Swagato

Up and running here in New Haven. It was a crazy weekend with three trips back and forth from NYC (made me so glad I'm not heading across the country instead of just a couple of hours). But, it's a beautiful apartment already, the cats are fine and exploring at will, and the weather is just lovely.

Making the big move--all of a ~2 hour drive--from NYC to New Haven this Saturday. With two cats! And stuff!

This is the case for me as well. Well, almost. The only other really magnificent fit was always Chicago, and...well. Word on the grapevine is that it's quite a bit harder to get in for the PhD if you already hold an MA there, but I'm sure they had their reasons beside that. I'm just slightly peeved/amused, though, because Chicago recently made a bunch of star hires in my field and now has the unchallenged #1 department in Film Studies. x) Just had to happen now, of course. But with that said, I can't help being pleased at the ridiculously good fit I keep reaffirming at Yale's departments. What I take away from this cycle is this: the adcomms sure as hell know what they're doing.

Classes haven't even begun and we already have the first loony...

Oh come on, it's $55. I'm sure you won't be living, literally, on bread crumbs.

With that GPA, you're likely at least as competitive as most admitted people as far as GPA is concerned. But bear in mind that GPA really counts for...not that much, in the greater scheme of things. Your writing sample, statement of purpose, and letters of recommendation carry far more weight.

Regarding this, what about this quote from the website in question? "The flip side of that, is that any funding you receive (including graduate stipends) that exceed your annual educational expenses (tuition, fees, books, supplies, equipment, etc.), is considered taxable income and must be included as such on your tax return. " So I'm covered for tuition and health, and I have a standard package: X amount of dollars as fellowship for 6 years. Does this mean I'll be taxed on X?

Sort of the minimum expectation for graduate work...at any level. I mean, I guess I expect that I will, at all times, give it all I can--and I expect the same of each of us.

IMHO there are some things that we can do to hedge our bets (to an extent). Specialising in areas that are at the forefront of research today, and are likely to continue evolving over the next decade or so, is certainly one. Pursuing the PhD at a top-tier department, or at least at a program that has an excellent reputation in your areas, is another. Working with major names and having a powerful dissertation committee is another big factor.

It depends on what, specifically, you mean by that. As I said, the current Airs are really very powerful. But, of course they won't quite compare to the Pros. On the other hand, it may actually be more viable for you to max out an Air than go for a Pro (by Pro I assume you mean the upper-end models). Is it feasible for you to try things out in an Apple store? Or, if you give me an idea of what kind of heavy graphics/video work you have in mind, I can get a fairly good estimate of what'll work and what won't.

Air. Emphatically, Air. My Air is a late-2010 model. 2.13GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 4GB RAM, 256GB SSD. It's blazing fast. I have 30-40 tabs open in Chrome for weeks at a time, no noticeable slow-down. Near-instant waking from sleep, exceptionally fast boot times, etc. On top of that, it'll easily last you any class (battery life with a fair number of apps open is between 3-6 hours), and is so, so light. Really, until you move from a Pro to an Air it's hard to appreciate the lightness. I can only imagine how much better the current generation of Airs are.

I doubt it. Most people I've talked to alternate between relaxing (for the last time before the marathon of the PhD begins) and just doing some basic readings. Many choose to work on languages.

^ What they said. USNWR rankings are almost completely irrelevant for graduate study purposes. You need to search around and look at the rankings (which may often be somewhat amorphous) for your discipline and sub-fields. Columbia/Yale/Chicago/UCLA may be fantastic places for the History of Art, but each will have specific strengths in periods/areas within that discipline, and not all will offer the same strengths/weaknesses. It's good to stick to major departments assuming you want to continue building an academic career afterward, but it's a very bad idea to choose a department based on institutional reputation.

I hear you. I've had a few people approach me for advice as well. It feels very, very strange to be on the "other side" (dispensing advice), but I suppose that's an inevitability if you've had a successful admissions season. I've tried to present the realities while pointing out the successes. I mean, I'd love for people to pursue higher education, advanced research and all that--just as long as they're going about it in ways that can position them for a suitable job afterward. Sometimes I have to remind myself that, even though September is a while away and I've not yet begun, all of the next 6-7 years is but another stepping-stone.

Now, now, don't go bursting bubbles already.

