FugitiveSahib

This thread has been quite educational for me, and I see how you can work with people who are not doing exactly the same thing that you want to do. Should've been obvious I work in Black studies, which is far more tolerant of trans-historical research. And so the one things I look for in scholars is their over-arching orientation toward Black studies; simply speaking, I can work with anyone under the umbrella descriptor of Afropessimism. I am still far more excited at the prospect of working with scholars who are asking questions about poetics, ethics, etc. Its too early to worry about this right now, but it would be interesting (if I am lucky enough) to choose between a "prestigious" university and a scholar who I really like. If I were you, I would probably stick to Romanticism programs and think about the intervention I can make in this field. I am very faithless about periodicity so I would have probably become a modernist but I know historical periods are of distinct importance to people.

I am in the same boat as you, as my field is very well represented, so there are scholars who work in it in virtually every school. I am planning to spend my summer locating 1-2 scholars who come closest to my research interests, but I also plan to spread a wide net. So I will apply to schools where professors are more generally engaged in the questions/concerns that I am asking, but I would highly prefer to work on the cutting edge along with the scholars who are immersed in the same questions. As an MA student, I sometimes find myself explaining a great deal about the specifics of my field to secondary advisors. While these make for animated conversations and at times, lively debates, I would prefer to be immersed with a bunch of scholars who get it and want to get on with it.

Yes, I see that. I just presented at a department symposium and I feel kind of great about it. It was nice (and utterly petrifying) to share my work. But it was well received and people said nice things.

Thanks all for your great insights. I don't mean to shit on conferences. I do think that a tangential critique of professionalization is valid though. Some of us may prefer other modes of working and creating research but that hardly means that we desire a dimly lit room or that we are abjectly solipsistic. Given all of your advice though, I shall urgently apply to some additional conferences. I have no doubt that they will be fulfilling experiences.

I am an MA student who will be applying to PhD programs this fall. I have been told that I MUST attend conferences to be competitive in my application. But there is a cynic in me who yawns at professionalization. I will likely present at a Graduate conference before I submit my application and I am also presenting a paper at a department symposium. Must I really try to get into and present at a professional conference in order to be taken seriously? I know that there are different expectations for BA and MA applicants. Yet, I would rather focus on developing a formidable statement of purpose and writing a paper.