Strong Flat White

I love danieleWrites way of describing the age gap...I relate to some degree. I took a course in hip hop poetics which for me meant some exciting prospects concerning Run DMC; for my classmates it was Immortal Technique. I vividly remember the Berlin Wall coming down several years before most of them were born! I didn't see Star Wars in the theatre but I did see The Princess Bride in the theatre. For me personally it's much to my advantage having waited to enter literature. So I'm 33 w/ a partner and 2 kids, another masters degree from another life, some semblance of a "career under my belt" (to use lisajay's terms), and not likely to be able to apply for PhD programs until the Fall 2016 intake...which will put me at 36 and all that other stuff at (hopefully) the time of acceptance, and closer to early or mid-forties by time of graduation. This couldn't have happened at a better time in my life. Much younger, I'd not know myself as I do now and I don't think I'd be as passionate about this new direction in my life (nor as good at it); much older and I start to have the anxieties that everyone seems to have voiced here already...although, as far as that goes, I do get a kick out of hearing those anxieties come out of a 20-something year-old mouth. The idea that you're supposed to be making a certain amount of money by a certain age strikes me as unhelpful at best, pretty destructive at worst, so long as we're all acknowledging the basic financial realities and so forth. Do what you gotta do!

Lol, I am amused that my post was taken for some kind of analogy or set of statistics to be taken seriously, really more of a hopefully colorful attempt to describe my feelings in light of how people tend to discuss luck and merit. Because when I hear about odds and I think about the process -- that is, when I try to mentally picture my application (however good) on a desk among the hundreds of others -- this actually is how I feel, however irrational or incomporable or whatever. I didn't offer it up as analysis nor as something to be analyzed, but rather in the good faith that people tend to share feelings of anxiety, and thus in an attempt to relate to anyone willing to relate along these lines. The sentence "someone has to get into these programs, just like someone has to win the lottery" might not make sense to you, Two Espressos, girl who wears glasses, and if you don't relate to these feelings, I get it, because that also makes sense. You're both absolutely right, of course, but somehow that doesn't change how I feel when I picture my application in that huge stack of other applications...so, it still makes sense to me, and I don't think I'm alone. And if I am, that's fine, too. As the length of my original post indicates, I was admittedly struggling to articulate these feelings effectively, and I still do (struggle, that is). It might not worth the discussion, but I thought I'd toss it out there. I will add, however, that this ineffective attempt of mine to articulate a feeling of being unable to imagine the successful-application scenario doesn't - weirdly enough - translate to my unwillingness to or lack of confidence to apply, so somewhere deep inside I guess I actually agree w/ the merit-side of the debate. I didn't want to phrase it in these terms (because it seems like so much negative energy), but perhaps it will help clarify what I'm getting at: imagining rejections is just oh so much easier than imagining acceptances, and this remains a fact for me even though I believe in my own merit. Does that suit your statistical analysis?

I'm glad someone wrote this, because I actually won't be applying until it's time for Fall 2016 applications, but I would have felt silly making the "Fall 2016 Applicants" thread...even though it is honest, and I wouldn't mind conversing with others whose projected application cycles are way out there like mine. How many others are gearing up for application cycles for '15 or '16 (or beyond)?

