illum

don't really like their works anyway... probably better for yale for a clean it up... the program seemed quite overrated in recent years and has produced a lot of crappy works, but if storr is wise enough and is really doing something about that, hopefully it's going to revive to its glory like in the 80s and 90s.

take out loans and there's a magic thing called inflation who will help you take care a decent part of it sooner than you think! (though i don't know if that's the case in the usa...)

I graduated from college a few years ago and was debating whether to go for an MArch or MFA. I went to a liberal arts college with an art/pre-architecture major. I eventually decided to go for an MFA (starting fall 2011). Here's some of my thoughts when I was trying to decide - kind of the opposite of your situation but just to put it out there in case it might help... I love architecture and I have the feeling that I would be able to do it well, and going for an MArch might make my life a bit simpler because I know exactly what I will become afterwards. Even if it might be extremely difficult to find jobs coming out of architecture school (like all other fields in today's economy), there is still a certain path I can kind of follow. On the contrary, an MFA doesn't guarantee me anything. I could be graduated and not only unemployed but also unprepared for any other kind of jobs. Starving, financially unstable, crazy artist. Though, when I decided to go for an MFA anyway, I was thinking that... I don't find myself as passionate about architecture - I love it, but I feel there are so many people who can build just as well, if not better, than I can, while I feel much more at home making art. The combination of MArch and my own personality under this kind of economy and constant social restructuring, I can see myself end up in a big firm doing photoshop, excel and maybe drafting for the already established names, rather than thriving on my own without drastically compromising my ideals. I also wasn't sure if I wanted to physically go through all those intense licensing and examination process that has little to do with creativity. So that's why I decided to go for an MFA, because it suits my lifestyle and aspirations better. Though, if I were more determined in becoming an architect, I would probably stick to the beaten path in today's world - get my MArch, intern in firms, work as an assistant in firms, become a junior architect, become an architect, etc. It might be more difficult to get there if I "take a break" for two years to get an MFA in the middle of this path. But of course, that's just me. Though, if you are pretty sure that you don't want to be an architect at this point, and are more interested in pursuing fine arts rather than architecture, then go for an MFA. I don't think the schools will find it weird that you've already had a master degree. It'll be interesting to combine the practice of both as well, if that's what you are interested too. But if you are pretty determined in becoming an architect, then it's probably not necessary to spend the two years + money + possibly moving to a different location just to get an MFA. As for the money - there are fully fully funded programs (Ohio State, UMich, U of Iowa, U of Minnesota, Stanford, Cornell, and probably more that I don't know). Good schools like Upenn and Yale seem to offer pretty generous financial aid as well, if you can pay like half of the money. Also, there are high quality programs in Europe too, and they are much cheaper than American schools, even for non-EU students. Look at schools in the UK if you don't speak another language. I was working for an artist in London and she was telling me that when she was young (she's in her 50s), young artists could just move to New York or Paris or London, make art and wait tables, and become famous artists. But she thinks it's so much harder to do this kind of thing now, and many such "opportunities" simply do not present in the same structure. I also thought about using the money for something as a starting fund rather than MFA tuition, but then decided that an MFA might be better for me. Of course, I have friends whose parents are New York-based artists, or some friend's dad is a literature professor at Oxford, or someone's mom is the chief interior designer of so and so big firm, or someone's dad is a philosopher and mom's a poet, and they might not need an MFA to make like-minded friends and be in a creative-friendly environment. I need it because I wouldn't get to a circle of creative people otherwise. Anyways, these are just some personal thoughts and everybody's different so I can't say it'll help you...

hey~ Thanks a lot for the input! It's very helpful to know the place/school in more dimensions. I'm a bit worried about the school merging into U of Edinburgh too. Though, some people seem to see it as a positive thing since U of E is so prestigious and that the two together would make the school even more comprehensive, which will be a further boost for its name. But of course, I also heard that they have a lot of adjustment to make and might be a bit disorganized at the moment. ugh.... Oh, and I saw you are heading to Stanford! Congratulations! It's a wonderful school and you'll love the place!

yeah that's very helpful to hear from someone who actually went to the school! thanks a lot! Does anyone know anything about Edinburgh or ECA?

Any replies and insights will be greatly greatly appreciated!!! I'm torn between moving to Edinburgh and moving to London... for MFA program in Mixed-Media Art / New Genre. Edinburgh College of Art (part of U of Edinburgh) vs. Central Saint Martins (part of U of the Arts London) I haven't been to either school. Can someone familiar with the cities or schools help me with some insights? I've heard good and bad things about London, and praises (beautiful) and complaints (too small) about Edinburgh. So I really don't know what to think. I can only imagine that... Edinburgh College of Art (ECA): part of the University of Edinburgh so more resources beyond visual art, which can be very inspiring for me and my interdisciplinary works beautiful city with open-minded friendly people, a combination of old and modern gorgeous landscape in Scotland - i'm always drawn to beautiful landscapes seems to have a more friendly, community feel comparing to CSM better ranking (?) Central Saint Martins (CSM): big design and fashion programs so more exposure to different types of art/design business and possibilities london is the center of, well, everything! possibly more exhibition opportunities and network building the city - active, diverse, historic, etc. seems to be more ambitious comparing to ECA more prestigious (?)

Hello everyone. I just found this forum today and it's been so helpful reading all the posts, and also just simply knowing that so many people are suffering through the same application experience as well! I applied to Yale (sculpture), UT Austin, Columbia, MICA, RISD and Stanford. So far I have one interview in late March. I heard that usually they ask you to present your portfolio for 20 minutes or so, and then have a general discussion with you. It's my first year applying, so I don't even have an idea what an interview is like. I wonder how much of the interview will be about discussions on art history or contemporary art criticism - anyone knows? Will they ask me to comment on certain artists / historical movements? Am I expected to throw names of contemporary artists here and there? Is it OK if I say things that are a bit more liberal artsy - e.g. telling them that my art is influenced by certain writers and philosophers, instead of directly relating my practice to so and so hot contemporary artists? Very thankful for your reply!

Hi everyone! I can't believe I only found this forum today! I'm applying for fall 2011 MFA too and am too in the looong waiting process........