Branwen daughter of Llyr

I'm applying again next year - and am technically already working towards that (researching more schools, mulling over SoP, focusing research interests, starting to mull over writing sample that needs to be expanded and improved, etc.), but I would like that low-level limbo to just GO AWAY. Once in a while I catch myself thinking - OMG, what if I DO get in this year? I just got new job (since I was pretty sure that grad school would be postponed for a year), two new students (ditto), have loads of shit to get together (financial mess), HOW WILL I DO IT?? - But on the other hand, if you get into ANY of the schools I applied to, you just don't say no, do you?? So I want those rejections. since I can't see myself turning Yale down. EVER. (But I doubt they would take me this year. So why make me suffer? Why not send out the rejection already?) *sigh*

I'm just hoping those rejections come soon. I mean, come ON - I KNOW I'm not getting in this year, why keep me in suspense???? Hurrah March!!

LOL!! :lol:

Harold Bloom's Shakespeare: The Invention of the Human was a HUGE bestseller. Things like that give me a lot of hope.

I might be overly optimistic, but I have a feeling that all that is going to change at some point. With so many specializations out there, I think that SOMEONE will finally realize that funding is important for more than the sciences (not that it's not important for the sciences, mind you...). Liberal Arts have always been the cornerstone of western education, ever since the middle ages (as us medievalists know) - the term was even coined in the Paris University, sometime in the 13th century, I think (I read that somewhere not long ago). With the explosion of mass communication, writing and rhetoric well will become more and more important, even for sciences and social sciences, causing a rise in English / Writing requirements. After all, if you are a brilliant scientist, but no one can understand your paper, how on earth are you going to get additional funding for your research?? I do know what you mean, however, and as stated before, I really hope it will change. I think it's a shame that we're losing our grip on the liberal arts in general - since those are the arts that help us, as humans, analyze, formulate arguments, write, and enter discussions in a community of thinkers. I'm seriously hoping that our star will rise again!

We are SO NOT second class citizens!! Quite the opposite!! It takes profs extra long to go through our applications because there is SO much to factor in!! - Think about it - past the numbers cutoff it's all soooo subjective - fit, writing abilities, SOP, LoR's... The fact that it takes a while actually makes me feel more confident that they're actually READING our apps rather than just playing eeny-meeny-miney-moe with them... And about your prof friend. Hopefully once the economy improves somewhat, tenure jobs will start coming back (by the time we all graduate, you think?)

Thank you for stating that so clearly!! See - this is why I can't wait to go to grad school. Yummy discussion at 1:30 am (well, it is here) about critical theory and why it's important to be a part of current discourse. @ hadunc, indeed you are right about the rules - even Picasso knew that to break the rules, you first have to know them VERY well (and boy did he break them to cubic little pieces).

If I was only planning on being a novelist, I wouldn't be going to grad school, now would I???? (the "only" is not derogatory. I mean "only" in the sense as the one thing i was planning to do. Since i also want to research and teach and publish academically, as well as write fiction, a PhD is somewhat of a prerequisite).

