Glasperlenspieler

I actually applied to a mixture of German, comparative literature, and philosophy programs. My focus is on the novel, narrative theory, aesthetic theory, Germany philosophy, and the relationship between philosophy and literature.

I also applied to a couple comparative literature programs. One doesn't look like it reports until mid-late February. Stanford, on the other hand, is all over the place, so who knows. Hölderlin? Did you only apply to comparative literature programs or German programs as well?

I'd also be hesitant to use Duke and NYU as representative examples of the field. They are probably two of the most theory-centric comparative literature programs in the country. The program requirements for Harvard, Princeton, UNC, and Berkeley all require comprehensive exams covering a broad historical scope in your literatures of choice (just to name the programs whose program requirements are available on their website and I've read through and remembered).

I feel like this might trigger the apocalypse, if I were actually to do it. At the very least, I wouldn't know what to do with myself. Buy more books probably. Luckily, I'm in no danger of this happening any time soon.

If you get accepted to both, it's certainly worth inquiring as to whether the program would allow you to defer. I think a program would be more apt to allow a deferral for a Fulbright, but you never know. If you don't have that option, you've got a tough choice ahead of you. You'll probably get mixed responses on here, but here are my two cents. As you say, graduate admissions are a crapshoot. This means that if you get accepted this time around, it's no guarantee that you will get accepted next time, even if you apply to the same schools with the same materials. This is because the applicant pool may have changed, the admissions committee may have changed, or there may now be too many students at that program with your area of interest. Things might also change in your favor or not at all. You have know way of knowing. Furthermore, applying to PhD programs is expensive (and time consuming), so it's worth thinking about whether you are able or willing to afford another round of applications. All that being said, all else being equal, I'd say go with the Fulbright. I'm doing a similar program specific to the country I'm in, and I really believe there's nothing like living in another country for a year. You experience things and learn and grow in ways I think it's difficult to do otherwise. So, if you haven't had this opportunity yet, then I'd say take it (if you have, then your decision metric is a little different). The other point in it's favor is the value of a year off. There are lots of people who go straight from BA to PhD and do great for themselves. However, I also think it can be a recipe for burnout. I applied to PhD programs out of my senior year and got shut out. I think I probably could have managed had I got it, but looking back I think I'm better off with some time off. It gave me the chance to step back and refocus. I think it also allowed me to better clarify what I really want to do in grad school and if I (hopefully) get in this time around, I think I will be ready to hit the ground running, something I'm not sure would have been the case if I'd gone directly into a PhD program.

I think it's the language requirements that scare off a lot of applicants to comparative literature programs. Whether or not the students have a more "serious" interest in literature, there are certainly fewer students who are willing to acquire full proficiency in one foreign language and at least a solid reading ability in one or two more. So for that reason, the applicant pool is going to be naturally more self-selecting.

I like Duolingo a lot, but I think it's better for review or at least for after you have the basic grammar down. Then again, I like to understand the overall system of things first, so maybe that's just my learning style. Combining Duolingo with a good grammar handbook could be a good way to go.

My thoughts exactly

I mean they also know that what's being tested in the AW section of the GRE (whatever it is that it actually does test) has nothing to do with academic philosophy. Also, every published philosophy article these days is heavily edited with lots of feedback. So being able to do that well may actually be a sign of professionalization. Everything I've read indicates the the verbal and quantitative sections of the GRE are of some value to admissions committees (how much varies), but the the AW is pretty much useless unless perhaps it's alarmingly low.

Since you're so close, it probably doesn't matter that much. That being said, what I would do is give your writing sample to a trusted reader. Have him or her write down as many questions as possible (about the topic, about background information, about your arguments, about the examples or quotes us use, about your thesis, etc.). Pick the best, most insightful/helpful question and try to address it. Chances are that doing so will probably improve your paper and will easily bring you up to around 4000 words.

The same way you calculate your cumulative GPA, except only using classes in your major. Your school should have a list somewhere for GPA values of letter grades. This is probably the most typical one: A = 4.0 A– = 3.7 B+ = 3.3 B = 3.0 B– = 2.7 C+ = 2.3 C = 2.0 C– = 1.7 D = 1.0 F = 0 However, I have seen some schools that count an A- as 3.66, a B+ as 3.33, etc., so be sure to check how your school does it. Then for each class in your major, multiply the GPA value for the grade you received by the number of credits. So, if you got an A- in a 5 credit class: 3.7 x 5 = 18.5 Once you've done this for every class in your major, add them all up and divide by the number of credits you had in the major. That will be your major GPA.

In regards to conferences, I think there's no reason not to put them on your CV. They certainly won't count against you in anyway and they may be of some marginal befefit. The point many here make is simply that merely having a number of conferences presentations on your CV probably won't have much of an impact on how an admissions committee reads your application. Assuming your grades and GRE are up to par, those decsions will probably come down to some combination of writing sample, SOP, recs, and fit. That's not to say that conference presentations aren't useful though. As you point out, they can be a great opportunity for growth and networking. So if you have the opportunity to take part in one and it won't be a financial or academic burden, then by all means. But if they do help you in graduate admissions it will probably be indirectly: either because the criticism you receive there allows you to produce a better writing sample or because you make a valuable connection with someone at a program you're applying to, not becaue you have a long list of such presentations on your CV. Publishing is a little trickier. It's probably important for you to sit down with a trusted advisor and have a candid conversation about the piece in question. It's certainly possible that it's worth pursuing publication. But if so, it's because the piece has the potential to be published in a respected journal in your subfield. What you shouldn't do is settle for a lesser journal just to get it published. In that case you're better off waiting until you've developed your idea and your skills to the point where you can get it into a top-notch journal. The reason for this it that unlike conference presentations, a subpar publication could actually count against you later in your career (or at least that's the worry).

