claritus

One sort of counterintuitive piece of advice I'll give is JOIN TWITTER. There is a fantastic academic community, and it has definitely helped me keep up with changes in the field. Follow scholars, journals, departments, other organizations, etc. I've been on the platform for a few years now, and though I won't try to make some sort of causal connection between that and my acceptances, I've definitely come in contact with some great scholars, and also given access to some rad (otherwise paywalled) resources.  Some newer journals and organizations (V21, Post45, and postmedieval—for example) also solicit for papers/articles/reviews from their followers. 

I'll also say that aside from all the potential career & academic benefits, it's just enjoyable. Scholars are hilarious, human people; interacting with them in this context really shows you that. 

So, that letter was written by the Director of the Graduate School.  I'm thinking Yale had 10,000+ applications to varying graduate schools, including English. 

I tried to be fairly practical & straightforward. So essentially I gave a brief description of my research interests, aligned them with the work of the POI in question, and then asked if they were available to work with students/whether they felt the program would be a good fit for me. There's no need to go overboard—really you just want to portray yourself as engaged & amiable. 

Don't be afraid to email POIs. I get fairly anxious about this sort of thing, so I only ended up emailing people at two schools. Those ended up being 2/3 of my acceptances. That said, the two faculty members in question are my dream supervisors, so it all worked out, but I was definitely gambling. There is definitely a lot to be gained from getting in contact with POIs, even if it's only a brief, friendly exchange.

Wyatt's beat me to it

Me, upon seeing this thread being a thing still.

I tried to be fairly practical & straightforward. So essentially I gave a brief description of my research interests, aligned them with the work of the POI in question, and then asked if they were available to work with students/whether they felt the program would be a good fit for me. There's no need to go overboard—really you just want to portray yourself as engaged & amiable. 

Placement, Placement, Placement. Pick choice A. 

But also, in terms of fit, I think sometimes it's better to figure out how to make a program work for you, than to immediately go somewhere that seems to have all the pieces of the puzzle in place. There's often a social reproduction problem in academia, where students working with the perfect supervisor/committee end up doing very similar, and in the end, less creative work. If you have to put together a committee from various subfields/related areas you'll find that you end up writing more dynamic, relevant, and self-aware scholarship. 

I guess to add to this with a more concrete example—I know of someone who works in the area of contemporary poetics, but with a romanticist as their supervisor. This person is doing some of the coolest, most radically interesting, and most innovative work in the field (in my opinion). Now I don't want to say this is all because of their supervisor, but I think some of it is because that distance from their "field" gave them space to question some received dogmas/orthodoxies. 

Wait, does that mean you got accepted with only one language in addition to English? Or am I misreading this?

Holy shit, I just got into Oxford!  Rejections from both Columbia and NYU, so yay this! Going to be biting my fingernails until I hear about funding (nominated by the English department for scholarship funding, but I'll have to wait for the Humanities division to make their final calls).

Yes!

I actually had another paragraph about "luck" that I decided to delete before I posted (since, as you say, it's out of the applicant's control...).

Going back to the original question of this thread, one thing I wish I had done was contact POIs. I'm not convinced that it helps a great deal, and it always has the potential to annoy, but if I'd had more time, I certainly would have touched base with more professors. One of my friends in the Ph.D. program here swears by it, and it worked out well for her -- she'd established a rapport with her eventual mentor long before she was actually admitted. If the questions you ask are well-formed and on point, you can potentially stick out in a POI's mind, and that might help you when an adcom is convening. There's a lot of "might" here, of course, but it's one of my minor regrets regardless.

Don't use your safe writing sample. Use a paper that really creates an interesting argument and pushes what is normative. 
 
For example, I was really worried about submitting a rather experimental paper to programs. I had two choices: one was a decent paper on PoCo theory and aesthetic form. It was just a normal, well-written paper; the second paper threw all caution to the wind. It was on so many things, but I organized it pretty well. It was on theory, art, form, aesthetics, the diaspora etc etc. My heart and soul rejoices every time I read it, but it was less traditional in form. 
Due to my irrational fear of sharing the second paper, I submitted paper A to half of the schools I applied to and paper B to the other half. Fun fact: every school that received paper B accepted me, and 2 others waitlisted me. 
 
Moral of the story, submit one paper that you are confident in to all of your programs. Be confident in your work and in you application materials. You've worked hard to get where you are, and you owe it to yourself to believe in your work.
 
 
Also,
don't go into debt applying to programs. It's not worth it.

Literally same. Like no one will have any jobs at all within the next decade because either global economic collapse, climate disaster, or all-out nuclear war, so I'm just like. Gather ye doctorates while ye may.