If you would have stated your opinion in the way you just did from the beginning, this would have been a completely different discussion. However, your attitude was that conferences were "boring and petty" that criticism was "defunct" that people were "bored with literature." Of course I don't want my work to be like anyone else's. I want it to be unique and MINE. But critical theory can help - sometimes an additional angle can give you some unexpected insights into a literary piece. And trust me, I'm not much of a fan of a lot of critical theory - I'm much more interested in personal interpretation, close reading, some narrative theory, and a whole lot of Jungian "myth" criticism. I also, belong to an "older" time, I adore Harold Bloom, and most of my papers from college aren't chock-filled with Fucault, or any other theorist for that matter (barring my honors thesis, which actually includes some critical theory regarding carnivalesque space, applied to children's literature). However, I would NOT disparage the current theoretical community by calling it "boring and petty." As I stated, yes, some is mediocre, as in every profession. But I look forward to going to conferences and hearing other people's work, as well as presenting my own. I look forward to having other brilliant people try to punch holes through my arguments. I look forward to hearing a new critical approach that I might be able to apply to my own, unique work, and hopefully contribute to the general discussion. Intellectual apparatus? I don't have any. I haven't gone to a conference in my entire life, nor published a paper. I graduated in 2001 with honors from a good program in a tier-3 school, and I was lucky enough to have profs that FORCED me to think critically about a piece rather than just gush about it. Searching for sub-text and "what the author means" is also criticism, remember. Figuring out cultural influences of the time, placing a literary piece in context, discussing how certain words were chosen to express an idea - all this is CRITICAL THINKING. It doesn't mean you have to "conform" to what other people are doing. Trust me - I have no intention of teaching my future students to read The Cantebury Tales in queer theory. Not my thing. But to write a dissertation, you can't work in a vacuum of "text only". If you're not interested in deconstruction, structuralism, queer, gender, marxist, or any of those, work with reader response. work with new criticism. work with new historicism. Support your argument by using other critical thinkers' ideas as well, and how they can apply to the text you are working on. But to reiterate - if you had written about things the way you did in the above post from the beginning, I doubt you would have been jumped at so strongly. It's not about everyone doing the same thing - it is, however, about respecting each other as a community of thinkers, and respecting other people's approaches. After all, there is no one truth regarding literature (as you yourself stated), and I've often said that I can prove that Shakespeare was anti-semetic as well as proving that he loved Jews from The Merchant of Venice. And if you don't want to publish, don't . however, this means you'll NEVER be a full prof. Unfortunately, those are the rules of the game.

To quote bigger and better minds than mine: "It ain't over 'till the fat lady sings."

B) Thanx - I've heard the same, so am also beefing up on critical theory. But, after 9 years out of school, my identification kind of sucks. I have to re-read most of the major modern poets (to at least recognize their style), and review a lot of the older stuff I've forgotten over the years. So weekends I read criticism, and during the week I read literature. Criticism, however, does not move me to tears hahahaha!

As some of you may know (and if not, you know now...), I'm currently studying my ass off for the Subject GRE in April. So today, during a particularly slow afternoon/evening in the store I work in, I was sitting and answering Princeton's mock exam, my Norton Anthology of English literature vol. 1 besides me (as was the Penguin dictionary of literary terms). After surprising myself and answering quite a few questions correctly, I was finally done (after two days) with the exam, and started looking at their recommended reading list. Immensely enjoyed reading Marlowe's The Passionate Shepherd to his Love again (it's been a while), and then moved on to their next recommendation. and oh boy. As I sat reading Ben Jonson's To the Memory of My Beloved, The Author, Mr. William Shakespeare, and What He Hath Left Us, I started crying. Not figuratively. Real tears were running down my cheeks, and I got all sniffly. Now, I've read this poem before. A few times, even. But it's been a while, and I was surprised by how very moved I was returning to it. So there I sat, sniffing and tears running down my face, from a poem, in the middle of a store (well, actually hiding behind the cash register), my heart feeling like it was going to burst. So if anyone was wondering why I'm applying to grad school - I think this is the answer. Ben Jonson can move me to tears. Shakespeare can arouse every single human emotion in my body and soul. As can Chaucer. As can John Donne and Jane Austen. Cosgrove can make me roll on the floor with laughter, Swift makes me laugh, and think, and puzzle, and.... 'nuff said, no?

I love Tom Stoppard. And yes, I agree. I do wish that the whole "Useful" to society thing would be dropped. The guy who sweeps roads in NYC is just as useful as a medical doctor (I mean, who wants to live in a litter-infested city?), and as rat-catchers were useful in the Middle-Ages. And that didn't require PhD's. Although... do you think that when the universities were founded in Paris / Oxford, they included "Rat-Catching" studies?? hmm. EVERYTHING IS USEFUL. Yes, even Lute playing.

