Jump to content

koechophe

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    225

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

 Content Type 

Everything posted by koechophe

  1. koechophe
    I honestly wish more of these functions were online, tbh. It would make them a lot more accessible to most writers who (frankly) don't tend to be rolling in dough. The actual cost of registration isn't usually the issue, it's the hotel/travel costs that make them so expensive.
  2. koechophe
    I think a lot of that depends on how much the school values candidates that will also be good TA/Teachers during their time. Obviously the writing sample is most important, but you can sort of tell how important the teaching bit is from the application. Schools that ask for teaching paradigms or something similar are likely more concerned with your capabilities as a teacher than the ones who don't. I was an English major and was pretty big into the "English" side of things in school, and I worked for our writing center and helped with revising the online content. I ended up working alongside a lot of the English professors, so I feel like I have a decent notion of the kinds of things they might look for. My partially-educated advice is to not try anything you're not 100% familiar with in your critical essay. Just show them that you know the basics and can execute them well. I'd give more attention to making sure the copy is SUPER clean than anything else.
  3. koechophe
    I applied to FSU last year and don't recall getting that type of email, so maybe it's a good sign? Idk.
  4. koechophe
    That definitely exploded in ways I never intended it to. I shouldn't have risen to the troll's bait and started this conversation. This isn't the time, place, or format for a discussion like that. Sorry for starting it.
  5. koechophe
    Actually, there's a big difference. We don't actually agree to laws. As much as someone could make the argument that by living in a country, someone is "naturally" agreeing to a law, there's some pretty big issues with that logic. Reporting anyone, anywhere, for raw law violations is another issue entirely because it's imposed on someone without their consent. When someone has agreed to follow a code of conduct, there's a distinct difference because they offered their consent. I won't say it's inherently virtuous to report them--if someone does so out of vindictive desires, it's not a virtuous act. But I dislike the notion that there ought to be reprisal against people for reporting things. I also think there should be SOME meaning to the fact that we agree to things.
  6. koechophe
    Yeah, like, I honestly don't think the government should say you can't do drugs. I'm more okay with them saying not to do them in public places (if secondhand exposure can be an issue) or limiting them for kids, but limiting behavior because it's self-harmful is a pretty bad slippery slope. I just get cranky when people have retribution against people who report things. Like, my older brother was in on-campus housing with his pregnant wife and 4-month-old baby. His next-door-neighbor kept smoking inside his house, and it was coming in through his vents and making both his wife and kid sick, so he reported it. I know people sometimes people make reports vindictively, but I honestly think that a lot of times, people do it with good intentions, and it's a very hard thing to do socially. I don't like it when those people are treated like the bad guys, or like it's their fault that someone gets disciplined.
  7. koechophe
    Eh, you can think it's absurd if you'd like. Conservative, definitely, though I don't think that word is necessarily a direct insult. But I'm politically moderate, so meh. I know that's probably how most people view it, but I am a proponent of agreements having SOME sort of value. If people agree to a code of conduct, I think it's faulty to complain about consequences for not following it, and especially to blame the people who reported them. I am genuinely curious as to how this constitutes "violent," though.
  8. koechophe
    It doesn't matter if you disagree with the law. When you agree to attend a graduate program, you agree to abide by the rules in their code of conduct. Those obviously include not breaking the law, but often go further. Some schools will discipline students from drinking on campus, even though alcohol itself is legal. Some schools will even discipline or expel students for refusing to report violations they witnessed. Most every code of conduct I've read stipulates a requirement to report things if you witness them. Code of conduct is an agreement that you sign with the school when you apply. If you aren't willing to follow the terms, don't sign the agreement. It boggles my mind how many people don't read their school's code of conduct. Say whatever you want about me, but I believe that people should be held accountable when they break their agreements. Would I report things like that if I saw them? I don't know. I'm not the type of person who goes to those parties, or who people are comfortable doing drugs around. But I respect the decision to come forward. And if people are punished for breaking their agreement, it lies on their shoulders and no one else's.
  9. koechophe