Nice. I couldn't agree more...but I also read things like this and (hopefully I'm not the only one), I can't help but wonder - fascinatedly! - how anyone ever gets accepted anywhere! What would the voice of reason say to this sort of reaction? Like, if I know that I've got some talent and that I could put together a decent application, yet I can't realistically imagine being accepted somewhere, what do you say? All the correct things sound kind of lame in light of this tripartite reality check, don't they? Or is that a lack of perspective? [As I write this, Two Espressos writes in with what is potentially an optimistic answer to this dilemma, but even so, I remain first of all persuaded by ComeBackZinc and second of all unpersuaded by Two Espressos, because here's the deal: Two Espressos (congratulations, by the way!) is this other person who got in...we all know that other people get in, we just don't know how to relate to those other people because we're not them, we don't know them, etc. - at best, we only hear about them, and we try to use that as a basis for rationalizing the process!] I hope that I'm speaking for more than my own insular perspective, here. I'm not trying to fish for enouragement. Truly. I am genuinely perplexed as to how to think of what would appear to be an impossible process, and I genuinely mean this from what ComeBackZinc is calling an "emotionally detached" standpoint. I am, weirdly and unemotionally, more amused or bewildered than I am scared or depressed or whatever. Just as weirdly, it doesn't keep me from wanting to apply, and to apply ambitiously. I have no idea what to make of this, nor how to reconcile it, but the fact remains that the scenario of my future acceptance somewhere seems so at odds with...well, the odds...that, even though I know that ComeBackZinc's #1, with which Two Espressos disagrees, isn't exactly the same as "the process is pure randomness" (because it's obviously not), I nevertheless get the feeling that I might as well be playing a lottery. It's a problem to do with my imagination, I guess. Having no interest in lotteries (on the same grounds; I am literally unable to imagine winning the lottery), wherefore my interest in my applications? Is there a part of myself that truly believes that some of my merit will count for something? If so, this is even more peculiar. It would suggest that a part of myself is wholly unaware of another part of myself. Or maybe another way of putting it: Hearing of Two Espressos acceptance is similar to seeing the random dude on the news who won the lottery. My imagination makes no distinction. No offense, Two Espressos - like ComeBackZinc I'm in no way suggesting that you aren't fully deserving - but the difference between you and randomness simply doesn't compute in my brain that is all too aware of the odds. I mean, someone has to get into these programs, just like someone has to win the lottery! So what is wrong with my brain and/or my imagination? Do tell!

It sounds like you were to some degree unwitting, BernardJOrtcutt! I appreciate the elaboration of your previous comments, and while I'm pretty happy to just sorta concede not having any clue about the philosophical world (hence my questions!), I do have a clue about the language of darkness and OOO. Your sarcasm notwithstanding, I repeat: it is interesting that you mention the "dark side." More so, now, actually. The darkside of objects is given special treatment by Graham Harman, at least...so even if you didn't intend a double-entendre, there it is.

It's interesting that you called it the "dark side." I just saw a keynote speech at an OOO-themed conference in which Timothy Morton merged 2 Pink Floyd album titles and gave us "The Darkside of the Household Object." I love the rhetoric of darkness surrounding this (sub)field. And - as for just calling it analytic philosophy, I was kind of gravitating that way...or, to put it another way, I had the thought that there is a sense in which ontology is object-oriented by definition, making something of a tautology out of "OOO." Still, you say it's awesome, and my theoretical headspace at this exact moment in time is quite ready to agree with you. But, cool to get some philosophers' views, thank you both, blumenbergian and BernardJ! I guess my follow-up would simply be, what of posthumanism, then, in philosophy? Does this fall under the same rubric? I am seeing OOO as an extension of posthumanism, but I also realize I'm insulated.

Close cousin (or maybe overlapping sibling?) to the posthumanism debates is some OOO, which I've been excited about and posting on the English threads, too...and yeah, I've actually been curious to know how OOO is received on the more philosophical side of things (as opposed to the lit theory side of things), so thanks for getting the ball rolling, Bennett!

Or you might get much! FAFSA dispersements and awards are in large part determined by your unique circumstances. As a dad of 2 kids w/ a wife also in school, we get all kinds of FAFSA...but it does help to apply earlier rather than later, as many institutions dole out their grants for people like me on a rolling basis. Procrastination could cost you thousands of dollars. Good luck!

