BCHistory

I know exactly how you feel. I'm going through this myself: I work at a university, as well. I thought that the stress would end when I received an acceptance, but now I'm trying to figure out how to tactfully put in my notice this summer. Nobody knows that I've applied for graduate school, let alone been accepted. They knew I planned to eventually pursue a PhD, but not that it was going to be this fall. I didn't want to tell anybody for fear of receiving no funded acceptances, only to have them let me go without any actual graduate school plans after the summer. I really have no idea how to leave this job without a very awkward, uncomfortable situation in the workplace, especially since the economic crisis will likely cause my school to institute hiring freezes very shortly.

Some more for 19th- and 20th- century Americanists. The list is by no means exhaustive but mainly represents books and a few articles that I've found helpful and/or important historiographically. Also, for the sake of time, I have not included subtitles or journal titles, but these should all be easy to find.

Patrick Allitt, Catholic Converts
Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities
Sven Beckert, The Monied Metropolis
Gail Bederman, Manliness and Civilization
Jeanne Boydston, Home and Work
Elsa Barkley Brown, "'What Has Happened Here,'" and "Negotiating and Transforming the Public Sphere"
Jon Butler, Awash in a Sea of Faith
Margot Canaday, The Straight State
Dan Carter, The Politics of Rage
David Cecelski and Timothy Tyson, eds., Democracy Betrayed
Katherine Charron, Freedom's Teacher
George Chauncey, Gay New York
Lizabeth Cohen, Making a New Deal, and A Consumers' Republic
Patricia Cline Cohen, The Murder of Helen Jewett
Karen Cox, Dreaming of Dixie
Jane Dailey, Glenda Gilmore, and Bryant Simon, eds., Jumpin' Jim Crow
Brian DeLay, War of a Thousand Deserts
Steven Deyle, Carry Me Back
John Dittmer, Local People
Jay Dolan, The Immigrant Church, Catholic Revivalism, The American Catholic Experience, and In Search of an American Catholicism
W.E.B. Du Bois, Black Reconstruction in America
Drew Gilpin Faust, James Henry Hammond and the Old South
Crystal Feimster, Southern Horrors
Barbara Fields, "Ideology and Race in American History," and "Slavery, Race, and Ideology in the United States of America"
Leon Fink, The Maya of Morganton
Roger Finke and Rodney Stark, The Churching of America
Eric Foner, Reconstruction
Gaines Foster, Ghosts of the Confederacy
Elizabeth Fox-Genovese, Within the Plantation Household
Eugene Genovese, The Political Economy of Slavery, and Roll, Jordan, Roll
Lori Ginzberg, Women and the Work of Benevolence
Lawrence Glickman, A Living Wage
Thavolia Glymph, Out of the House of Bondage
Kenneth Greenberg, Honor and Slavery
R. Marie Griffith, Born Again Bodies
Steven Hahn, A Nation Under Our Feet
Steven Hahn and Jonathan Prude, eds., The Countryside in the Age of Capitalist Transformation
Jacquelyn Dowd Hall, "The Long Civil Rights Movement and the Political Uses of the Past"
Pekka Hamalainen, Comanche Empire
Nathan Hatch, The Democratization of American Christianity
Christine Heyrman, Southern Cross
Evelyn Brooks Higginbotham, "African-American Women's History and the Metalanguage of Race"
Daniel Walker Howe, What Hath God Wrought
Hassan Jeffries, Bloody Lowndes
Philip Jenkins, Hoods and Shirts, Cold War at Home, The Next Christendom, and The New Anti-Catholicism
Paul Johnson, A Shopkeeper's Millennium
Paul Johnson and Sean Wilentz, The Kingdom of Matthias
Robin D.G. Kelley, "'We Are Not What We Seem'"
Adriane Lentz-Smith, Freedom Struggles
Robert Korstad and Nelson Lichtenstein, "Opportunities Found and Lost"
Nelson Lichtenstein, State of the Union
Stephanie McCurry, Masters of Small Worlds
Micki McElya, Clinging to Mammy
Lisa McGirr, Suburban Warriors
John McGreevy, Parish Boundaries, and Catholicism and American Freedom
Danielle McGuire, At the Dark End of the Street
James McPherson, Battle Cry of Freedom
Tiya Miles, Ties That Bind
Michele Mitchell, Righteous Propagation
Edmund Morgan, American Slavery, American Freedom
Mark Neely, The Fate of Liberty, and "Was the Civil War a Total War?"
Stephen Norwood, "Bogalusa Burning"
Annelise Orleck, Storming Caesars Palace
Robert Orsi, The Madonna of 115th Street, and Thank You, St. Jude
Peggy Pascoe, What Comes Naturally
Charles Payne, I've Got the Light of Freedom
Albert Raboteau, Slave Religion
Steven Reich, "Soldiers of Democracy"
Seth Rockman, Scraping By
David Roediger, The Wages of Whiteness
Anne Rose, Transcendentalism as a Social Movement
Willie Lee Rose, Rehearsal for Reconstruction
Steven Rosswurm, The FBI and the Catholic Church
Adam Rothman, Slave Country
Leslie Schwalm, A Hard Fight for We
Joan Scott, "Gender: A Useful Category of Historical Analysis"
Charles Sellers, The Market Revolution
Susan Smith, Sick and Tired of Being Sick and Tired
Christine Stansell, City of Women
Melvyn Stokes and Stephen Conway, eds., The Market Revolution in America
Thomas Sugrue, Origins of the Urban Crisis, and Sweet Land of Liberty
Patricia Sullivan, Lift Every Voice
E.P. Thompson, "The Moral Economy of the Crowd in the Eighteenth Century"
Grant Wacker, Heaven Below
Deborah Gray White, Ar'n't I a Woman?
Sean Wilentz, Chants Democratic, and The Rise of American Democracy
Nan Woodruff, American Congo
C. Vann Woodward, Tom Watson, Origins of the New South, and The Strange Career of Jim Crow
Bertram Wyatt-Brown, Southern Honor
Susan Zaeske, Signatures of Citizenship
Andrew Zimmerman, Alabama in Africa

