DisplayNameGoesHere

@AP@dr. telkanuru@Sigaba@OHSP@Tigla As promised, I have returned. I was accepted at four schools, got in off the waitlist at one, and rejected by five. I chose to accept the offer of a school that was not my first choice, because I quickly built strong rapport with the people there and discovered that they might actually fit better in terms of my interests, temperament, and future goals. Thank you for all the help and support that you have shown me during this application season.

@AP @telkanuru @Sigaba @Tigla @OHSP I know I've been silent for more than a month and that the deadline has passed, but I'd just like to thank you all for providing me with clear and incisive comments and criticism. I will make sure to report back with results when the time comes in a few months.

I'm sorry if my wording is confusing. I completely revised my SoP such that I avoid advancing any specific argument. The second version is, essentially, unrelated to the first. I mention a few topics and themes that I am interested in and attempt to situate myself in prior literature dealing with my two countries. Perhaps I did not do a good job of situating myself in this literature. I wanted to say that the literature deals with [country1] and the center of the empire of which [country2] was a part, which in fact spoke a different language from [country2], in three main ways. I intend to compare [country1] and [country2], which was in fact the periphery of the aforementioned larger empire, and utilize all three of these methods to illustrate the ways in which ideas have flowed between my two regions as well as between them and the West. Perhaps that's neither clear nor particularly interesting, in which case I will have to do some rethinking. Regarding the sustainability of the comparison, I would honestly prefer if I could work on both topics simultaneously without trying to force comparisons for now. Trying to find something to say that a professor would find interesting is difficult enough as it is without trying to force every single topic I would like to do into the comparative and transnational mold. The problem is that I am trying to indicate my openness to a variety of topics and approaches, but I am not sure if I should focus exclusively on comparative topics, e.g. the construction of race in both regions, regimes of sovereignty in both regions, reactionary movements in both regions, or, as I do, name the few isolated topics I am interested in and explain what sort of comparative work I hope to do. I'm also receiving different messages from the people around me, so I am getting confused.

Thank you for your detailed comments and criticism. I've since then dramatically overhauled my SoP, but I fear that I have moved so far in the other direction that my readers will get the impression that I have no clear idea of what I would like to do. My most recent draft is as follows: I am a student of the intellectual history of [country1] and [country2] from the early nineteenth century until the latter half of the twentieth. I am open to a variety of topics and approaches, both theoretical and methodological, but have until now taken particular interest in conservative, right-wing, and nationalist thought, [country] Revolution, [country's participation in WWII], history writing, and debates on modernization and modernity, among others. Much comparative scholarship on these regions focuses on [metropole of empire of which country was a part] and is devoted to individual thinkers, e.g. [book]; the place of one in the imaginary of the other, e.g. [book]; or parallel diachronic study of one or a few phenomena in each, e.g. [book]. By combining these methods and focusing on [country] periphery instead of [country] center, I hope to explore the ways in which ideas and practices have flowed, not just from the West to the non-West, but also between non-Western regions during and after the transition to modernity, as well as the influence that the institutional forms and modes of thought particular to each have influenced these processes in elite and non-elite discourse. I then discuss my senior thesis, touch on the fact that I used only original-language primary sources in writing it, and then discuss my argument. I would like to carry forward the questions asked and observations made in my thesis and use them to help inform whatever future dissertation project my advisors and I decide on. I then discuss the work I did across departments at Cal in historiography, theory, and languages, the awareness of theoretical and methodological approaches and also the consciousness of the variety of intellectual and religious traditions in my countries that I have thereby gained. Although I have yet to settle on any single approach or set of subjects, I am interested in furthering my knowledge of theory and incorporating such topics as [understudied religion in country] and such themes as race into my future work. I then discuss fit in the same terms outlined in my previous post. What do you guys think? I fear that my failure to pinpoint any single specific project that I would like to do implies that I am lacking in focus. How do things look from the perspective of someone who has actually read applications and taken students, though?

