[Advice on Picking Undergrad if my Goal is Art History PhD]

Ditto to the above. You may stumble into a history class or an English class and decide that you have an entirely different passion! Currently, the field has alot of issues. I don't need to repeat them here. I have been super fortunate (and beyond lucky) to have been able to garner external fellowships during this horrible climate. But these fellowships came with many sacrifices (social, sleep wise, being single and in my 30s, etc) and often felt as if I was a pigeon fighting on the ground for breadcrumbs of money.  

 

With the above stated, I do want to make some notes regarding the current choice you have. Barnard is great. But do look at the dollar signs. Entering grad school with debt can be hard. The top PhD programs typically offer students 4-5 year funding and health insurance plans. However, alot of these packages may not be enough to live in expensive areas (look at Columbia and NYU stipends). Sometimes you may have to pay out of pocket for a publication, for conference attendance, etc. Some have already begun (thank God like my program) to make up for this by offering summer stipends, conference funds, etc. But it sometimes takes months to get reimbursed and I have gone at times several months without insurance or even pay due to administrative issues. What I am trying to say is that it is good to start grad school with some dollars in the bank for hiccups along the way. Something to consider is the fact that if you are to attend Barnard, it might be quite some time until those debts get paid off. The system is crummy but yet we are all here...:/ 

[Applying for Art History PhD with BA in another field?]

On 4/11/2021 at 7:57 AM, A Small Raven said:

Hi GradCafe friends - 

So I've been living over on the English Lit side of the forum, because I applied to all English and Creative Writing PhD programs this cycle. It's my first PhD admissions cycle and was rejected everywhere, so I'm gearing up to apply again for next year. In addition to applying to English PhD programs, I'm also strongly considering applying to Art History PhD programs for next year. 

While this might seem an odd combination of programs to apply to, the research that I want to conduct can essentially fall into either field - I'm interested in researching creative practices of artists and writers, with specific focus on dream studies and utilization of the unconscious. Thus, I'd likely be primarily focusing on surrealism (but if anyone else has commentary of other periods, artists, or movements I should look into, please let me know!)

I'm wondering if anyone has any experience or thoughts on applying for Art History PhD programs without having a particularly strong Art History background? My BA is in English, although I did minor in art and have a few undergraduate art history courses and a study abroad art business course under my belt as well.  My MA is in Creative Writing. My MA research focused on the research I want to dive deeper into as described above, except it was focused on literary analysis instead of art. 

Do I stand a chance getting into Art History programs even though my background is primarily in another field?

I'd appreciate any thoughts or advice, thanks! 

While I think you could have a good shot at a MA program if you explain in a compelling way what is prompting the switch, I don't think a round of applications to PhD in art history programs will fare any better. The truth is art history can be a very conservative field with many opposed to or not understanding literary studies, psychoanalysis, etc. Take a look at current symposium papers or publications and get a sense if that language would help you address dream studies or unconsciousness well. You might feel a bit stymied by alot of the inherent presumptions of the field (I do and I have a MA in art history). Perhaps, the problem with the lit programs had to do with something in a research statement or program fit? Best of luck! 

[DO NOT GO TO COURTAULD]

I don't want to be the cynical older grad student. I really do not. But this does not surprise me at the least. I do not at all mean this to sound like I am dismissing your problems or complaints. Instead, I say this as a way of articulating that art history really is a field with many problems. From professors I know who stole their student's proposal to the frequent complaints I hear about misgendering and microagressive behaviors, it seems to be an arena of brewing problems. I can go on and on about how I feel as though art history is one of the most "conservative" fields despite professors who profess liberal or progressive ideologies.  Yes, taking your money and providing you with a poor education and lack of resources is hard. But please know that it might very well be symptomatic of the field itself and you are in good company with your complaints. 

[Fall 2021]

On 3/12/2021 at 10:26 AM, EyLC said:

Yeah that is sound advice, thanks ? I found two potential advisors at VCU, still in the process of meeting and gauging our compatibility. Sadly even after trying to negotiate, Chapel Hill made it clear MAs are just out of luck this round (COVID, budget cuts, etc.), and that funding is going more to PhDs. 

That sucks re UNC and funding! ? I guess I would ask what makes it your first choice? The department has changed alot and the landscape seems to be placing more emphasis on your advisor than the name of your institution. I have been telling everyone I know at this point I would not accept an offer without (a) funding and (b) a very strong advisor. 

[Fall 2021]

21 hours ago, EyLC said:

I received full funding from Virginia Commonwealth University's (VCU) MA in Art History/Museum Studies program (graduate assistantship too). But my first choice UNC-Chapel Hill isn't offering anything, RIP. Anyone want to vouch for either programs? 

I would be really hesitant in this climate to take anything without funding. Now it is possible to see if Chapel Hill will throw in something if you very craftly communicate to them that the funding vs no funding thing is what is making you hesitate. I did this when I was deciding and some programs did up thier funding packages to me. Funding is probably the second most important think to look for. The first important thing would be who your advisor is. Is there an advisor who you feel like you especially want to work with and who will advocate for you the strongest? We all know the job market sucks so having an advisor you think will help you on the job market is crucial. I hope this kind of helps! Best of luck deciding! 

[funding questions]

Do not attend a PhD program unless you have multiple years of promised funding up front and are working with an established advisor who can help you navigate the funding terrain. JUST DO NOT DO IT. The minimum I would take is 4 years of guaranteed funding with at least 2 of them being fellowships. You will not have the time to take on extra jobs. You will need to not only attend to coursework, dissertation planning etc but also attend to things like publishing, applying for grants, and going to conferences. 

[Fall 2021]

On 3/6/2021 at 8:47 AM, jondewitt said:

NYU is a fantastic place to study art history, but their MA is known to be a "cash cow" type of program, as it is a MA program within a PhD-granting institution. MA students at places like NYU, UW-Madison, and other MA/PhD programs tend to be given less mentorship, attention, and support by faculty, who will spend much more time and energy on their PhD students. Students tend to be much better off going to a MA-only program like Tufts or Williams, at least when it comes to faculty mentorship (although Williams is another can of worms--their program is probably the best terminal MA art history program around and it's apparently a very competitive and cut-throat environment that not everyone can thrive in).

That being said, getting an MA from NYU might be a good stepping stone to the PhD if you can maximize contact with your advisor and work around the general lack of support, especially since the faculty there are doing good research and tend to be high profile (I'm thinking specifically of professors like Tom Crow and Christine Poggi)

Edit: Check out this thread 

 

I honestly don't know how funding works at NYU for the M.A program. But, I would say acorss the board, I would not attend a place without a funding package in place. When I applied, my choice came to a M.A at Williams with full tution remission and a PhD at a top 20 school with 5 years of funding (including 2 years of fellowship). I chose the latter as it was with a facutly member who I wanted to work with and is very well accomplished anyway. With COVID and an uncertain job market, you do not want to go down a rabbit hole of starting with poor funding. I'm baffled to have learned that some PhD programs are accepting students without any garuntee of funding or one year of funding. Now, that strikes me as egregious?