Borden

What I've been consistently told is that good scores won't get you in but bad scores will keep you out. Those seem fine.

If you've been in touch with POIs at your schools, ask them for advice on what they would prefer to see as a demonstration. It may be that different schools want different samples.

I have a bunch where the distance (and internationalness) makes visiting impossible so I've had a ton of phone conversations with people whose work was, y'know, hugely formative and influential, and even when they go well they're just emotionally draaaaaaaaaaaaaaining. I'm with you on the creepy fangirl emails though, there was one where I was all but licking the screen in eagerness.

Who else hates phonecalls with Important POIs??

No problem! I really liked my experience at the program but now I'm in the same boat of "how do I get into a top tier PhD coming from two state schools."

I don't think there's anyone doing photography at UC Davis now that Blake Stimson's out at the University of Illinois, Chicago, and to be honest I haven't seen any added cachet from coming out of there in the past five years. It certainly didn't get me in anywhere last year. That said, it is a really good program if you can deal with the cow smell coming from the dairy farm year round.

UC Davis' PhD program is Visual Studies Performance Studies, not Art History, as far as I know. They're always going on about starting an art history one but no one ever gets anywhere with it. That said, it's a pretty great program in a really groady town. I double checked, it's performance studies and they'll let you do stuff IN art history but it's not an art history doctorate.

The first question is, what do you hope to accomplish/become by going into art history? That will largely influence what sort of program you'll need to look into.

My favorite thing about Raphael is something one of my grad school professors used to say in the undergrad lectures, at which no one laughed but the grad students: And then in 1520, Raphael died, and everyone was very sad *mimes melodramatic crying*... Except Michelangelo.

Accurate summary of how I feel writing emails to all the POIs from last year:

I'm actually stoked for grad school 2.0 because I enjoyed my MA so much. Hahahahahahahahaha masochism, thy name is me.

SAAAAAAME. We have internships at the museum I work at but "low stress" does not describe them AT ALL.

There's actually no consensus on this, except that resumé is technically incorrect and resume is the preferred American spelling. After a few minutes of googling, the general sense on job hunt websites is that résumé is fussy and pretentious, and a sign of "fastidious overcorrectness." I would say the safest bet is to spell it however the school you're applying for is spelling it.

CAA's career building pages also have CV layouts broken down into different fields of the arts, so for academics, museum professionals, artists, etc, with recommendations on how to tailor it to your experience levels.

I'm not even going to think about signing in again until it's much closer to the time to send mine in, but the little nagging refrain of IT'S OPEN YOU SHOULD WORK ON THIS THING YOU LAZY BUTT has begun...

So I understand Yale's application went online yesterday, has anyone gotten the jump on application season and turned theirs in yet? Or does anyone else still feel like this from last round: ETA: upon checking, my bad! It isn't actually live yet. Poo to the person who gave me bad info, and poo on me for not checking first! ETA AGAIN: No, it's supposed to be open as per their application website, but isn't letting me start a new one....

I did that last round, and got answers from about half of them, which I think is a pretty good ratio. My only hedge on it right now is that a lot of professors may still be out of the office still, since it's still summer, and maybe in September you'd have better luck?

Anyone know of something like a Rate My Professors for conference speakers?

I know when I applied to PhD programs this round, I had to put my MA GPA on every single application, so your mileage may vary on that. I have been corrected: Art History gets grades, none of the other MA/MFA programs get standard grades. Yeah, the AIC is right here, but if your class isn't structured to involve a direct discussion of objects, and you want to work on object-based history, that seems like a huge disadvantage. What I keep getting told (and I'm asking as I type this) is that it is HEAVILY theory and not as much HISTORY. They do say they get a fair amount of attention from the professors. There are mixed-level classes, but that happened at my more traditional MA program as well. Also apparently James Elkins "knows everything about everything but I think he's in Visual/Critical Studies."

From what I understand is it's hard to translate an entire system of pass/fails into a GPA, and that can potentially cause difficulties if applying to another school later. As for the amount of attention they get from professors, I'm not sure. The biggest complaints I hear are about "We never look at art ever" and "The undergrads take up too much time in seminar."

I know several people at the SAIC's art history program at this very minute, and the one consistent complaint that I hear over and over again is that they almost never actually look at art, it's almost all theory all the time. Also, apparently they don't get grades? This boggles my state-school trained mind, but those are things that I would keep in mind.

Little Ashes was surprisingly good.

It should be a given that we're pretty into art history if we're putting ourselves through this soul-sucking, exhausting, expensive gauntlet. Grad school is about career preparation and intense training in the field, unless you're so rich that you don't have to think about what you're going to do once you've got an MA or a PhD.

I really like Idols of Perversity by Bram Djikstra, if just because trying to read it on public transit at rush hour without anyone seeing all the insane paintings and commentary on masturbation and hysteria is a challenge. It's a bit extreme and dated but a good read. Bonus points for incredibly indignant man-rage about the patriarchy in the 19th century. It's a bit early for you, I think, but it's a kick.

Amen, bro. Amen.