Some more for 19th- and 20th- century Americanists. The list is by no means exhaustive but mainly represents books and a few articles that I've found helpful and/or important historiographically. Also, for the sake of time, I have not included subtitles or journal titles, but these should all be easy to find.

Patrick Allitt, Catholic Converts
Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities
Sven Beckert, The Monied Metropolis
Gail Bederman, Manliness and Civilization
Jeanne Boydston, Home and Work
Elsa Barkley Brown, "'What Has Happened Here,'" and "Negotiating and Transforming the Public Sphere"
Jon Butler, Awash in a Sea of Faith
Margot Canaday, The Straight State
Dan Carter, The Politics of Rage
David Cecelski and Timothy Tyson, eds., Democracy Betrayed
Katherine Charron, Freedom's Teacher
George Chauncey, Gay New York
Lizabeth Cohen, Making a New Deal, and A Consumers' Republic
Patricia Cline Cohen, The Murder of Helen Jewett
Karen Cox, Dreaming of Dixie
Jane Dailey, Glenda Gilmore, and Bryant Simon, eds., Jumpin' Jim Crow
Brian DeLay, War of a Thousand Deserts
Steven Deyle, Carry Me Back
John Dittmer, Local People
Jay Dolan, The Immigrant Church, Catholic Revivalism, The American Catholic Experience, and In Search of an American Catholicism
W.E.B. Du Bois, Black Reconstruction in America
Drew Gilpin Faust, James Henry Hammond and the Old South
Crystal Feimster, Southern Horrors
Barbara Fields, "Ideology and Race in American History," and "Slavery, Race, and Ideology in the United States of America"
Leon Fink, The Maya of Morganton
Roger Finke and Rodney Stark, The Churching of America
Eric Foner, Reconstruction
Gaines Foster, Ghosts of the Confederacy
Elizabeth Fox-Genovese, Within the Plantation Household
Eugene Genovese, The Political Economy of Slavery, and Roll, Jordan, Roll
Lori Ginzberg, Women and the Work of Benevolence
Lawrence Glickman, A Living Wage
Thavolia Glymph, Out of the House of Bondage
Kenneth Greenberg, Honor and Slavery
R. Marie Griffith, Born Again Bodies
Steven Hahn, A Nation Under Our Feet
Steven Hahn and Jonathan Prude, eds., The Countryside in the Age of Capitalist Transformation
Jacquelyn Dowd Hall, "The Long Civil Rights Movement and the Political Uses of the Past"
Pekka Hamalainen, Comanche Empire
Nathan Hatch, The Democratization of American Christianity
Christine Heyrman, Southern Cross
Evelyn Brooks Higginbotham, "African-American Women's History and the Metalanguage of Race"
Daniel Walker Howe, What Hath God Wrought
Hassan Jeffries, Bloody Lowndes
Philip Jenkins, Hoods and Shirts, Cold War at Home, The Next Christendom, and The New Anti-Catholicism
Paul Johnson, A Shopkeeper's Millennium
Paul Johnson and Sean Wilentz, The Kingdom of Matthias
Robin D.G. Kelley, "'We Are Not What We Seem'"
Adriane Lentz-Smith, Freedom Struggles