I think there are (at least) two ways of understanding "atheoretical." A theory is really just a particular way of looking at things. In this sense, you can't really avoid theory. No matter how hard you try to avoid it, you will always be coming to a text from a certain perspective, and thus you will have your own theory. So in this sense, being atheoretical is naively unrealistic. And given that we are all working from certain perspectives, it's important to critically examine what these perpectives are and how they inform our research and understanding of the texts we deal with. So avoiding theory altogether is a sort is almost certainly a mistake. That being said, the idea of "theory" has often become associated with a particular group of thinkers and approaches (primarily French post-structuralism and it's descendents as well as an increasing role for gender and race theory). Given this understanding of "theory," the desire to be atheoretical is not all so strange. If you think, as I often do, that most of French post-strucutalism is a wrong turn in intellectual history, then you may have good reason to avoid it or at least to avoid atmospheres in which it is seen as essential to literary study (That being said, given its wide ranging influence, I think it's still a good idea to have at least a basic understating of the main ideas that are involved here.).

As far as I'm aware, the French theorists are still pretty popular in English departments. So if you primarily want to study English language literature, and just want to use French theorists, you're probably fine and even better off in an English department. Look for theory heavy departments, and take a look at staff interests. I'm sure you'll find a number of English programs that match your interests. Comp Lit departments are typically meant more for people who wanted to study literature across two or more languages.

I've gotten emails from a number of universities encouraging me to finish my application. I think they just want to make sure they get their application fee.

I don't think expanding it is necessarily a bad idea to expand it. Give to a few readers who you trust and ask for comments. Unless you're Gettier, they will probably point out a few areas where you could clarify something a bit better, explain your reasoning more clearly, or ward off a potential objection. This can easily give you a few extra pages and will probably make your paper stronger in the process.

Almost forgot to update! Harvard, Brown, and Chicago held onto my GRE scores. UC Riverside did not and as I said, Stanford stated on their site that they do not hold on to GRE scores for that long.

In regards to the GRE question, I applied to UChicago a few years back. When filling out my application this time around my scores showed up from last time with 'verified' in green next to them. I sent them an email to make sure I don't need to send scores again, but haven't heard back yet. Hopefully that's at least a little money I'll be saving. On the same topic, Stanford explicitly cites on the grad admissions site, that they do not retain scores that were submitted prior to September 1st, 2015. I emailed a couple other schools too and will report if I hear anything.

I feel like this is the struggle that faces almost every SOP, so you're certainly not alone. I'm not familiar with your field, so take what I have to say with a grain of salt, but my advice would be to focus on the skills you demonstrate in your writing sample and how you could apply it to the projects you would like to pursue going further. Like you said, you don't necessarily want to dwell on your writing sample, but clearly you chose it for a reason and it represents some of your best work. Yet it's not the end product, but rather a stepping stone to what you'll do next. By focusing on the skills you demonstrate there, I think you sort of give the committee a key to how to read your writing sample. It need represent so much what you would like to do as that you can do what you would like to do. So explain those abilities and then explain what it is you would like to do going forward and how those to fit together. I think this not only gives a coherent narrative of your educational progress, but also demonstrates a certain degree of critical reflection that I suspect an admissions committee would appreciate. Good luck!

Their website seems to say otherwise: "Comparative Literature “classics” majors are expected to study Latin and Greek and one modern language in lieu of the two modern / one classical requirement." (http://complit.princeton.edu/graduate-program/program-requirements)

I would agree that it's hard to believe how much time you've spent abroad would be make or break for graduate admissions. That being said, time abroad is certainly valuable both for personal and academic growth. So it may be worth looking into applying for a Fulbright ETA in Germany, the USTA program in Austria, or a DAAD grant just to get the opportunity. I mean if you can get paid to live abroad for a year or two, why not take advantage of it? I can say personally that spending a some time abroad teaching English, has not only given me the chance to improve my language skills, it's also given my some much needed distance from my undergrad, which I think had made me a stronger applicant. EDIT: Just realized you're applying for this fall, which means you would have missed the application window for Fulbright and not sure about DAAD. You can definitely still apply to the USTA program though: https://www.usta-austria.at/ PM me if you want more info on the program.

I just heard about the potential closing of the JHU Humanities Center (here: http://www.supporthumctrjhu.com/ and here: http://leiterreports.typepad.com/blog/2016/10/humanities-center-at-johns-hopkins-under-threat-and-a-petition.html). I had been planning on applying but now I don't know. Does it still make sense to apply to a program in a situation like this? I presume they would refund application fees if they did in fact close, although I'd still be out the money to send GRE scores. Anyways, I thought I'd post this in case anyone else here was considering applying.

Make sure to check whether a school actually requires an official transcript. It seems like more and more schools are ok with an uploaded copy of your transcripts, and will only request an official transcript if you are admitted. This can definitely save you some money if you only have to pay for official transcripts for a handful of schools.

I think having specific research interests is actually an advantage, but you do want to make sure that you don't appear to be inflexibly focused on one small topic. My advice would be to focus more on the theoretical interests you mention, using your research on F for Fake to to emphasize the way you approach them but also indicating how you could/would like to apply those same consideration to other films. That way instead of being the person that studies the film, F for Fake, you can be the person that investigates a particular set of postmodern issues as demonstrated by this film but also translatable to a broader field of research.

Stanford is $125.