ThePoorHangedFool

This might be dusty old news to everyone, but when I registered for the subject test (which I'm taking in November), I selected whatever box indicated that I wanted to be mailed a practice exam from ETS. I haven't looked at all of it, but so far it's not the same as past practice tests I've encountered. I'm pretty sure I had to manually check something to express my desire to receive this practice exam, so if you've already registered and haven't gotten one in the mail yet perhaps there's a way to request a copy despite having already registered and presumably stated you didn't want to get the practice booklet...

I think this is excellent advice. Your SoPs are your only real first-person opportunity to show adcoms how prepared you are NOW and how determined you are NOW to succeed in their programs, both of which being things that, as other posts have already explained, only need to be supplemented with a brief explanation for any unavoidably noticeable slip-ups in your transcript. If any of your LoR writers had you in class during the period you underwent this experience, they particularly would be able to buffer your temporary slide with more specific examples of how you did the best anyone could have done in your situation while it was all going on, etc., etc.

If I tried to explain what I don't understand about using basic arithmetic to solve problems involving fractions, I'd only be digging myself deeper. Does an answer simply of "but my degree is in English" suffice? I know what a fraction is. I don't see the usefulness in knowing how to divide one fraction by another. I would certainly hope that the revised GRE doesn't bother including questions on this topic given the ease with which the provided calculator would make answering them. Which is essentially my whole point--when would anyone that needed to divide fractions in the first place not be able to do so digitally with little or no trouble? How does a lesson on "basic" math, that I'm starting to wonder whether or not I even had in elementary school at all, prove my ability to succeed in a graduate-level program for English literature?

I agree with ZeeMore21's advice, and also wonder how much importance an admissions committee for a program in History would place on GRE scores in the first place. The content tested in the GRE is, obviously, more relevant to some fields than others; thus, its weight in each overall application a program receives will by nature vary depending on its relationship with GRE concepts. It would seem that the GRE's lack of historical questions--aside from contextual information that can be used during the Verbal portions that consist of reading comprehension-esque-structured questions--would suggest its comparative irrelevance to the faculty of and adcom for a grad program in History versus, say, one in English or Math Education. I might be flatly wrong in assuming this. I can only make educated guesses at this stage; one pretty unanimously-accepted opinion is that even a perfect GRE score won't get someone into a grad program, let alone a "top-tier" one, if it's accompanied by SoPs/LoRs/transcripts/all or any of the above that are less than stellar. Nonetheless, such high scores certainly won't hurt your application, so feel relieved that you can put one aspect of this process behind you and spend time on the more important components.

As far as your capstone project goes, I would think it could be something worth mentioning briefly in an SoP, though only, of course, if it is very clearly related to your proposed area of graduate study and research OR would enable you to defend your ability to satisfy the rigors of graduate work. I say this predominantly due to your remarks about not writing a thesis, which is unfortunately something that a substantial number of applicants with whom you'll technically be in competition (a general term, I realize) will have written upon receiving their B.A. Some undergraduate schools require one, others offer the opportunity to write one (though with less of a daunting sense surrounding undertaking such a project); regardless of initial motivation, as far as I know it is pretty common for undergraduates to complete a thesis (whether written for departmental honors or not). **As usual, anyone that can refute this is encouraged to do so--I don't want to offer misconceived advice, but am pretty positive I'm not too inaccurate in my opinions on this.** IF the capstone project will end up involving a process like researching for a thesis paper, etc., it could possibly be useful given the lack of thesis. Also, please don't take my comments regarding your choice not to write a thesis the wrong way. Most seniors in my English department last year didn't write one, and those that did were divided in how they felt about it after turning it in (in terms of how useful the entire endeavor seemed based on how plans for the future developed for each person). For you specifically, it seems that with the number of other achievements you get to list that are in the same vein as a thesis, your overall "application package" won't have some huge void due to not completing a thesis per se. I'd bet that less undergraduates write one than I probably would assume (and suggest in my above paragraph), and it's additionally worth remembering that if a thesis wasn't successful or accepted by a department and/or doesn't relate to the area of concentration an applicant states he or she wants to study in graduate school, having simply written one doesn't add much to an application or c.v. People that wrote a thesis only to have it receive a barely-passing final mark will probably not talk about the mere fact that they wrote one in any part of their application...I would assume...at least... A tactic I've found pretty helpful so far while doing my own research into specific faculty members is looking each one up on JSTOR or MLA. Usually, particularly when he or she is slightly older and thus has had time to write a fair amount on his/her area and concentration, at least one essay will be available, though sometimes a search only gives reviews as results. If you're able to access the essay(s), definitely read whatever you can that's available. Just because a faculty member's area of specialized study appears to match yours doesn't necessarily mean that he or she would be the best person under whom to work and study. Perhaps theory comes into play and the argument(s) one faculty member proposes in every essay you find written by him/her is made through a critical lens with which you find fundamental flaws or otherwise don't see as a valuable perspective specifically concerning your own interests? Such a decision could only be made by applicants with enough background in their fields to discern whether an idea posited by a faculty member (who on the surface seems like the perfect mentor whose guidance would only be beneficial) is one that both A. pervades his or her writing and thus way of approaching literature to some extent, and B. very obviously clashes with what they intend to pursue during graduate studies. However, JSTOR is useful in a positive way, of course, when you come across an essay that confirms a certain faculty member's alignment with your own personal methods of analysis, interpretation, etc., in how it expresses an idea or argument that you find to be the epitome of everything you now believe in (or something to that effect). Yay electronic databases...