Robert Korstad and Nelson Lichtenstein, "Opportunities Found and Lost"
Nelson Lichtenstein, State of the Union
Stephanie McCurry, Masters of Small Worlds
Micki McElya, Clinging to Mammy
Lisa McGirr, Suburban Warriors
John McGreevy, Parish Boundaries, and Catholicism and American Freedom
Danielle McGuire, At the Dark End of the Street
James McPherson, Battle Cry of Freedom
Tiya Miles, Ties That Bind
Michele Mitchell, Righteous Propagation
Edmund Morgan, American Slavery, American Freedom
Mark Neely, The Fate of Liberty, and "Was the Civil War a Total War?"
Stephen Norwood, "Bogalusa Burning"
Annelise Orleck, Storming Caesars Palace
Robert Orsi, The Madonna of 115th Street, and Thank You, St. Jude
Peggy Pascoe, What Comes Naturally
Charles Payne, I've Got the Light of Freedom
Albert Raboteau, Slave Religion
Steven Reich, "Soldiers of Democracy"
Seth Rockman, Scraping By
David Roediger, The Wages of Whiteness
Anne Rose, Transcendentalism as a Social Movement
Willie Lee Rose, Rehearsal for Reconstruction
Steven Rosswurm, The FBI and the Catholic Church
Adam Rothman, Slave Country
Leslie Schwalm, A Hard Fight for We
Joan Scott, "Gender: A Useful Category of Historical Analysis"
Charles Sellers, The Market Revolution
Susan Smith, Sick and Tired of Being Sick and Tired
Christine Stansell, City of Women
Melvyn Stokes and Stephen Conway, eds., The Market Revolution in America
Thomas Sugrue, Origins of the Urban Crisis, and Sweet Land of Liberty
Patricia Sullivan, Lift Every Voice
E.P. Thompson, "The Moral Economy of the Crowd in the Eighteenth Century"
Grant Wacker, Heaven Below
Deborah Gray White, Ar'n't I a Woman?
Sean Wilentz, Chants Democratic, and The Rise of American Democracy
Nan Woodruff, American Congo
C. Vann Woodward, Tom Watson, Origins of the New South, and The Strange Career of Jim Crow
Bertram Wyatt-Brown, Southern Honor
Susan Zaeske, Signatures of Citizenship
Andrew Zimmerman, Alabama in Africa

It's not a big deal. If you are not laid back, then you likely shouldn't live with someone in your program. But as others have said, it will be like any other roommate. You are both busy, and while you both will be going to the "same place," it's doubtful it will make much of a difference in your daily routine. I live with 11 other people (bigass house) from my program, and it's never a problem. But meh, I am extremely laid back.

Personally I never got the people who couldn't pull on a pair of jeans to go out. I definitely witnessed the creation of the leggings-as-pants craze at my university. Dressing up for anything formal is a definite must. I even dressed up for class presentations.

Think of the situation and whether that is appropriate or not. Sitting in an office or the library, studying, it shouldn't matter. Presenting a paper at a conference, you will want to dress nice.