    Oh, admissions definitely do, but I can still hope for a shorter waiting period ?
  10. koechophe
    So last year, we had this massive number of people apply for grad school, and a lot of people said it's because unemployment was so high. There's this small, selfish part of me that hopes less people applied this year. Either because unemployment is so much lower or because so many people's dreams were crushed last year. I'm assuming that less people applying = faster response times.
  11. koechophe
    Allow me to disprove your skills of prediction: I wholeheartedly disagree with this. There are good reasons to report someone else for ANY rule-breaking they might do. Assuming they are being petty or vindictive is needlessly judgmental. I honestly hate the fact that "don't be a tattle-tale" actually has a place outside of kindergarten. It's childish and stupid. When you sign up to go to school, you agree to a set of rules. Sometimes, those rules are VERY explicit that you're required to report things like that. Why we place blame and negative emotions towards the people who uphold the agreement they made when they joined the school, I'll never know. I won't fault people for keeping quiet, but I respect that coming forward is a hard thing to do, and people being whiny and judgmental about it need to grow up. At the end of a day, if someone gets kicked out of a program for breaking the rules, it is on their shoulders alone.
  12. koechophe
    Not sure what type of things I was expecting, but it wasn't anything as intense as that. Boy have you been gentle on describing your reasons for switching programs. There's a large part of me that wonders how people like that even got into programs, much less found themselves in teaching roles. I don't have experience with the racial subtext for that, but I do know "intense" is a big thing for neurodiverse people. I used to be called too "serious" all the time. When I wanted to buckle down and get to work, the other people would get angry at me for being so "serious," type thing. Honestly, it's appalling that's how your MFA is going. I was half-expecting some things which were, like, mistakes reasonable people can make but don't realize they're making. Those are the kinds of things I worry about, but wow is that negative. I just want to say that I find this heartbreaking, primarily because I grew up feeling the same way. At some point in life, I internalized the idea that "people don't like me." And it became so ingrained in me that in order to protect myself, I learned how to not care what people think about me (at least, to some degree). For years and years, I always assumed any stranger, any new person I met, would dislike me. It made it almost impossible for me to ask people out, to join new clubs or social groups, to do pretty much any of those things. It was only when I went to college (and tried to do that stuff) that I realized I had a deep problem. It took a lot of work and some really good friends (the most important being my long-time friend, who later became my wife) for me to realize that no, people don't hate me. Sometimes people dislike us or shun us because we are an uncomfortable reminder of truths they wish they could ignore. In school, a lot of people in my debate club were always on my case about being too serious. I was too serious about it, too serious in the work, I tried too hard, etc. But I would win competitions, and they would lose, and they'd chalk it up to bad judging and say it was out of their control... except I kept doing it, so they really couldn't. I represented an extremely uncomfortable truth: if they were willing to work harder (and smarter), they could've won. As someone who is ace, I represented some pretty uncomfortable truths for the guys around me, too--the truth that sexual attraction is a layer in perception that most people are incapable of peeling off (which I don't actually think is a bad thing, btw, but it's certainly uncomfortable to a lot of people). In our discussions, I've even made my wife uncomfortable as she's come to realize how much sexual attraction has affected her own life (it's easier for people to realize this when they speak to someone who doesn't experience it at all). I know it's not easy, but the world needs more people who represent uncomfortable truths. The writing community needs them desperately. There's always room for self-improvement, sure, and learning to have a genuinely good impact on people around you is a lifelong pursuit. But, If the people around you don't often find you palatable, maybe it's because your truths make them uncomfortable. Because in some way, your work itself, your dedication to your craft, your diversity, your story, or SOME part of what makes you unique and special reminds people of things they don't want to face. It's rough, but it is also no reason to think worse of yourself. And I choose to believe and hope that you'll eventually find a place where people are comfortable with the truths you represent.
  13. koechophe
