merry night wanderer

I feel this so much.

[insert obsessively thinking about the political climate and general state of the academy and the impact on climate change policy and basically the entire state of hte world for the next 5 years here] ?????

I too retract this (and a small portion of my general dislike for Twitter news) lol Hope you're holding up scotty2, and getting the info you need to make a good decision.

I would just like to state, as someone in corporate world, it's also a dumpster fire and a hot mess. It turns out most humans (beyond, like, the Dutch or Korea and such I guess) don't actually organize that well?? Despite being capable of making the Internet. A constant marvel to behold.

I mean, a lot of us have already chosen at this point. Even if BU came by with any sort of offer I'd have to immediately respond with "taken, sorry." I'm sure a lot happens behind the scenes to complicate any admissions process, but I wouldn't be surprised if they're left scrambling to fill their cohort.

Signing all of my Johns Hopkins paperwork today; after the visit cancellation, they did an exceptional job of setting up meetings with faculty and students, so I feel very informed, despite never having set foot in Baltimore. I have some feels about how my cycle went, but they've really convinced me I ended up in the exact right department for me. I'm grateful! Good luck to everyone still agonizing. I know it's got to be doubly stressful with everything else that's going on.

I really fear the whole "accelerating the move toward online education" scenario. I think a few online classes here and there are fine, but largely, online education sucks. (I will also note that I've definitely made online classes for a paycheck before, lol.)

First of all, congrats on Madison. That is a legendarily competitive program in a legendarily competitive field. Major, major congrats!! Because I applied to UCSB, I totally understand what you're saying - they're doing things that no one else in the entire country does, and in an entirely different way. And if you are interested in Lit and the Mind, they are second to none. But there's the whole uncertainty about the UC System, etc. It's why I am most likely going to decline them, though believe me, this one hurts; my writing sample extensively quotes Julie Carlson and I admire their faculty tremendously. I think the whole UC situation may be clearer in two years, though. And if Lit and the Mind is really what you want to do, you aren't (to my knowledge) going to do better. I would see if you can defer and check where things stand as far as the whole UC COLA mess in a couple of years. Hopefully, there will be more clarity at that point as to whether UCSB is doable for you. And if by next year you decide you want to apply to fellowships or what have you, you can just decline at that point. (Also, you may already know this, but the on-campus housing seems like by far the best deal in Santa Barbara at $700-800/mo, and you're guaranteed it at least the first two years. I don't think I'd consider going at all unless that was available. I was able to budget out something reasonable with those prices and with the assumption I'd be on my own during the summers, but YMMV... and after all, I am still probably going to decline.)

If you don't know if you'll be able to do all three things - the M.A., M.F.A., and Ph.D - and aren't sure you'd go back if you did the M.A., take the M.F.A. You can leap from the M.F.A. to a Ph.D, especially if you're taking the lit specialization, and especially if you're planning on that going in, and can ask lit professors in your area to mentor you. With funding being equal, that's a totally legitimate strategy. You most likely will not get what you need from an M.F.A. in an M.A. program even if you're allowed to do some creative projects. Regarding your professor - if your writing sample is illustrative of the sort of work you're going to want to do, I'd be very heartened by both your acceptance and that phone call. It sounds like he'd be quite supportive. It wouldn't hurt to talk to him about your concerns more directly. I think the best source of information, though, would be students whose thesis he directed. Ask them how open he is to the kind of work you do, and if workshops tend to skew toward a certain type of fiction over another - they're going to know best of all. This isn't your ego speaking, it's just pragmatic! But it goes back to the idea that creative writing prestige is more about networking and connections than anything else. There's no question that Iowa (for instance) would open up your chances - you might never even have to run around looking for an agent if you went to Iowa, since they basically do agent speed dating there. But it's no guarantee. The person on my friendslist who went to Iowa is a great writer, but he applied to the program as a realist and ultimately was much more interested in experimental fiction. He honestly hasn't benefited at all from going to such a strong school (and tbh there are other disadvantages to Iowa I won't get into; suffice to say it seems set up like a fellowship more than a studio program). He's said he'd have been a lot better off in a school like Alabama, Brown, NC State, etc - places where the faculty are more open to that kind of thing. Meanwhile there's that other example, who has had success people dream about, who went to a small, scrappy little school and has had a story in the New Yorker twice in the last two years. How well-published and well-connected are the faculty? What kind of opportunities do they offer you to network? How are the recent alumni doing as far as publishing in strong indie or top-5 presses? These are the things that matter in the CW universe as far as prestige.