I don't know a lot about them, but I would be very weary of any places that allow undergraduates to live there. It will be loud and not as nice.

Are you currently in a grad program or in the process of applying?

If you're in the process of applying, it may help for you to know that most of the smaller awards you speak of—a really good example being conference/travel money—are awarded through universities. This varies hugely by school (for instance, I have a friend at Purdue in the rhet/comp program, and she tells me that they don't have ANY travel funding), but generally that's where you're going to find smaller pools you're talking about.

For instance, at my university I'm eligible for an automatic $400/year for conference presentations (that is, by automatic I mean it's not competitive), plus there's an additional competitive source of funding for travel through an endowment. The endowment also has competitive "enrichment" grants of $2500/year for research activities like institute sessions, travel to archives, etc. We also have a smaller number of other awards sitting around the department (a small summer research fellowship of $1k, a $200 annual writing prize, etc.) and a few other competitive grants available through the university/graduate school at large.

In all, if you're in the process of applying, I'd spend MUCH more time looking into programs that offer funding that you can live on and professionalization funds, rather than trying to cobble together outside sources. I'd recommend you take a school's ability to fund professionalization into account when looking at schools or deciding between acceptances; I certainly did so during my last application round.


If you're a current grad looking to help keep costs down: certain conferences sometimes award graduate student grants as well, for travel; competitiveness varies by conference. (MLA, for instance, must be nigh-unto-impossible to get; travel grants at the much smaller Computers & Writing conference are insanely easy to get; awards are also available for rhet/comp students who join the WPA-GO, I know.) Some of the larger professional organizations also have awards available that carry cash prizes, though I'd expect them to be fairly coveted.

I will not miss working a typical 9-to-5 office job. I just can't adjust to it. I've never been able to. I can't stand the rigid structure.

Or for that matter of fact, had everybody taken the finals, then the class average would have gone down and I would still be getting a B despite the fact that I had not submitted that one assignment.

I think your sentence, in a way, encapsulates the main issue that makes it so hard in all of this. For the most part, there really aren't any "objective realities," just perceptions of on a topic. I think both sides approach a debate from this mindset. Those who admit that their perspective is exactly that--a perspective and not reality--are ones I rarely have an issue with. They're at least willing to consider arguments from the other side. It's those who stake their claim on a certain stance and then argue it's somehow "objective reality" that I tend to have difficulties with. (And I'm not saying that's what you're claiming here, but your comment did raise a few flags for me).

It was charged to the point of explosive at the undergrad level; I can only imagine what it's going to be like at the grad level after being out of the field for three years. My policy is to just keep my mouth shut until I have a good grasp of whatever the situation happens to be.

This is what my MA adviser told me: You have to learn to play nice. Basically, you have to play play politics with these people. For the next 4-6 years, you're going to have to deal with them and the field's inherent emotionally charged atmosphere. I'm not looking forward to it either, but that's how the field is. If you're going to argue, don't. If you're looking to counter an argument, couch it in theory.

And (another tidbit of wisdom from the prof training me to be a good academic or both of us will die trying), it's as much about getting along with the cohort as much as it is about getting along with the faculty: you never know who you'll be working for, who you'll be working with, or who'll be hiring you. This isn't an enormous field like English is, so reputation is going to be everything for us. Everything you do now has to be done with that end goal in mind.

Don't compromise your views, no, but remember that you have to think long-term at this point. You got in, now you have to start working towards getting out.

Speaking of God, there is holiness in seeking out commonalities with others, rather than differences.

My experience as the liberal odd duck wasn't in an academic environment, but rather as the extremely liberal girlfriend of a guy with an extremely conservative extended family-- still a lot of pressure, especially since I was staying with all of them during a long vacation. I learned a couple of lessons that might help you weather the significantly longer challenge you're about to face:

1.) Resist the urge to bait others about their beliefs unless you are prepared for the possibility of an argument, ill-will, being humiliated or ostracized, etc. Choose your battles.

2.) If YOU are the one being baited, resist the urge to escalate the interaction. Keep a level-head and express your beliefs with sincerity (not sarcasm); be a good representative of the ideology you espouse.