    First off, ouch, that sounds awful, and I'm sorry your experiences have been so negative on something you've worked so hard to do. Second, would you mind elaborating on what this looks like? Not because I like horror stories, but more because it's something I don't ever want to do. I'm a white male (I'm ace, not cis, but in a cis marriage--we make it work ?) and as much as I've got a trans sister and have had some friends who are LGBTQ+, in writing communities, my experiences have been pretty homogeneous. Being considerate is something I care a lot about. Without any sort of diagnosis, I have some neurodiverse tendencies, and I really struggled with feeling understood when I was younger (obviously being ace impacts that too). It's taught me that it's important to try and understand people and their POV. I also have faced a surprising amount of bitterness just at the fact that I'm a Christian (but a specific denomination of Christianity that a lot of the other Christians don't like, lol). It's taught me that understanding is really important. Since I just haven't had much experience with diversity in writing circles, it's something I want to understand how I can account for more. I have this fear that I'll hurt someone in giving feedback because I'm unaware (and my feedback is usually pretty, err, blunt, since I honestly want bluntness in return.) You don't have to share if you're not comfortable, but I'd like to know more of what people are doing so I can get a better grasp of what it looks like in programs.
  14. koechophe
    The thing that annoys me the most is how prioritized they are in High School (or even middle school) education. Reading the "classics" in high school messes students up bad, in both their desire to read and in their ability to write. I was a writing center tutor for most of my undergraduate, and so I saw a lot of incoming students. People legit wrote essays that sounded like they were Jane Austin novels, because they had been taught that was the pinnacle of great literature. It's a total double-standard though, because that type of writing will get students bad grades on essays since it's too verbose and indirect. I basically had to un-train them on their writing because they spent so much time in high school reading things that they SHOULD NOT mimic for modern purposes. I remember one specific individual who attended the writing workshop I managed. She wrote a ~250k word novel that was written just like a romance novel from the 1800s. The writing was extremely verbose and romantic, and she thought it was fabulous because she'd been taught the classics were the best, and it read a LOT like the classics. She was frustrated because no agent/publisher would give her anything but a forum rejection. Extreme example, but I really think that a lot of the mistakes and problems I see in people's writing comes from too much respect for the old ways of writing when if you want modern success, the writing should be modernized. I also met so many students who said they hated reading. And I don't blame them, if you've got a 16-year-old reading Crime and Punishment, OF COURSE they're going to hate it. Maybe a select few won't, but the bulk of them will be totally turned off of reading. We have a lot of fabulous modern YA pieces that can both capture interest and present profound thoughts. Admittedly, a lot of modern YA tends to be too colored for my taste (when I studied it in undergrad, too much of it was basically like "here's the RIGHT way of thinking, and everything else is wrong, and people who think this way are wrong, horrible people.") But there are complex pieces out there that teach people to look at all angles of a thing and teach people to think rather than teaching them to blindly follow. /End rant.
  15. koechophe
    I mean, you probably saw the slight debate I got into about literary fiction, but I'll share more of my POV. Granted, this is coming from someone who got straight rejections last year, so you can take it with the as many grains of salt as you want to. Upholders of literary fiction are extremely inconsistent with what is "okay" or not. Science fiction isn't okay, unless Bradburry or Shelley are doing it, and then we'll let it slide. Fantasy and magic aren't okay, but magical realism is just fine, and we'll be okay with Kafka doing it too. Post-apocalyptic isn't okay, but we'll turn a blind eye to those elements in Marget Atwood's The Hand Maiden's Tale, because the piece is an extremely focused reflection on feminism. Some pieces that honestly would never be given the time of day in a classroom if they were written now are praised and adored because they were written 100 years ago. And, let's be real, some of the "greats" were only great because they had money and acclaim that let them spread their writing, and people praised them more for status than for actual writing. The pure theory behind literary fiction, including subtle elements, literary devices, and emphasis on internal conflict over more plot-based conflict, is good. But I also think that literary fiction has been overly exclusionary in ways that it shouldn't. My school offered a "Great books of the world" course. The requirements for something to make it into the curriculum? A book needed to be at least 100 years old, and the book needed to be written by a British or American author. I think that just about sums up a lot of my issues with it. The fact that something is old doesn't necessarily make it good (and in fact, its impact was likely based on the privilege and aristocracy of its writer.) Writing honestly has evolved, and we're better now than we used to be as writers, primarily because we have more access to good literature and good instruction than we ever have before. I think that the concepts of literary merit are valid and can be taught, used, and understood. But I also think "literary fiction" as an idea is often used to exclude others based primarily on whether or not they conform to what is wanted in the culture. For better or worse, I don't find as much satisfaction in writing straight literary fiction. I like there to be a bit of wiggle room for other things, and I love my speculative fiction elements especially.
