foppery

<br style="text-shadow: none;"><br style="text-shadow: none;">I second this. If there's one thing I learned during my application season, it's that if your application is good, no one will care whether you submit a PDF or a .doc (or any number of trivial things); and if you're not a good fit for the department, no amount of reformatting will alter your chances. STOP WORRYING. It's bad for the health. Some departments don't even care whether they get your GRE scores on time, let alone whether you convert all your documents into PDFs. <br style="text-shadow: none;">

<br style="text-shadow: none;"><br style="text-shadow: none;">No, that sounds fine! My own approach to literature is much more historical than theoretical, so I didn't feel the need to mention any scholar in particular. But if you're planning to use specific theories in your future research, mentioning your favorite proponents of those theories seems like the way to go. <br style="text-shadow: none;">

Since I'm not an -ist of any kind (I did go through an unfortunate deconstructionist phase in college, but the less said about that the better), I didn't mention a single critic in my SOP. I don't think you need to name-drop unless you feel a strong allegiance to a particular theoretical approach, or unless a specific critic has had a major influence on your work. Otherwise, save the name-dropping for your writing sample. <br style="text-shadow: none;">

In my current cohort of 13, only three students have MAs. So, yes, I would agree that admission standards are higher for MAs - but I'd also say that if you have an MA *and* a clearly defined plan of study, your graduate degree won't hold you back. Essentially, my advice is that if you're already a solid candidate with a BA, you might as well apply to PhD programs; but if your undergraduate record isn't what it could be, or if you're not certain that graduate work is for you, you should apply to MA programs. (By the way, it's true that applying with only a BA allows you more freedom - I know someone who applied to do Renaissance lit and submitted a writing sample on Samuel Beckett. Obviously this was a risky approach, but he got into several great programs.) <br style="text-shadow: none;">

<br style="text-shadow: none;"><br style="text-shadow: none;">I can tell you, with no shame at all, that I got a 6 for two formulaic, uninspired essays that followed the format set out in my Princeton Review book. I don't even remember what my prompts were (though I do remember being so anxious that I nearly ran out of the testing center), but I am living, breathing evidence that ETS isn't looking for originality. Since Medievalmaniac and I got the same score for what seem to have been very different essay styles, I can only imagine that the scoring is very arbitrary, and based perhaps on length and coherence more than ideas. <br style="text-shadow: none;">

I got in the first time around, and so did most people I know (not to sound bitchy; that was just my experience). <br style="text-shadow: none;"><br style="text-shadow: none;"><br style="text-shadow: none;">

<br style="text-shadow: none;"> Yes, but a five-year stipend does allow you to wait out the recession (or at least part of it). <br style="text-shadow: none;"><br style="text-shadow: none;">

The question is, how much time do you think you'll need to spend studying in order to get a score over 600? 580 is close enough to 600 that you probably won't need to study *too* hard, and luck is such a big component of the GRE that you might even score higher the second time around. (Frankly, you might score higher if you took it tomorrow, with no extra studying.) I took the November subject test and it got to my programs in time, so I don't think that will be too much of an issue. And if you report your scores in time, your schools probably won't care if the official scores take a while to arrive. I'm not sure what kind of score is attractive to the schools you listed, but I would advise you to retake the GRE--that is, if you don't have to devote 12 hours a day to studying. My philosophy is, if you have a chance to make your application better, why not take that chance? <br style="text-shadow: none;">

<br style="text-shadow: none;"><br style="text-shadow: none;">Ditto. As always, my advice is this: If a certain prof is capable of answering a question that *you* can't answer by looking around the website (e.g. "Are you still working on X, the topic of your latest book?"), go ahead and write. But don't bother if your email is going to be along the lines of "Hi, just wanted to let you know I'm applying, please accept me."<br style="text-shadow: none;">

I'm certainly willing to take back my advice; I didn't mention specific professors, and I was successful in my applications, but I realize that many other people have applied to programs in a totally different way. What this *should* prove, above all, is that no one detail is going to make or break your application!<br style="text-shadow: none;">

