mrssalad

I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss those names or schools. Their names, especially Casid's pop up in many acknowledgements. 

I can't hep but think you are over-thinking it a bit (in a good way). Yes, it's true. I think MA programs have become a way for very qualified students to get into the top tier PhD programs in art history (and some PhD programs won't consider an applicant without a MA). HOWEVER, there are still places out there that view MA programs as an opportunity for people like you who may have had a related humanities degree to get a new degree n art history! With a degree in English and studio art experience, I am not sure why you wouldn't be a solid applicant for an MA in art history! I'd also keep a look out for MA degrees that offer their students funding. Williams tends to be the most desired program, but I'd also look at UMass-Amherst, Tufts, Wisconsin, and UT-Austin. I know of folks who have received MA funding at those institutions. Good luck!

You writing and editing this long meditation about prestige and "the reality of the humanities ca. 2018" and then coming back the next day to reread and revise your own (unanswered and ignored) post is such a perfect metaphor for academia. You posted about being on the job market in 2015. Regardless of the outcome (I can guess...) move on, let it go. 

Oh shit. I forgot my actual favorite book: Deleuze on Francis Bacon. 

Amen. At the end of the day, focus on your research. I was on a panel last year at CAA. To protect confidentially, I will say I was the only 1 who was from a public ivy as opposed to a private ivy (or Berkeley on the panel). The work from the other 3 individuals was absolutely sub par (undergraduate students in my lecture course turn in better work). A name and an advisor won't make up for bad scholarship that isn't doing anything to push the discipline. I will stress where the rankings are important at research is important - go where there is FUNDING TO DO SO. Typically "Better ranked programs" have more $$$. But, this isn't always the case. If a place wants you, really inciting packages can be made. 

Amen. At the end of the day, focus on your research. I was on a panel last year at CAA. To protect confidentially, I will say I was the only 1 who was from a public ivy as opposed to a private ivy (or Berkeley on the panel). The work from the other 3 individuals was absolutely sub par (undergraduate students in my lecture course turn in better work). A name and an advisor won't make up for bad scholarship that isn't doing anything to push the discipline. I will stress where the rankings are important at research is important - go where there is FUNDING TO DO SO. Typically "Better ranked programs" have more $$$. But, this isn't always the case. If a place wants you, really inciting packages can be made. 

Hands down UW-Madison. The Nelson Institute is the best there is. They have folks such as Bill Cronan, Gregg Mitman, and Paul Robbins there.