"Modeling Texts In and Out of History" - did you attend that? I gave the "Artificial Human" paper. Well! As for the conference as a whole and Timothy Morton and Bruce Holsinger, I have nothing but amazing things to say. Truly. I have to admit that there is always a bit of wariness surrounding "grad conferences," at least where I come from (we've all been indoctrinated by Semenza's How to be a grad student in the 21st Century, and he writes that grad conferences are good experience to do once, but I think that is based on the assumption that it is less rigorous, less well-organized, and less headily focused than this one). Conferencing, as a matter of professionalization, is "one of those things." However, this one was (to me anyway) way more than one of those things, and I believe it was a true enhancement of my scholarly development and not mere "professionalization" on paper. I was blown away by the cohesion of the panels, the quality of the papers, the engagement of the participants, the friendliness of the UVa-ers, the genuine accessiblity and thoughtfulness and investment by T. Morton...all of it. In these respects, I got so much more out of the whole experience than the Rocky Mountain MLA last fall, and I'm serious when I say that OOO is going on my list of interests and that I'm now reading through that lens without being able to help it. As for Timothy Morton's keynote, I for one was impressed. And I'm not easily impressed (when, recently, I did a book review of Neil Lazarus' The Postcolonial Unconscious a classmate reviewing the same book - and who thought it was the best thing since sliced bread - asked me how I liked it...meh, possibly a topic for another thread, but point is I am a hard sell). But his talk, entitled "The Dark Side of the Household Object" (a merging of 2 Pink Floyd album titles) was a great introductory to OOO with the emphasis on a perfectly-working machine (and the scariness/disturbingness that comes with that perfection) being a very scary thing for human beings precisely because it suggests that machines might have some agency in "disturbing" the frequencies of things. That is, the "human-driven copy right" (as he called it) on disturbing the vibrations of those "weird loops" (all things - human and object - are weird loops akin to a mobius strip; totally devoid of a dotted line indicating where one thing begins and ends in relation to its plane of existence) is brought into question. Scary if your hierarchy puts human subjects above objects/things. Less scary if you can accept it. Some great Q&A afterward, too. Some very special insights and discussions happening all weekend long (and, as I say, still going as I continue my own readings). Time to get on Amazon and buy up some Morton books. And...I guess...to add Rice to my list of schools to apply to for PhD! Would love to hear others' thoughts in a sort of conference debrief. And a shout out to delimitude - your panel was one of my faves. I want to respect everyone's privacy (even though by announcing my panel and paper I've left myself pretty wide open), so I won't try to guess your panel (and hence your identity) in the open, here, but perhaps we can use this as the start of private conversations about our ongoing work, whether it be a continuation of OOO or just any overlapping interests. Thanks, all. Good stuff.

My BA is in international affairs. Then I got a masters in international affairs, and when PhD apps for int'l affairs didn't go well, I did the whole "what am I going to do with my life" thing, and got into an English masters program. My experiences and insights with this? Best decision of my life. The English part, that is.

so cool...mine is under the panel of "Modeling Texts In and Out of History." Here I come, Virginia!

SuhWEEEEET! I'll be going through the schedule tonight to make my hit list. I'll be sure to keep a look out for your panel topic. I can't remember what mine is called but I'll double-check tonight and come back to post it...

ok, thanks to you both, christakins and pinkrobot. It sounds like, what I'm gathering from these replies, is that there's a good amount of interest in Timothy Morton-style posthumanism, so mayhaps I shall take good notes and owe everyone a good synopsis of how things went upon my return. That said, I'd still like the insider's take on UVa b/c I'm somewhat fascinated by their program, and hey, I'm gonna be there in a couple of days! So, posthumanists unite, and UVa-ers, I'd love to meet you!

duly noted, thanks.

cool, well it's all good. I'm not applying this season, still finishing up an MA and probably won't be able to apply for a while since my wife is going into a 3 year PA program. I'm hoping to teach high school in the meantime (with a very strong lead and even a job interview this week). as for the posthumanism...exciting. We'd probably really enjoy each other's writing. And yeah - when I saw this conference, I was all over it. Looking forward to Timothy Morton's keynote speech. The regional MLAs rock. I went to the Rocky Mountain MLA last fall and it has resulted in my first publication, so I send good vibes to the NeMLA. Speaking of, what's your paper on more specifically?

I'll be attending this upcoming grad conference (March 22-24) at the University of Virginia and wondering whether any other Grad Cafe users are either at Charlottesville as grad students and/or attending the conference? Given the conference's title and focus, I'm just kind of assuming that any responders will automatically be speakin' my language, and we'll be in business! But specifically, I'd be curious to know whether anyone else is interested in doing some quick pre-presentation workshopping slash whether anyone can direct me to the highlights of Charlottesville. I'll be getting in on Thursday night and staying at a hostel that I think is a mile or two from campus. I need guidance to the best coffee shops around so's I can get my writing on! I'd also like the skinny on UVa's program, but I realize that's asking for insider informtation. Which is exactly what I'm doing, yes. Thanks in advance to anyone out there.