<br style="text-shadow: none;"><br style="text-shadow: none;">As I've noted before on this forum, my adviser told me not to mention specific professors in my SOP. I know other people here disagree with this advice, but I think it's sound: the professors decide whether *your* interests correspond with *theirs*, not vice versa. A statement like "Professor X works on subjectivity, which I discuss at length in my thesis" sounds a little presumptuous. No matter what work you've done on subjectivity, your potential professors have probably done more thinking and research (no offense intended, but they do have more scholarly experience than you). That said: If you know that Professor X studies subjectivity, you might find a way to mention it in your SOP *without* mentioning Professor X. Under no circumstances, though, should you misrepresent or grossly exaggerate your actual interests. That will do you no favors when you arrive at the program next fall and Professor X expects you to devote your entire grad-school career to subjectivity in Woolf. I'd be interested to hear what others have to say, because this is certainly a delicate issue.<br style="text-shadow: none;">

Since the GRE subject tests are scored on a 200-990 scale, but a score of 990 (or, frankly, anything above 800) is unheard of, the percentage system is always a bit weird...<br style="text-shadow: none;">

<br style="text-shadow: none;"><br style="text-shadow: none;">Dude, applying to 16 schools is crazy. I applied to 6. I second diehtc0ke: If your interests are so unfocused (as you mention in a later comment) that you have to apply to 16 programs, then you need to reconsider your interests. Applying to programs is incredibly expensive and time-consuming, and there's such a thing as having too many options. I'd recommend no more than 10, though I seem to be in the minority here...<br style="text-shadow: none;">

First, I'd like to echo all those people who are reassuring you about your scores. Though the difference between the 98th and 99th percentiles is negligible, the difference between 710 and 800 *looks* huge, so I can see where your worries are coming from. But if I remember correctly, applications ask you to list your percentiles along with your scores. No need to panic! Second, four years of French and a year of Latin from high school? That's GREAT. No one cares where you picked up your languages, so long as you're proficient in them. And it's not like departments call and ask you to sight-read Lucretius to prove your Latin skills. Obviously you shouldn't lie about your languages, but three languages at any level? Not bad at all. (When I applied, I had 1.5 years of college Latin and 9 years of, believe it or not, Japanese. I think my lack of German or another Romance language harmed my chances at some schools. WHATEVER, Yale, I'm not bitter.)<br style="text-shadow: none;">

Wow, you sound just like me in my freshman year! So I'm going to give you the same advice I would give younger me: STOP WORRYING. At this stage, you don't need to think about programs that will fit your specific interests, especially as those interests are bound to change. (I entered college assuming I wanted a PhD in early American history, and now I'm doing a PhD in 17th- and 18th-century British lit.) The only things you should be worrying about are maintaining a high GPA, making connections with professors, and participating in a few relevant extracurriculars (though grad schools care about these far less than colleges do). I can't see how knowing a foreign language will do anything but help your application. Your home state, on the other hand, is irrelevant. Grad schools have too many important criteria to consider (GRE, GPA, writing sample...) to care about where their applicants happened to be born.<br style="text-shadow: none;">

<br style="text-shadow: none;"><br style="text-shadow: none;">With your interests, I'd apply to theory-oriented English programs: Duke, Cornell, and Johns Hopkins are a few that come to mind...<br style="text-shadow: none;">

I know someone who was accepted to several good Renaissance programs (like, top 20-30) with an essay on Samuel Beckett, but that was six years ago. I don't think it's a HUGE problem, but is there any way you can tie the two topics together? What do you mean by "Renaissance," and is it at all related to your work in the 18th century?<br style="text-shadow: none;">

Honestly, I think doing the legwork (or, well, the fingerwork) and scouring department websites IS the best way. The US News subfield rankings aren't terribly specific: "American Literature Before 1865" isn't the same as colonial American lit, and who goes to grad school for "Medieval/Renaissance"? If you know any savvy professors or current grad students, ask them (as you're doing right now, on the forum!), but I'm not sure there's an easy, streamlined method for this kind of research.<br style="text-shadow: none;">

<br style="text-shadow: none;"><br style="text-shadow: none;">My impression is that many conferences publish collections of papers, and that getting your paper in one of these collections is less prestigious than getting it in an actual volume of essays or a well-respected journal. I don't know anything about the rest of your application, so I'm not sure how much this conference would help you. I WILL say, though, that thousands of dollars is quite a sum to spend on something that may not even help you. And the Czech Republic is pretty far away. But if you can afford it, financially and logistically, I guess it couldn't hurt.<br style="text-shadow: none;">