  16. koechophe
    Oh, I meant applying for schools in general gets expensive. Yeah, I know they've got a great stipend, that's one of the reasons they're my top pick too ?
  17. koechophe
    And also expensive lol. But I think it's worth it. It honestly takes guts to say, "I believe in my writing enough to spend money to submit it." For me, the act of doing that is valuable. It's one of the greatest exhibitions of both self-confidence and self-doubt out there.
  18. koechophe
    John Hopkins. Don't think I've got a prayer of being accepted, but it'd sure be nice ?
  19. koechophe
    I feel that, my literal bottom pick was a pain too. I actually factored application costs into my list though, and I want to say it's what decided it for me between which of the 2 bottom schools I'd cut out. University of Florida only charges $30 for theirs, which I think is pretty awesome.
  20. koechophe
    @eternalwhitenightsHey, welcome back! Good to see you! Hope that the app goes well
  21. koechophe
    I've said my piece, and I'll leave it at that. More important than anything else in writing good fiction (literary or otherwise) is authentically capturing a character's voice, and that often requires breaking rules of concision and concretion. I'm not going to waste my time arguing writing theory with someone as obviously ill-intentioned as you.
  22. koechophe
    I had this happen last year with WSU, but they also denied my application, so... yeah. It generally doesn't mean much if you get funding info for FAFSA
  23. koechophe
    That's a gross oversimplifcation. Different styles of literary fiction demand different things. More minimalistic or objective narrations would ask for what you're talking about. More stream-of-consciousness or post-modern approaches, especially ones which value poetic prose, would not. I can point out more than a dozen examples that are even more filled with statements of direct feeling than my own piece, but it works, because they're going for a specific effect. Unreliable narration with statements of direct feeling is frequently used in good literary fiction. To homogenize all of literary fiction under the umbrella that it prefers objective narration rather than colored, opinionated narration is frankly damaging to people who don't follow that specific narrative structure. I'm not saying this to defend the haircut piece, I've already said numerous times it's not my favorite, I wrote most of the text 10 years ago, and it somewhat baffles me that it's had so much success. Stories that are overly prescriptive are stories that tell readers how they should feel. Essentially, stories that are too direct with the meaning of the story. It's a term I picked up from a writing craft book a while back that stuck.
  24. koechophe
    I appreciate the exercise, and have done similar things in writing classes since, but there's no way on earth I'm touching that story again. I wrote the first draft of it back when I was in high school (about 10 years ago) and I am so sick of it that it's just going to sit on its laurels of being the first thing I ever published. Also not sure that story would ever work as a minimalist expression piece, tbh. The story is definitely too verbose and prescriptive as it stands now, but straight-up objective narration would fail here, imho.
  25. koechophe
    Thanks for sharing! I got some McCarthy / Obrien vibes from it, the more objective POV with minimalist punctuation. I can also see a lot of poetic influence in the writing too, which I think is interesting (in a good way!) As much as it pains me to admit, my haircut story is the most successful thing I've ever written, even though it's not my favorite. It's been published in multiple places, one of which I sent in like 4 pieces and they picked it, as well as giving it 1st place in some contest I didn't know was even a thing. Just generally has had better reception than any other single piece of writing I've sent off for publication (though I have a lot of newer ones I've never even tried with). I did learn a lot from it though. I wrote that piece before my college education, and during undergrad, it kept being more successful than a lot of the pieces I was writing at the time, which irked me. And then at some point, I realized that all my studying into literary fiction and all the "rules" about what makes things literary was stinting my writing. So I started blending genre into my writing, and it went a lot better after that. I guess I write a lot better when I'm not trying to follow rules ?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. See our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use

  I accept