One more point: Ummm... the reason we spend so much time writing and talking about literature is because we love it so much. Trust me, there is no way in hell I would be considering a PhD in the study of literature if certain texts didn't bring me to near orgasm . I've read Austen's books so many times, it ludicrous. And I'd STILL take an Austen class for critical thinking at the drop of a hat, despite being a medievalist. And of course I read literature and ponder it. But then I share my ideas with the rest of the world, and take in their ideas as well. And their ideas build /focus / alter my understanding of any piece. *blush* thanks

A few things - You are banking on the wrong idea for university level teaching. It may be enough to teach high-school - teaching students to appreciate literature is wonderful, indeed. But teaching college level is about much more than that - teaching students to think and write critically about literature. So they may LOVE Gullievers Travels, but can they analyze it? can the student think critically about it and apply critical methodology to it? Personally the appreciation of literature is something completely different than the study of literature. And I wouldn't lose either. Critical work is important, since it is part of the global discussion on literary topics. If you don't enjoy the theory part - don't pursue a PhD. seriously. You can't get away with just close reading in graduate school. And even in your own way, you ARE pursuing criticism - of the "reader response" variety. Conferences are wonderful opportunities to hear other people's research and ideas (opportunities I wish I currently had the privilege to attend), to get that lightblub over your head saying "oh my god, I can actually use this in my own work," or "I never thought of this before." And of course there is mediocre work. There is mediocre work in every single field. We're lucky in English, however, that often, that mediocre work provides a huge amount of discussion and development - take this as an example: 17th and 18th century adaptations of Shakespeare's plays were often undoubtedly mediocre. However, due to those adaptations, we NEVER lost Shakespeare as a culture! His work wasn't lost and then discovered. And these adaptations also create a wealth of scholarship in themselves - how does a particular adaptation reflect on the attitudes and social mores of the time? Why did this writer change this to that or that to this? How is this culturally significant? You're treating literature as existing in a vacum, when it doesn't. Literature is connected to local culture, history, readership, psychology, conventions, innovations, and just about everything else. Yes, the enjoyment of literature is paramount to those of us who wish to spend our lives exploring it at a deep level and exchanging ideas with other scholars. But if I only wanted to teach high-school level English and the appreciation of literature (which is a wonderful thing), I would go get my MAT and teach at a good high-school with a progressive English program. I most DEFINITELY would NOT pursue a PhD.

Well, the introduction and first chapter of my thesis are quite good - I'm just terribly worried that the second chapter (the one that's only a draft, with the final version missing) would have been the better one to send off (as it contains the conclusion, re-stating the thesis, and the strongest indications of Welsh magic). Ho hum. I just found an 8 pager narrative development paper on History of the Kings of Britain, Brut, and The Alliterative Morte Arthure. Easy to expand and insert some theory in certain sections and create a stronger thesis. I'll figure this out in the end. somehow. AAAAAAAAAAAGH!!!!

I have no intention of applying to 20 schools!! (I don't think woolfie does either) 20-22 schools is the long list. it will be significantly narrowed down come applications - to somewhere around 10-12. And that's not by fishing - there are a LOT of great programs out there for medieval - it's just a matter of finding the best fitting 12 and applying.

I just got an utter giggle fit from that!! I've heard some ppl say that they got an acceptance in a thin envelope. However, each school may do things differently. (Also, when Rory and Paris were opening up Paris' grad school letters in Gilmore Girls they were all acceptances in small envelopes. See, THIS is my reference point. Gilmore Girls. I also think that's why I'm so obsessed about Yale hahahahahahaha)

I actually came to the conclusion that it's for the best - waiting the extra year. I'll be applying to schools with a better fit, I have time to re-write my writing sample (or rather, expand a terrific paper), focus my SOP, and I'm signing up for a Latin class to get a head start on my languages. Also, it gives me time to save up some money and actually be able to afford the plane tickets (for myself and my furry family) back to the states to start grad school, sort out my defaulted student loans from undergrad (very easy to default when you DON'T live in the US), as well as be able to buy an old car, a new laptop, and perhaps even a bed and a sofa hahaha. But no, it's not weird. It's called thinking ahead. Although I have been driving my mother insane - she gets a call every other day that goes something like this : "OH MY GOD, I found this AMAZING Arthurian scholar that teaches at so-and-so university, and I HAVE TO GO THERE." So I'm either talking about researching schools, or what I'm currently studying for the subject GRE - "I recognized a Spenserian Stanza!!" or "I REALLY need to buy this other book." *sigh*. No, you are not alone in the madness.

AWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW. That sux. I was really rooting for my friends here to get in!! (and don't all grad school acceptances come in a thin envelope as well?)

Sometimes, how you say something makes all the difference. And although content and style aren't completely interrelated, very often, being a tad more empathetic with people that have trouble with this stupid horrible test can go a long way in getting your point across. In many ways, I agree with you - the GRE is with us to stay and we have to suck it up and ace the damn thing. But, some people just need to complain about it. And that's fine. They let off steam. some people hope it won't matter. That's fine, as well. How a response is phrased to reply to these issues with the GRE is completely up to you, of course. Personally, I don't have a problem with WHAT you say. Just sometimes, HOW you choose to say it can be.... problematic, and is probably why so many people get angry at you. I don't know if you care about it (ppl getting angry at you), but if you do, there are many ways to handle a debate without reaching the levels of annoyance that you've gotten on this forum. Just a small insight.

I only applied to four, none of which I expect to get into this year. I now have a 22 school list (and growing) that will eventually narrow down to 12-14 for the 2011 app round. For which I will be much better prepared. And for which I have NO DOUBT I'll get in. And yes - even knowing I'm not getting in, I wish they'd send those damn rejections already. humph.

Returning to the ORIGINAL post: Listen, I'm not an expert on this. I don't claim to be, and I don't particularly WANT to be. Now that the disclaimer is out of the way: Although an English dept may accept you despite low GRE's (and everyone agrees that for the top-twenty, scoring in the 90th percentile and above is recommended, if above 700V - you've definitely crossed the slushpile bar) due to a stellar GPA, writing sample, SOP, and LORs, you MIGHT have problems with fellowships / TAships. Many universities HAVE to take into account the total GRE score (as strokeofmidnight said before me) to approve funding for candidates. And since (unfortunately or not, not up to me to say), a lot of funding options depend on GRE scores. And since Universities are scrambling for fellowship money, they want to present the most attractive candidates (this is quoted directly from my father, a tenured prof at Brown - although not in the Humanities - but funding is funding is funding, just about anywhere). If you're applying to top-twenty programs, the competition this year is SO tough, and SO many qualified, amazingly smart applicants are in the pool - well, I don't know. I'm not saying it's impossible, but I wouldn't hold my breath. I applied this year with an initial score of 600V / 560Q. I realized very quickly that I most likely WON'T get in to the 4 programs I applied to. Especially since I totally missed the november subject GRE (I decided to apply too late to register for it). So I went and did the silly test again, and registered for the April subject test. I improved scores significantly, and will be applying again next year, confident that at least my app won't be thrown away in the initial sorting. I recommend that you do the same. The GRE, as crappy as it is, is NOT impossible to prepare for. My scores this time around were much higher than the first time, with only 4 weeks of studying, and were also MUCH higher than the GRE I took right out of college. If you want above a 700 in the verbal (NOT impossible), crack down and study vocab. READ. LOADS. Read The Economist, Scientific American, read books with advanced vocabulary that uses obscure meanings. Take your dictionary EVERYWHERE. Get the prep books. To improve the math - hrm - I'd say go back and practice. However - DO NOT rely on just good GRE scores to get in. Make sure your writing sample and SOP are superb and focused. Make sure your recommendations are excellent. Good luck!!

I think I saw that too... but I can't be sure. Yet another one I'm just waiting to hear from already.

wahoo!!! found it used for $7. (may the divine bless betterworldbooks.com).