losemygrip

For what it's worth for you guys: a former student just received an acceptance from U. Tenn, in case anyone's been waiting on that one. She also received a rejection from Carnegie Mellon--not sure exactly when that happened.

At least one person on that list is a horrible human being. Others are not so young. Just FYI. (I suppose it doesn't matter if you're just looking for reading material.) I just saw that English is coming out with some new things that look very interesting.

The importance of contacts and reputation is vastly inflated.

Funding always trumps everything. Go for the money. You won't regret it.

The VCU sculpture facilities are just sick. The most amazing I've ever seen. You've been accepted into two of the very best programs in two very different media. Congratulations. I tend to agree that VCU will probably continue the funding. Why don't you call them and ask? Tell the graduate coordinator you have this great offer from UTK. It sounds as though you really want to work in sculpture, but you could probably continue to do sculpture as well at UTK. If your goal is eventually an academic job, think about which area you might want to teach. If it's just about exploring your art, go the place that stimulates you the most. Really, I think you can't go wrong with this choice.

If you don't want to be challenged, skip graduate school.

I'm noticing other people who are trying to decide what choice to make. As a grizzled old professional, I'm telling you: you must go for the money. Do not go into debt to get an MFA. That might be worth it for an MD, but there's not such a clear return on investment with art professions. If you're accepted several places, but no one gives funding, you should skip it and re-apply to other schools next year. One possible exception might be if you're going to an in-state school with relatively low tuition. But even in that case, you should expect some kind of assistance--a T.A. or something. Plus, these schools need to know--if they want to get good students, they have to pay for them.

It's very simple. You go wherever you get full funding. That overrides all other considerations.

Irvine does not have a PhD in art history, which is why you don't see it in the lists. As Annie notes, it's "Visual Studies." It's heavy on theory/criticism. Think University of Rochester. If that's what you want, go for it. If not, look elsewhere.

To answer your question: No. It is not. Do not give it a second thought.

Rule of thumb would be that one of the three recommenders could be outside art history (but somehow related), such as an artist or a professor in another discipline. I had a favorite French professor who wrote letters for me years ago. Most important is getting people who will write good letters.

There were two publications with MoMA's big "High/Low" show years ago, but I'm not sure that's exactly what you're getting at here.

Alessandra Comini is retired (thank god). I'd just like to say that Vienna Secession could be a good specialty, especially if there aren't many experts around. You could potentially find a nice career in an auction house or decorative arts museum. Sounds good to me!

Rochester is the primary place for a critical theory oriented program. UC Irvine is also into that. Most of the other places you mention do not have a reputation for it. Chicago doesn't do much in contemporary.

Go for the money. No question.

If you can, wait until you get the details of both offers. How long will the UIUC support last? That is something to consider as well. Who will cut you off sooner? But you are correct that you need to go for the best deal. Those are both good schools, and although I myself would prefer to be in Phoenix, it's not worth it if it's costing significantly more.

Honestly, I think you could do this anyplace with an Italian Renaissance professor and someone who does Italian Renaissance literature in another department. Big research schools should all fit the bill. You might even want to focus on the literature person, and let the art history department come along for the ride.

I've heard that about her.

My advice: If you want to study Manet, DO NOT go to a program with a famous Manet expert. S/he will already know it all, and it will be hard for you to surface from beneath your advisor's research. Find a place (or person) that more generally suits your scholarly disposition instead. (Theory-oriented; object-focused; social history; whatever)

SMU used to have GREAT funding for their terminal MA program. They have a new PhD program with a strange title, so I don't know if that has drawn funding from their MA students or not. I agree--if you need funding, a terminal MA program is the way to go. Just expect that some schools (like Harvard) will give you little or no credit for it if you apply for their PhD.

An excellent and accurate response based on my own experience.

Whoa! Those are some INTENSE paintings. I'm sure you'll get several acceptances, but I'm kind of rooting for Tyler in your case. Just go for the best financial package.

Wise beyond your years.

I have to say, your first post comes off a bit offensive.

Well, good. Maybe it's for you, then. I knew a few people who hated it there. But that was a few years back. Being at UCSB would put you close to the very interesting L.A. art scene. And it's cold in Columbus . . . . (although a very nice city)