When a friend of mine was made an offer a couple years ago, it was 2/2 and the stipend, while fully funded, was barely livable (the situation the OP is in). If they loosened the teaching load that's great news. It's why he didn't go, despite their great reputation.

Apologies, that should have read "Almost no"! Regardless, it's a different business with prestige - the Columbia program is extremely controversial, for instance, and though Cornell and Brown are great, there's no question that programs like Iowa, Michener, etc are considered the gold standard. But even so prestige just works differently. You go to those schools because of good funding, published writers, and networking, not name recognition, and even big state schools like Ole Miss with iffy funding situations and huge teaching loads are incredibly well-regarded. I will also second what was said about the M.F.A. making you more interesting: all the programs that have selected me have mentioned it, a couple have sold me on their excellent M.F.A. programs as a bonus (just having the literary community around), and one or two even mentioned they have good luck with MFA students. And of course, you can take lit seminars if it's not a studio program. I don't think it's exactly a benefit in a hugely tangible way, but can certainly form a compelling part of a larger, strong application. The M.A. is definitely going to teach you to research at a higher level (especially if you're going to a studio program, which might not have you doing lit criticism at all), but an M.F.A is not going to set you back.

This is a tough dilemma. Yes, the M.F.A. teaching load is higher, but it isn't unusual for M.F.A. teaching loads to be that high, and getting into a fully funded M.F.A. anywhere is an accomplishment. Yes, this M.F.A. program is newer, but prestige isn't the same thing in M.F.A. programs - what counts are the opportunities you're given (do they set you up with agents or provide networking opportunities?) and the publication history of the faculty and recent grads. Admittedly, Iowa and Michigan will try to set you up with agents right then and there, so it's not like prestige doesn't exist, but it's not always the gamechanger it seems to sometimes play in lit programs. (And name recognition hardly matters! No Ivies have M.F.A.s, after all, and our top program is in Iowa.) On my friends list, there is one person who graduated from Iowa and has struggled mightily for every publication he's gotten... and another person from an only-partially-ranked MFA with sketchy funding who has been in the New Yorker multiple times and just won the O. Henry Award. The funding amount is worth considering, though. I think you will stand a better chance getting into a prestigious Ph.D in an M.A. program, just by virtue of training to do literary scholarship. I do not feel I was nearly as prepared as an M.A. student. However, if your goal is to balance creative work and criticism, I think you should do an M.F.A. before a Ph.D., one way or another. A Ph.D is a beast, and so is an M.F.A. I can't imagine jumping into a Ph.D, intending to also do creative work, without everything I had to learn about style, plotting a good story, the literary community, maintaining writing discipline, etc. in an M.F.A. A few things about M.F.A.s to consider: Having writers who you admire, and who you think will support your work, is important. However, the writers you think will support you and the writers who actually will are often different. My thesis director was a notorious hardass about "weird" or speculative fiction; his major book - which had just come out, and was a NYT bestseller and all that jazz - was realism. While I'm not scifi/fantasy and technically nothing non-"realistic" actually happens in it, my fiction definitely has a very surreal flavor. I expected him to be my harshest critic just by his books. However, he ended up really believing in it and supporting it from the start. There are a lot of stories like that, at least in my MFA program. What it often seems to boil down to is far more subjective factors like feedback style, personality, openness to stylistic experimentation, etc. The exception to this I think is that if you are POC or queer since... not having guidance from someone who isn't clueless about your writing material is often, in those cases, extremely helpful. What Bumblebea said is true across the board, and in particular with fiction: CW is a brutal business. Be prepared for many existential crises. You are not really going to be able to work on your literary scholarship since (if you're like me) CW is hard enough that you'll just be drowning in that. But. Given all the factors involved, I'd agree that it makes sense to do the M.F.A. or M.A. both before the Ph.D. Since the M.A. is the better opportunity right now, complete that, and then apply again to M.F.A.s. From there, you can apply to Ph.Ds. The one thing would be, if you feel like you can't push your creative work forward at this time without the benefits of the M.F.A., maybe take that into account and do it first, and practice the time balance you'll need to do for the rest of your career in the M.A. afterward. That's a lot of applying, but it seems worth it to you to do both, and IMO doing an M.F.A. somewhere is worth it if you want to straddle both worlds.

