kfed2020

100% agree.

This is true.

Also keep in mind, everyone, that Columbia's program is inclusive of both English and Comparative Literature, and so attracts students interested in both fields, accordingly. If Harvard's Comparative Literature and English pools were combined, I'm sure the number of applicants would be similar. (Probably a little less, because Cambridge/Boston is no New York.) Still, yes, it's scary to think you're all thrown in there together.

Probably less than a third of the students applying to any of these programs will genuinely appeal to the admissions committee. If you're competitive, you're not competing with 700 people; you're competing with far, far less.

I said: "I think it's irresponsible, however, to say that it's okay that someone express an interest in these sorts of nonacademic professions while applying to graduate programs geared towards preparing students for academia." I hope that clears up what seems to be the crux of our disagreement, as I think we're both right, but my assertion was pretty specific. I can't really speak for or about disciplines where students regularly pursue other career options, but certainly for disciplines in which students are expected to filter into academia, I do believe that everything I said is true.

I've seen the Duke listserv, am not sure what you're clarifying in your first point, and slightly disagree with your second; the listserv is obviously going to be of interest for prospective students, but it's bound to be of more direct use for current or graduated students who have to think in more concrete ways about these options.

As for the third point:



I'd be careful about mocking this... The life of an intellectual is a life of the mind, the desire of which is, indeed, precisely what many graduate programs are looking for. It's something many people take very seriously -- some of your colleagues among them, no doubt.

I stand by what I said, and wish sincerely that you would re-read it.

Yes: I recognize what a doctoral program does and doesn't give / teach you, and recognize that learning research and writing skills can be beneficial to an extraordinary range of jobs. There's no disagreement here.

I think it's irresponsible, however, to say that it's okay that someone express an interest in these sorts of nonacademic professions while applying to graduate programs geared towards preparing students for academia -- particularly if you're trying to help this person gain acceptance. No matter what you say re: the merits of graduate education "training," the fact is that these programs do believe they're training people to become scholars. This is more or less what they expect you to want to become, from the get-go. Changing your mind while enduring the process is absolutely understandable, but when you're applying? You need to give the impression that academia is your end-goal.

The Duke example doesn't prove much. Hosting that listerv is, quite simply, morally responsible, given the realities of the academic job market. But you need to keep in mind that it's a resource for current students seeking these alternatives. It's one thing to be a CURRENT PhD student who says, "I'm trying to be realistic"; it is another thing entirely to be a PROSPECTIVE student who says, to the admissions committee no less, "I'm keeping my options open." What options? These people are not going to be inspired to give you a $20K stipend plus tuition if you don't seem sure that you want to pursue a life of the mind.

While applying, you need to give the impression that your goals are in line with those of the program. Otherwise, why would they waste their resources? This is true for any field, any profession. Humanities fields in particular are already struggling to stay alive as it is. Students with iffy intentions to filter into these disciplines will not -- WILL NOT -- appeal to these dying fields.

Of course you need to be realistic. No one would expect any less. But getting a PhD is not realistic. Graduate school is not realistic. The alternatives are really not things to be discussed in your application unless you do truly want to be insulting. Get in, first -- and then explore the alternatives. Fake the funk if you have to. Strategy, people. It's really that simple.

Harvard comes to mind, as well. Helen Vendler ain't a theorist.