I'm just going to grad school to wait out the apocalypse 

I'm just going to grad school to wait out the apocalypse 

I'm just going to grad school to wait out the apocalypse 

I'm just going to grad school to wait out the apocalypse 

Placement, Placement, Placement. Pick choice A. 

But also, in terms of fit, I think sometimes it's better to figure out how to make a program work for you, than to immediately go somewhere that seems to have all the pieces of the puzzle in place. There's often a social reproduction problem in academia, where students working with the perfect supervisor/committee end up doing very similar, and in the end, less creative work. If you have to put together a committee from various subfields/related areas you'll find that you end up writing more dynamic, relevant, and self-aware scholarship. 

I guess to add to this with a more concrete example—I know of someone who works in the area of contemporary poetics, but with a romanticist as their supervisor. This person is doing some of the coolest, most radically interesting, and most innovative work in the field (in my opinion). Now I don't want to say this is all because of their supervisor, but I think some of it is because that distance from their "field" gave them space to question some received dogmas/orthodoxies. 

I feel a bit guilty to say it, honestly, but it's true. Everything in me wants to run down the hall to my mentors and tell them that I got into all of the programs I applied to. Especially because they (and everyone else) thought I only had a good shot at about half. It just feels so good to prove everyone wrong, you know?

Does anyone on here feel bad about declining programs? All the ones that have taken me (even the ones that have waitlisted me) have been so kind. I just feel awkward about the fact that i'll have to decline some without seeing them. I can't afford (time-wise) visiting each program, although I wish I could. How are the rest of you feeling about you decision making process? 

@orphic_mel528, I'm out of reputation, but I wanted to say how sorry I am that someone you've known for so long would take that kind of tact. So often it seems to me that people on the outside of academic work have a set of responses, as though they're reading directly from a script, when talking about the academy, no matter the circumstances. It's rather bizarre, to me, that there is such a widespread assumption that academic work isn't or can't be real work, even as more and more people go to college and press their own children likewise to go to college, something that would be impossible were it not for those willing to get PhDs. The current higher educational system relies on people getting PhDs, and yet somehow it is shameful to do so? It's something I certainly don't understand.
 
On the other hand, my father--a high school dropout who's worked with his hands his entire life (although he also does IT work sans degree)--remains completely baffled that he doesn't have to come up with money to put me through a PhD program. I've tried explaining several times that I only really applied to programs that would waive tuition and give me a stipend, but he remains worried about the debt he believes I will certainly accrue. People's assumptions re: academia are really strange.

Small but important point: If you take a look at NYU's philosophy department, I think you'll see that they don't have much to offer someone interested in "Theory". In fact, I suspect that much of the work done in that department is rather hostile to "Theory". NYU is certainly a strong place for people with the theoretical interests that the OP has, but I don't think you'll be finding it in the philosophy department.

I just got into the Comp Lit PhD at Yale! My top choice!

Placement, Placement, Placement. Pick choice A. 

But also, in terms of fit, I think sometimes it's better to figure out how to make a program work for you, than to immediately go somewhere that seems to have all the pieces of the puzzle in place. There's often a social reproduction problem in academia, where students working with the perfect supervisor/committee end up doing very similar, and in the end, less creative work. If you have to put together a committee from various subfields/related areas you'll find that you end up writing more dynamic, relevant, and self-aware scholarship. 

I guess to add to this with a more concrete example—I know of someone who works in the area of contemporary poetics, but with a romanticist as their supervisor. This person is doing some of the coolest, most radically interesting, and most innovative work in the field (in my opinion). Now I don't want to say this is all because of their supervisor, but I think some of it is because that distance from their "field" gave them space to question some received dogmas/orthodoxies. 

Placement, Placement, Placement. Pick choice A. 

But also, in terms of fit, I think sometimes it's better to figure out how to make a program work for you, than to immediately go somewhere that seems to have all the pieces of the puzzle in place. There's often a social reproduction problem in academia, where students working with the perfect supervisor/committee end up doing very similar, and in the end, less creative work. If you have to put together a committee from various subfields/related areas you'll find that you end up writing more dynamic, relevant, and self-aware scholarship. 

I guess to add to this with a more concrete example—I know of someone who works in the area of contemporary poetics, but with a romanticist as their supervisor. This person is doing some of the coolest, most radically interesting, and most innovative work in the field (in my opinion). Now I don't want to say this is all because of their supervisor, but I think some of it is because that distance from their "field" gave them space to question some received dogmas/orthodoxies. 

I would like to vent about how Irish buses never arrive on time. I am cold.