3.) Be prepared to answer questions, clearly and pleasantly, in case someone is legitimately curious or if you are in a situation where not answering the question (or answering it poorly) would be a mark against you or your beliefs.

4.) Most of the people you meet will believe as firmly in their ideology as you believe in yours. It's taken them years to develop their ideas and sentiments, so don't expect to "convert" people simply because you believe they are mistaken or misguided. Feel free to relish in small victories, but be realistic about your ability to start some sort of revolution on campus.

I'm sure you'll find some other people who run along the same political/social lines as yourself. Even the most conservative campus will have its contingent of outliers. Find some campus groups, have lunch together, do some volunteering-- you'll find your own little pocket of acceptance, and with luck it will get bigger over time.

Please read more carefully. I'm talking about my undergraduate debt. I did not loan anything during my graduate studies. I live off stipends, TA salaries and grants, and use some of that money to make payments towards the private loan.

So you are using your stipend to pay rent and for food? Or is it the case that your stipend is paying off the loan balance and your loans are paying your room and board?

I got what you were trying to say, it was you who missed what I was saying. As such, let me spell it out for you. If you take out a loan during grad. school the gov't has no way of knowing whether or not you are paying your room and board with that particular money or with your stipend. That is, if all the $ ends up in one acc't and then you write checks from it...

I'm not making a big move to go to graduate school: same region, same lifestyles, slightly bigger city, more shopping, still within an hour of my friends and most of my family. The biggest difference will be NOT working at this pizza place to make ends meet.

I will NOT miss standing on my feet, washing my hands 100+ times a night, dealing with hungry customers, always keeping my hair tied back in the same damn bun, never letting my nails grow out, never getting to wear rings or nail polish, wearing those stupid t-shirts, running up and down two flights of stairs just because someone wants an extra 2 ounce cup of ranch dressing, screaming children, drunk a-holes, skeezy bartenders, and coming home every night smelling like pizza pizza pizza.

I know that grad school will come with its own set of drawbacks, including drama and long hours, but after five years of pizza I'm ready for five years of something else.

If you go to community college for financial reasons thats perfectly acceptable, although there is still stigma attached to it because some of the people who are there are those who got such terrible grades that they couldn't get accepted into a 4-year college. Just go and get straight A's, transfer to a 4-year college and they may give you some financial aid or scholarships. If you're grades are really stellar right now that might be a possibility right off the bat, maybe apply to some places and give it a shot, don't sell yourself short. If you end up having to go to community college to start it won't make a huge difference once you get to undergraduate. Grad schools do typically give out full ride scholarships, in the form of tuition remission, assistantships and stipends, but that is usually only if you're going for a PhD. My advice would be to check out some 4-year colleges and see if it's possible to get some financial aid or scholarships from them if you can, then wherever you go make sure you get great grades (above a 3.7 or an A- average) and you'll have a good chance of getting support once you get to the grad level. Good luck!

Considering the agony I seem to remember you going through this season, I'd just go for it now.

You can improve that one aspect, but is admission really guaranteed after that? You'll be up against all of next year's applicants next year, and no one really knows what their applications will look like.

Why even bother applying to other schools if you holding out for just the one?

Settle. The process is just too random for you too bet the farm on any one school. You could do all that extra classwork and have a 'perfect' application, only to discover that the department's funding fell apart or your subfield at that school is over-subscribed or the professor who shares your interests died/retired/relocated or...

As long as your 2nd choice schools have a solid reputation (i.e. you can get a job once you finish) and you are being funded I say go with one of them.

Being in a long distance relationship is actually a lot easier when you are swamped with work. You won't be bored and wondering what he's up to all the time, and you won't be thinking "I wish Johnny were here right now" the way you would be if you were having a fabulous time traveling or living a more relaxed lifestyle.

Skype is really amazing, and makes being apart much easier. Decide on a regular time that will be good for you to talk, with the understanding that social events with real people should sometimes take priority. Also, try not to spend lots of time talking on Skype, because it gets dull pretty quickly and being visibly bored or running out of things to say during a call can be hurtful and aggravating to the person on the other line. Folding laundry or eating something while on the line is fine, but keeping Skype open when you're doing something else that requires mental energy is a bad idea. I dated a guy who didn't understand why I got annoyed that he would play an online game during our conversations. Being on Skype can sometimes feel like having the other person in the room with you, but don't try to make it a replacement for real human presence. Keep the conversations reasonably brief and enjoyable.