I've found a lot of really good information by asking POIs what scholarship they think I should read to get further or more current with my interests, but the downside is my book list is now literally +50 books heavier!

Right, it's kind of like saying the New Yorker publishes "diverse" authors because they have Junot Diaz on retainer. (They publish more POC than Junot Diaz, and key editors are trying to change things from what I understand, but overall, they get a lot of rightful heat for their tokenism.) I think it's also very important to note that these discussions absolutely don't negate anyone's achievement in getting in anywhere. It's hard to get into top schools no matter who you are, and you probably just aren't going to do it if your work isn't good. Bringing up these realities doesn't take the shine off of that, and I hope people are proud of what they've accomplished in this hellish process. Good work is good work! But I think it's everyone's responsibility to grapple with the ethics of prestige, institutionalized -isms, tokenism, etc in academia, for the sake of the future of the discipline and for the sake of our future students. Pride in what you've done can coexist with an awareness of how things are, and what helped you get to that point.

@MichelleObama, that's why I mentioned you - I remembered that Yale had specifically asked about those challenges! It's hard to get a pulse on, because I've spoken with older applicants here and elsewhere who have also reported really direct bias (as in, quite explicit comments about being 35+ and the like) against people who are older, non-traditional, etc. I think it's probably too easy to get too wrapped up in or too dismissive about these discussions, when the truth is things like bias about age, undergrad prestige, etc. is there but varies a lot depending on which institutions and which people are involved. You can't really "disagree with" people's direct experiences of ageism and what have you, just like you can't "disagree with" your direct, very positive experiences of being non-traditional. Both are true and experiences are going to vary. Regardless, I'm incredibly glad that you saw such success. It really makes me hopeful about academia. I think my education was much better for being in state schools where people who worked full-time, were older, etc were fixtures in my English classes, and I'm happy you're bringing that experience the places you've gotten into. I know I'm glad I bring that perspective check to wherever I'll go in the fall.

I'm not sure I will be able to attend the UCSB open house, so if anyone knows much about the program or living in the area (I am a little terrified of Cali's cost of living) I'd appreciate hearing from you!

@brownjournal I'm curious to see which one you'll choose to do first - it looks like you've got great offers on both the PhD and MFA end. (Madison is nothing to slouch at!)

That's also often (though not always) a public/private thing, I think. Many of my friends who went to private schools have an easier time obtaining that kind of guidance; it seems like it was more the default. In my case I had great professors, and my LOR in my field is very well known, but they were not current on anything that's going on. Honestly, they were doing their best to keep the liberal arts school afloat at all, since in the past couple of years the state legislature has been slashing the budget left and right and the school is turning into a STEM factory. As much as they care, mentorship was not able to be on their list of highest priorities. I don't feel like I'm making excuses for myself here; plenty of what I've learned this season I'm taking to heart, and I'm very happy with my current choices. But I also think that if we are going to stand a chance of not making academia the reinforcer of classism it has historically been, we have to be upfront with ourselves about all of these factors. Prestige doesn't mean that quality, or knowing the language, doesn't matter or doesn't count, and quality likewise does not mean one most likely did not have ample opportunities to cultivate that quality, or know what the standards are. Imposter syndrome is useless. Own your advantages, celebrate your successes, try to improve, try to make the system more just. All of those things aren't mutually exclusive.