<br style="text-shadow: none;"><br style="text-shadow: none;">I spent last year in Chapel Hill, and yes, living in the Raleigh/Durham area without a car is difficult. The bus system is unreliable, and the distances between one town and another are daunting. If you don't drive, you should do what I did, and start dating someone with a car! Kidding. But not really. Kumari: I grew up in cities, and to be frank, I found Chapel Hill a bit isolated. Chapel Hill and Carrboro are lovely, livable towns in themselves, but I was used to the East Coast, where everything is within a few hours of everything else. Chapel Hill is several hours from DC, and nine or ten hours from New York. This was one of the reasons I decided to move to Princeton. That said, you really should give the area a chance--it's beautiful, cultured, and cosmopolitan, and it grows on you.<br style="text-shadow: none;">

I'm a 17th- and 18th-century person, not a medievalist, but writing-sample problems and solutions are universal. So, for what my opinion is worth: 1. No, a review paper isn't enough. Frankly, it doesn't even sound like a worthwhile seminar paper. You need to discuss primary texts, and come up with original analyses of those texts, though you should of course engage with the scholarship on the issue. 2. I used a very obscure prose satire by a very obscure Restoration author. The text hadn't been in print for 150 years, and not even my adviser, who knows everything and might actually be God, had heard of the author. Obviously there are different philosophies on how obscure your text should be, but I suspect committees will happy to read something that isn't Chaucer/Gawain/whatever. Since I couldn't find any scholarship on the text or author, I used scholarship on Restoration philosophies of language and the genre of satire. The writing sample was a chapter of my thesis, and it was by far the most theoretical chapter: I discussed linguistic theory, deconstructionism, etc. (Hence my acceptance to Cornell, whose program turned out to be way too theory-based for me.) But a good portion of the sample, maybe half of it, was a close reading of the author's language and opinions. 3. Yeah, your prof sounds like he's trying to make less work for himself. That said, the professor of an online course may not be the best person to ask for advice: after all, you've never met the man, and he may think (correctly or not) that his job description doesn't include helping students with writing samples. Is there another professor, even from undergrad, who might be more helpful? One of your potential recommenders? (Also, where does this dude teach? I hope he realizes that most programs these days do some form of New Historicism. I have my issues with Greenblatt, but I agree that the historical angle is very important.) 4. Aahh, no idea! I've taken one medieval-studies course in my entire life. <br style="text-shadow: none;">

It seems to be a truism on this forum that applicants should attend as many conferences as possible, to network and present papers and whatever else. Honestly, I don't see the need, and I believe that a strong application alone can win you acceptance. And there is NO reason to spend thousands of dollars on a conference in the Czech Republic (which, I agree, sounds like a scam. "Interdisciplinary.Net"? Really?). Attending overseas conferences is something you do as a PhD student, not as a potential applicant. Look, if there's a well-respected conference in your area, and it's IN YOUR FIELD, and you can actually find out information about its hosts, go ahead. But neither I nor any successful applicant I know attended a single conference before grad school.<br style="text-shadow: none;">

<br style="text-shadow: none;"><br style="text-shadow: none;">Agree completely. I do know of one mediocre student who was admitted to a program largely because she had a big-name adviser. However, I'd say that while famous advisers can help you, unknown advisers will NOT hurt you. Frankly, I think the PhD admissions system is more meritocratic than most systems in the country.<br style="text-shadow: none;">

<br style="text-shadow: none;"><br style="text-shadow: none;">I'm not sure history and English depts have the same language requirements. For admission, in my experience, it's better to have a basic reading knowledge of several languages than a professor-level knowledge of Spanish.<br style="text-shadow: none;">

I can't remember my exact score, but I know it was in the 99th percentile (high 700s, I believe), and I was rejected from Harvard, Yale, and UChicago. I say this not to boast or to discourage you, but to reassure you that the subject test is not the most important part of your application. Also, 80th percentile is great! However, I'd disagree with you about programs overstating their minimum scores. If anything, wouldn't they want as many application fees as possible?<br style="text-shadow: none;">