windsor refuses to accept that spirit of inclusion. There are far better options in Ontario, especially if you are spending good money on a graduate degree.

Hey, sorry to hear about the situation you're in, it seems like a sticky one.
I agree with what ExpontentialDecay has said in their last 2 points. You never know how the rest of your application will look to the schools you apply, and if you do really well on the GRE, then that will always help your case. 
However I am concerned for your path to moving to the US. I apologise if you already know what I am about to say, but I would hate for you to go through all the effort of applications and then fall at the last hurdle.
What I am talking about is your plan to obtain the F1 visa, and then have that converted to a H1B with a sponsor. When you apply for your F1 visa you will need have an interview at the US Embassy in Turkey. During the interview they will asses your 'intent to return to your home country' once your studies have concluded. This means, that if you do not show adequate proof, through familial connections and things like that, that you intend to return to Turkey after the completion of your studies then they will deny you your visa. 
I am no authority on this, however, I can see you being from Turkey already making it harder for you to obtain the F1 visa :(. The current situation in the region may well make the burden of proof for intent to return after completion a lot greater. America is very strict about its security and the issuing of visas, and what is going on where you are will not help.
I don't wish to dissuade you from applying though! I highly encourage you to fully research all your options for study in the US (or other places, the rest of Europe is also a great place to go study!) and wish you the best! But please keep in mind the stipulations of applying for the F1 visa.
Best of luck

There's Susan Babaie at the Courtauld Institute of Art. Avinoam Shalem and Zainab Bahrani at Columbia University could also be possible advisors. Anneka Lenssen at the University of California, Berkeley, is a recent hire and an excellent advisor for this area, incidentally she graduated from MIT.
Hope this helps.

There's Susan Babaie at the Courtauld Institute of Art. Avinoam Shalem and Zainab Bahrani at Columbia University could also be possible advisors. Anneka Lenssen at the University of California, Berkeley, is a recent hire and an excellent advisor for this area, incidentally she graduated from MIT.
Hope this helps.

Hi Joy93,
As far as I've been advised by a potential supervisor at a U.S. school (for a PHD statement), I was told not to sound as if I have my mind made up about a particular topic because that could be seen by the committee as a sign of not wanting to avail the intellectual diversity of the department. When going through 500 applications for roughly 5-6 spots (at most top-ranked schools), the committee wants a student who will have an idea about his/her research interests (for example and these are rather broad for a reason: gender, patronage, critical theory, etc.), yet, still be open to the department's intellectual currents. For instance, a student could be applying to work with a South Asianist (with a dissertation area in pre-modern Nepal) but would draw upon methodologically from the Western Medievalist, Modernist, Islamicist, and/or East Asianist. This suggests an openness to new experiences on the part of a student.
Having said that, most statements usually begin with a research area/topic/object that you want to investigate. Begin by raising major/pertinent questions around your topic in such a manner as to address the geographic, chronological, and methodological strengths of the department and not just your supervisor. By addressing the department you show the committee your reasons to be in their program over and above another program. After all, you're working not just with a particular supervisor but with an entire department.
This is what I've been advised, but take it with a pinch of salt, as our situations are different (I'm applying for a PHD, you're applying for an M.A., our areas are probably different). As for rolling admissions, as far as I know most schools wait till after the application deadline to inform applicants. Finally, if you are applying to M.A. programs have you considered some in Canada. There are excellent standalone M.A. programs at Toronto, McGill, UBC, Victoria, Queens, and Montreal.
Hope this helps.    

Hi Joy93,
As far as I've been advised by a potential supervisor at a U.S. school (for a PHD statement), I was told not to sound as if I have my mind made up about a particular topic because that could be seen by the committee as a sign of not wanting to avail the intellectual diversity of the department. When going through 500 applications for roughly 5-6 spots (at most top-ranked schools), the committee wants a student who will have an idea about his/her research interests (for example and these are rather broad for a reason: gender, patronage, critical theory, etc.), yet, still be open to the department's intellectual currents. For instance, a student could be applying to work with a South Asianist (with a dissertation area in pre-modern Nepal) but would draw upon methodologically from the Western Medievalist, Modernist, Islamicist, and/or East Asianist. This suggests an openness to new experiences on the part of a student.
Having said that, most statements usually begin with a research area/topic/object that you want to investigate. Begin by raising major/pertinent questions around your topic in such a manner as to address the geographic, chronological, and methodological strengths of the department and not just your supervisor. By addressing the department you show the committee your reasons to be in their program over and above another program. After all, you're working not just with a particular supervisor but with an entire department.
This is what I've been advised, but take it with a pinch of salt, as our situations are different (I'm applying for a PHD, you're applying for an M.A., our areas are probably different). As for rolling admissions, as far as I know most schools wait till after the application deadline to inform applicants. Finally, if you are applying to M.A. programs have you considered some in Canada. There are excellent standalone M.A. programs at Toronto, McGill, UBC, Victoria, Queens, and Montreal.
Hope this helps.    

Have you thought of Canadian schools?
 
Most good schools here offer terminal MA's. I can speak for Toronto's program, which is both methodologically challenging and in recent years geographically diverse as well. Sadly, Toronto does not offer scholarships to international students (but at $16,500 for a one year M.A. it is considerably cheaper than schools like Williams, not to mention the kind of international exposure it gives you). There are OGS (Ontario Graduate Scholarship) and SSHRC (Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council) grants but the latter is open only to Canadians, the OGS, on the other hand, is open to international students as well.
 
Here's a list of some terminal M.A. programs in Canada (most have some form of funding available for students either as entering fellowships or TA/RA positions):
 
University of Toronto, Department of Fine Art, Toronto, ON 
McGill University, Department of Art History and Communications Studies, Montreal, QC
University of British Columbia, Department of Art History and Visual Art, Vancouver, BC (an interesting Alumni profile page exists as well)
University of Victoria, Department of Art History & Visual Studies, Victoria, BC
Queen's University, Department of Art History & Art Conservation, Kingston, ON (least diverse of the six, no faculty specializing in non-western areas, such as East Asian, South/east Asian, or Islamic art)
University of Montreal, Department d'histoire de l'art et d'etudes cinematographiques, Montreal, QC (French)
  There are other programs at Concordia, Carleton, Alberta, and York, but they're fairly provincial and as international students that might not be the best environment.

My understanding is that Williams and Tufts are considered the most prestigious terminal MA programs in the U.S. They both have funding available for top candidates. Delaware is pretty good, too (esp. for material culture, where it is considered the best), as are some of the other programs listed above. You can also consider going abroad for the MA (I have met lots of successful people from the Courtauld, which is only 1 year long and so is a $$ saver). One thing that my various advisors have always stressed to me is that one shouldn't do a terminal MA without funding - most of the time you are just helping to fund the department's doctoral students, and those programs are generally held in lower regard, even if they are part of otherwise prestigious institutions. No to poopoo those who can afford it/have gone that route, but if you don't have independent means it isn't worth it, IMO, to go deep into debt just so you can get a low-paying museum job or get paid ~$20k/year as a PhD. student. Perhaps better to gain more work, research, or language experience and try to go straight for the PhD. I did that and it has worked out great, though of course there are multiple paths to success. Just a word to the wise/my 2 cents.