Given those goals, it is practically imperative that you proceed toward a PhD at one of the top programs in your area(s) of specialization. Competition for this is intense. Here, for example, are some admissions statistics for Yale's History of Art PhD program (where, to answer your question, I am headed this fall--as a joint program with Film Studies): http://www.yale.edu/graduateschool/academics/profiles2012/historyart.pdf One reason why I am really happy with this program is because I'm also aware of the difficult market, and am quite interested in developing myself as a strong candidate for museum-type positions, particularly those involving film and new media as well as more traditional work in the history of art. A joint program like the one I'll be doing might suitably respond both to that kind of career development, as well as my primary ambition of a tenure-track professorial job. Most PhD programs will challenge you and will develop your skills and knowledge-base, so that isn't much of a concern. What is a concern, however, is that on the job market, names appear to matter. I'm not saying this just because I'll be lucky enough to attend one such 'name' program. But if you look at the leading programs, inside of or outside the "top ten"--where do most of these faculty come from? That's something to think about. It's true that MAs are often not wholly funded. At the same time (and here I speak for my own observations in Film Studies and Art History both), there seems to be a definite shift toward accepting PhD students who already have an MA somewhere. Partly, I feel, it may be a response to institutional pressures to control time-to-degree, costs, etc. Someone who has already completed an MA might, in many cases, offer a more cogent proposal and have a clearer sense of "how to do things in graduate school" than someone fresh out of a BA. Again, this won't always be the case, but...it's a likelihood. I can say that I would never have had a shot at any top programs in the field if not for my Chicago experience, and I know several friends in other disciplines who experienced the same change in fortunes. It isn't so much Chicago itself (though that obviously helps) but rather the experience of doing graduate work itself that positioned us better for graduate applications.

Moving in 3.5 weeks now. I still feel like summer mysteriously slipped away, is slipping away. Fortunately there's an Ikea in New Haven, and the usual big department stores are a short drive off.

You might want to consider a strong MA program first--Williams, or the University of Chicago's MAPH. If you're not aiming for a top program, may I ask why you're considering investing 6+ years of your life into the kind of intensive work a PhD requires? The employment scenario in Art History isn't much better than in most of academia. In sum, if you pursue your PhD at a program that isn't recognised as among the leading ones (both in your specialties and in the discipline), you increase the risk of finding yourself simply edged out by graduates from more competitive programs. On the other hand, a strong MA program can help you move into a top program. I think that's something you should consider. Also, the kind of questions you implied are usually clearly discussed on most programs' websites. 99% of Art History PhD programs will be fully funded with a stipend, anyway. And if it isn't, I'd say it isn't worth considering. You're not going to do a PhD...in any discipline...part-time. That's just unrealistic, I think, and I definitely don't know anyone who's ever done that. GPAs can be overcome. My undergraduate GPA was well below 3.0. Doing an MA at Chicago helped me overcome that. More importantly, what matters for PhD applications are the writing sample, the statement of purpose, and the letters of recommendation, really. Good GREs and GPAs can help, but they won't win the game.

It's a simple question, in my opinion. If you want a smartphone that has a plethora of (mostly) well-vetted, well-designed apps that integrate smoothly into the phone's OS and simply work as they're supposed to, a phone that is extremely well designed inside and out, whether software and hardware complement each other--go for the iPhone. If you want a smartphone that has a plethora of apps, a much more customisable (and consequently less-stable, less-consistent) OS, a variety of hardware options with questionable hardware/software integration--go for an Android-based phone.

Ha, yeah. Living up north (compared to Hyde Park) can bite you in the rear end later on, simply because it's so, well, disconnected. I suppose that may work for some--you'd be the best judge. It's certainly easy to get up to the Loop/northern parts of the city--the 6 takes you straight there--but come winter, come late night hours, and it gets trickier.

My plan is to live quite near campus (three blocks, as it turns out) until quals. For the dissertating years I'll move off to a neighbourhood slightly further away (apparently in a better/more spruced-up area) where most of the graduate students live. Why? Convenience, mostly, but also because...it's frakking Yale and I'd like to absorb as much of it as I please. >.> You're heading to Chicago. I had a great time living just a block from the Museum of Sci & Industry on E. 55th and South Hyde Park Blvd. It's quite close to amenities (all-night Walgreens, Treasure Island grocery, a bunch of cheap eats and reasonably close to better eats, a couple of bars as well). I remember there are a fair few highrises stuffed with graduate students and some faculty members too. It's a good area. Plus it's really close to Promontory Point so you can always walk the grad blues off. Best part is that it is right on the UChicago shuttle/bus routes, so you are never (at any time of night or day) more than 15-20m from campus. You can choose to walk it (it'll take about the same time anyway) but I don't recommend doing that too late at night. Good luck!

31 days until I move. <---my emotional spectrum at present--->

Calm down, people. I simply mentioned it as a response to other remarks about transferring coursework/credits for the MA at one's PhD institution. o_O

Am I the only one not that bothered about "doing over" the MA (in essence)? Perhaps it's because MAPH is a compressed one-year MA program, but I'm really happy about being groomed in Yale's approach. That's not to say I'll implicitly overwrite what Chicago instilled in me--I'm sure there will be interesting parallels and differences. I guess I'm really looking forward to both refreshing and advancing my foundations.

Where have you been reading about how the SOP should be personal or have a catchy opening phrase? That's actually the first time I've heard something like that in relation to PhD applications... To be honest, I'd keep it professional. It's possible to be elegant and frame an attractive SOP, if you're that good with writing, but every SOP I read through during last year's preparations was played straight. Clear, precise language, very straightforward, very professionally academic. No hooks or catchy openings/endings. YMMV.