For most people, the key to having a long distance relationship that doesn't fizzle out is to have plans for being together in the not-too-distant future. If your boyfriend is planning to stay in Charlotte indefinitely and you are just now starting a PhD program in Indiana, then the absence of any light at the end of the tunnel may weigh quite heavily on your relationship. But, of course, all relationships are different and I fully understand that some people are capable of putting their ideal love lives on hold for extended periods. Just remember, some people stay virgins well into their 20s (or indeed much longer), and there are lots of people who don't date anyone (or have any romantic/sexual experiences) for years at a time. Being in a long distance relationship can be frustrating, but if you were able to handle being a virgin and possibly not having a single boyfriend throughout puberty and adolescence, you can handle not being able to see your boyfriend every day.

Lastly, don't underestimate the importance of handwritten letters and snailmail correspondence!

My boyfriend and I have been together about 4 1/2 years, and about half of that has been long distance (I kept studying abroad, and he kept getting internships far away). He started a PhD program six hours away last year, and I will be meeting up with him to start mine at the same institution in a couple months. I don't feel like our relationship has suffered at all from the time apart, though. I realize everybody's relationship is different, so I don't claim to be an expert on the subject, but I can tell you what worked for us.

1) The single most important thing for us is trust. Being able to trust one another allows both of us to go out and enjoy ourselves with our friends without worrying about what the other is doing. I have some male friends, and he has some female friends, but neither of us goes on crazy jealous rampages about it. Having a solid trusting foundation allows you to both live healthy separate lives without the added stress of worrying about what your SO is doing without you.

2) We text. A lot. Usually, we're both so busy, and neither of us has been doing much interesting stuff, that we really can't sustain really long phone conversations all the time. We figured out that what we really missed, though, was the exchange of small comments, jokes, and observations throughout the day. Thus, whenever we observe or think of something we want to share with one another, we text. It's a great way to still share the little things and witty comments throughout the day without really interrupting the other person or trying to start a whole conversation about nothing.

3) We set both ideal and realistic plans for visiting. We realistically figure that we can see each other every six weeks. We make sure that happens. Sometimes we have to work our asses off in advance to free up a whole weekend, but there is enough notice that we always manage to pull it off. Then there is the ideal visit schedule. Ideally, we would like to see each other every two weeks. This usually does not happen. If we're lucky enough to have the time free, we do it, but if not, it's no big deal. Extra visits are icing on the cake, and they only happen when we both can manage to take the time off from whatever we're doing. They are a special treat, and we don't usually know for sure if they will happen until the day one of us is to travel. We find that the scheduled visits make sure that we do actually see each other, and the extra visits add some spontaneity and excitement. Oh, and we try to alternate which person makes the trip.

4) Have a plan for getting back together again, even if it's a long way off. As previously mentioned, that light at the end of the tunnel can be important. You can do everything right, trusting one another, keeping in contact, visiting, etc., but after a few months or years, it might get pretty hard to continue to put your love life on hold and ignore the other fish in the sea if you have no idea when, if ever, you'll permanently be in the same state as your fish.

Sorry this has been so long. I just wanted to share the key things that my boyfriend and I have found that helped us successfully navigate a LDR. We have found the relationship to be very satisfying, despite the distance. Hopefully this info is of some help to somebody here.

Disclaimer: YMMV

My boyfriend and I have been long distance for the past year, we see each other 1 weekend a month. Here's what I've found works:

Skype, no pesky long distance bills, plus some face to face time every day. Sure you are going to be busy but you will take time to eat or fold laundry just do it in front of the computer.

Plan visits in advance so you have something to look forward to.

Make the most of the time you have, which means getting enough work done in advance to enjoy the time you have together.

Have active stuff to do together as well as time to sit around and do nothing.

The biggest thing is communication, be willing to talk if there's problems, it's too easy to ignore things when you don't have to face the person every day.