So...this. I am a current MA at CU and I can maybe clarify the whole funding thing a bit. The program does make every effort to hook up its MA's with TAships, but these amount to tuition remission and are semester-by-semester, usually after the first year. I understand the confusion, though, b/c being a staff member and longtime part of the CU community, I'd stop in all the time and do my business on campus. Well, one day after my MA acceptance I swung by to inquire about "funding," and was told, "no, there's no funding for MA's." Just purely matter of factly. So, if a TAship here and there to cover tuition does it for you, then yes, you might get "funding." If you see funding as a stipend kinda deal, then no, CU does not offer this to its MA's. I am at a total loss as to why they have you "apply for funding" and evidently communicate the way they do about "funding" because I was told point blank it doesn't exist. Not to be a downer, but hopefully this clarifies a bit?

Well you certainly have my attention! Like so many recommended books, I'll have to earmark this one for summer. I don't see a "phenomenally difficult" and unrequired read fitting into this already packed and too-tight semester, but I always enjoy seeing what shoots to the top of the list, and how. And this is a cool way for it to happen.

Lattes and cappuccinos are a difference of degree, not kind. Technically "no foam" - as in, none at all - wouldn't be even a latte. It would be naked espresso awaiting its milk. A latte done right (what the Kiwis call a "strong flat white") has a very silky textured foam to it, it just doesn't dome over. This is assuming, of course, that when you steam your milk, you then call it "foam." Of course, you could simply call it something else - "steamed milk" / "less foamy foam" - in which case you have a semantic case to be made that "a no-foam cappuccino is just a latte." Except that it's not. Because to make the latte into a cappa, you just keep pouring the same steamed substance on top until it's bigger and whiter. And, of course, therefore inferior. For a fantastic read involving a hilarious anti-coffee character, I recommend Mark Helprin's Memoir from Antproof Case.

If that's true (about Rainbow), then it's next on my list...Absalom rocks. Your modest qualification notwithstanding, thestage, I'd love to hear why you think so (I'm assuming you're a fan of Absalom; my maybe best paper is on this one, proclaimed by Faulkner himself the greatest American novel since Moby-Dick, and whether that's true or not, what's amazing is that it's not crazy to say or consider...definitely in the conversation).

this looks effing great. how does one get one's school to sponsor one, hypothetically?

Po-co and 50's Poetry. 2, just 2. After semester after semester of taking 3+ classes, I finally figured it out. 2, man, 2! I've also got kids (a 3 year old and a 9 month old) and 2 jobs and...fuggetaboutit. BUT...also tutoring undergrads in Masterpieces of American Lit, Women's Lit, and Writing and Rhetoric!

I won't jump in on the whole theory/method thing here except to say it sounds (to me) like oferlanger is looking for an application of theory qua method, more or less. oferlanger? In any case, a couple of obscure gems I like are Christina Foust's _Transgression as a Mode of Resistance: Rethinking social Movement in an Era of Corporate Globalization_ and Rachel Riedner and Kevin Mahoney's _Democracies to Come: Rhetorical Action, Neoliberalism, and Communities of Resistance_. Both approach political rhetoric from the Communications department, I guess you could say, and specifically, they critique the rhetoric of a political landscape characterized by Hardt and Negri's _Empire_, which is what got me into these theorists. I had a project going where I linked Hardt and Negri to Kairos as a rhetorical technique even though they're not explicit about it in their work (although Negri, solo, is elsewhere, notably _Time for Revolution_). The common rhetorical ground for all of these would be the rhetoric of resistance, which first assumes a rhetoric of power, which is what it sounds like you're looking for. And they all do some kind of Marxist-Nietzchean fusion, with Marx as the explanation of power and Nietzche as the blend of kairotic affect to combat that power. Fun stuff.

Myself and a bit of my cohort came into my program with a polisci background, and it's generally seen as a kind of value-added/supplemental advantage. The card up our collective sleeve being that of course all lit can be analyzed/theorized politically. But, then, I'm not in a funded program, either, and as for lit MA's, funding is pretty much a flip of the coin, at least insofar as it corresponds to prestige/placement/general-goodness-of-program kind of stuff. Personally, the switch from poli sci to English lit was a methodological switch from social sciences to humanities, a switch that I take to heart. Kindly discard those data sets, behavioralism, and empiricism, and come on over to where the water's fine.

In my program, profs and students alike are generally covered in tattoos, piercings, etc. You're borderline out-of-place without'em. You study literature, right?