Hello everyone! I've been lurking the forums for some time now and finally decided to take the plunge! If anyone thinks that I am revealing too much information about myself, please let me know and I will make deletions. Basic Information: I'm about to graduate with a dual degree in History and a non-European language from UC Berkeley. My overall GPA is 3.694, my History GPA is 3.85, and my other major GPA is 3.88. I scored 170 on the verbal and 5.5 on the analytic writing section of the GRE. I'm a holder of advanced certifications for the languages of the countries in which I hope to specialize. If it matters to anyone, I am a naturalized US citizen from a severely underrepresented minority population. My points of concern here are my overall GPA, the fact that I only got a 3.0 during my semester in one of my countries (I was late to class all the time), and the fact that I've taken only one class in that country's language at my school (I got a B in it because I was late to class and on assignments). I have no idea how this will come across to professors who are evaluating my application. Schools: I am applying to ten History PhD programs, including UT Austin and UChicago. For almost every single school, I identified two faculty with whom I'd like to work, each of whom specializes in one of my two countries, two additional faculty in History whose thematic interests overlap with mine, at least two faculty outside the History Department with whom I might be able to work, libraries and library collections (should I name specific digital collections in my SoP or can I just say "the relevant digital collections?") that contain materials relevant to my proposed project, as well as research centers and institutes that cater to my fields. I've also reached out to potential advisors at these schools, and I actually reached out to advisors at my top choice at the beginning of this year. Languages: Research fluency in three non-European languages and intermediate knowledge of one more. I know some French and Russian as well, which my transcripts attest to, but I'm not sure whether it would be a good idea to list them on my applications. At present, only the non-European languages are listed, with the sole exception of the application form for one school. Research Experience etc.: I've participated in an undergrad research conference with a paper written using non-English primary sources. My BA thesis is a close study of the principal works of two nineteenth century thinkers from my regions. My secondary source engagement in that paper is relatively weak - I have no historiographical survey section, and I leave the few interventions that I make until the conclusion. On the other hand, I translated and quoted numerous passages from the works I read and went to great pains to put the two thinkers in conversation. My intention was to make a preliminary attempt at investigating the manner in which these two regions were assimilated into the Western world order in the nineteenth century. I don't think the result is particularly insightful, which concerns me. Other than that, I worked as a research assistant for a professor in my department for a year, which entailed using materials in one of my languages and learning the basics of paleography. I spent four months studying abroad in one of my countries, and besides that have spent nine additional months in that same country. I've also visited numerous libraries and archives there, including the largest state-run archive. This information is listed in my SoP. SoP, Research Plans: My countries were both assimilated into the Western world order in the nineteenth century, but one later did well and the other did not. Both became modern, by any definition of the term, but only one prospered in the process. Scholarship on modernity in these countries approaches it as a perpetually mobile cultural signifier. While modernity is in one sense specific to time and place, the ubiquity of such principles as those of popular sovereignty and the separation of Church and State suggests that it also possesses a universal content consisting of a set of novel attitudes to individuals, populations, states, and belief. I'd like to do an intellectual history exploring the assimilation into modernity of my two countries in this latter sense, with potential topics including theories of sovereignty, their influence on historiography, and the relationship between religion and state. I might also want to tie these into sociopolitical conflict in my countries. In my SoP, I identify four figures, two from opposing sides of the debates from each of my countries, whose work I could use to investigate the question of theories of sovereignty. I name one relevant book by each, give my own translation of the title of the book, and give its original language title in parentheses. I also list four archives that likely contain pertinent material unavailable in the United States. Writing Sample: I have no idea how to edit my writing sample to make it competitive. I kept most of the introduction, smoothed out the language, corrected errors of spelling and grammar wherever I found them, and focused on showcasing the parts of my thesis where I either translate from primary sources or make arguments and/or comparisons about them, but I don't know whether or not I did all that well enough. Would anyone happen to have any tips, hints, or tricks, thoughts, or advice? I'm getting help and support from the people around me, but I have no real conception of what a competitive application looks like or of what important information they might not be telling me.