I agree and I also think it's self-perpetuating, in that, prestigious institutions have more of the guidance and support you're talking about, in general and specifically because they are used to supporting students through this whole process, know the lingo and can teach it, etc. It's definitely not solely the case that people are just a bunch of snobby assholes, though those definitely exist in droves; it's also about access to knowledge and knowing the language, as you said. My MFA English department was not used to people applying to PhDs, to put it mildly, so although my profs were beautifully supportive, I was on my own; they were older, so some of their ideas were hard to gauge by the current market, and I didn't have a network of applicants or applicant materials at all. Nonetheless, I do wish I'd checked the graduate student profiles of schools before applying. If, in a 5-year program, there are no non-traditional students, I think it's a safe bet to move your aspirations elsewhere, if only because who needs extra obstacles on top of the already-extreme competition.

Point taken and good to know about Chicago and Brown. I do hold that the graduate profiles in certain institutions do speak for themselves on certain schools, not only for age but for previous institutional prestige, but some schools might care less than others, or be willing to make exceptions. I do disagree, though, that keeping a realistic perspective on prestige "doesn't help." It keeps you from taking things too personally. I believe very much in using any opportunity to self-reflect and improve, but prestige (as well as ageism) is just a reality. Ignoring it isn't going to help you work within the systems.

Check your WS/SoP by profs who aren't in your field, as I've said elsewhere, and consider an abstract if you think it will help. I definitely think this would have made my work better. I'm not a hundred percent certain about this, but: as a non-traditional applicant, I wouldn't even bother with the Ivies. I had one prof tell me they never accept students outside of a certain profile, i.e. younger (and usually from certain schools though there are occasional exceptions), and another tell me 'well who knows about that, it's all about the work, YOLO!' and what I should have done is just look at the grad student profiles on the website, which I did in a fit of stress a month ago... to find that yes, they are all younger (I think the most recent undergrad degree I saw in an Ivy was 2011, and it was from a super-accomplished international student; 30ish seems to be the max, and he was oldest by a fair margin). Though idk, I think MichelleObama is non-traditional so maybe it's just rarer. I know for a fact other top schools like UVA and Michigan and JHU and such accept non-traditional types, so there was really no need to even chance it. The only reason I didn't apply to those schools was actually that I was looking for bigger cities and POIs, but I could have gone for Rutgers instead of Harvard, etc.

Out at Harvard and Penn (totally expected)! But in at UC Santa Barbara! Which is wonderful (seriously, I love this program so much) and complicates my life substantially! The roller coaster continues! lol

What digital_lime said. It has a very low chance of killing you, less so than the flu. It is a problem, don't get me wrong, but it's a problem for places that don't have the medical infrastructure to manage it, which the US (for all of our crazy issues) does. Do you have traveler's insurance, or the UK equivalent? Not sure how it works there- just (for the sake of being extra careful) make sure you'd have no problems navigating the healthcare system here if you needed to see someone. I'm planning on traveling all summer and honestly I'm going to get traveler's insurance, make sure I'm informed and aware, and not worry beyond that.

No word from Boston DGS yet! I feel so close to a decision, and, I mean, at least we have a timeframe for UCSB, but god I can't imagine waiting until next week or even longer right now.

I feel everyone on the struggle to figure out what you did wrong when you've worked so hard and people you respect gave you feedback. To me, the worst feeling is the world is not knowing how to get better. Don't forget the lottery element and factors out of your control, like school prestige, connections of your LORs, whether you're non-traditional, etc.; give your SoP and writing sample another clear, critical, ruthless look and get more feedback; and if you can-- just get back in the ring to try your chances again. You're going to need persistence in this game no matter what you do. I feel lucky at this point that I am going to pull through, but I applied to sixteen schools. If I'd applied to the nine that rejected me - a very respectable number - my only options would be a nonfunded MA at Boulder and I'd be in the shutout category.