Joseph Andrews and Shamela were much more enjoyable for me, I have to admit. Also, all those who love Tristram Shandy that haven't read A Sentimental Journey would probably find it worthwhile to read. It's only about 100 pages, and is an interesting work in part because of its slim nature (at least, that specific quality makes it a somewhat unique counterpart to Humphry Clinker, Joseph Andrews, and the other major works from that period that total around 400 pages each). I too have a fondness for Restoration-era literature, particularly that of Pope (and especially The Rape of the Lock, An Essay on Man, and An Essay on Criticism). Swift has a few poems that I also enjoy quite a bit (my cat's name derives from the several written about and/or for "Stella," or Esther Johnson, for what that's worth). I still hope to get my hands on a decent copy of Pope's edition of Shakespeare someday, though my last online searches weren't very fruitful...

I'm reading various sections from the second edition of Feminisms, which is in part because of its relevance to my current research and writing. I am now awaiting a very recently-released novel called The Family Fang, which is the work of a friend of mine and which has so far received abundant praise from every reviewer I've come across (the NYT evidently adored it, if that says anything in particular to anyone that frequents the book reviews printed in the Times). Next on my list is Harold Bloom's new book on the King James Bible, about which I welcome any opinions from people that have already read it or know anything relevant about it.

A related question, coming from the least mathematically-inclined applicant out there: Were there copious amounts of problems involving adding/subtracting/multiplying/dividing fractions on anyone's test who has taken the revised GRE? I took the former GRE last October, knowing that such questions would comprise some portion of the quantitative questions (knowing such in panicky fear, as well, since it's been "that part" of math courses from elementary school onward that I simply cannot wrap my mind around, no matter how much studying of how many different types I try). At least on the exam I had, fractions pervaded the entire thing, making up probably 40-45% of the problems in the combined quantitative segments. I managed to score something like a 560, after doing the best guesswork of my entire life; however, I clearly don't expect that to happen again and am trying actually "learning" as much of the potential math on the new GRE as I can. But those fractions are going to be the death of me regardless of my personal efforts to conquer them, so any input on how frequently they have so far appeared on the revised GRE is welcomed.

First and foremost I apologize for perhaps repeating a past question that this thread has already answered; my Internet and/or computer is being obstinate and I currently can only view the first and third pages of posts. Thus, someone may very well have already addressed this on page 2, unbeknownst indefinitely to me, and therefore in light of this I feel this disclaimer is warranted. : ) Now then: I have a question to those with experience in this department of the application process. This is a purely hypothetical situation I'm proposing at the moment, but there are likely chances, I believe, for it to take place at some point in the next few months for any number of us. As one does research on the faculty members at the various schools to which one plans on applying--these being, specifically, programs that range from among the "top tier," so to speak, down to schools ranked closer to the bottom of a top-50 list--one is bound to find a handful, at least, of faculty that appear to be the perfect match in terms of one's intended future research and concentration(s). If a faculty member from one of the lesser-ranked programs either becomes *the* perfect match somehow (via direct communication, the applicant's thorough reading of his or her past work, etc.), would it be more worth it to attend that lower-ranked program IN the event that the applicant in question were to get into a school ranked much, much higher? That could possibly be confusing, I know, so I can rephrase if needed, but input and opinions on this would be much appreciated. I've been concentrating pretty intently on finding the faculty at the different programs in which I'm currently interested whose interests seem to fit my own the best, and am just curious about this potential situation. Not that I personally plan on receiving a spot at one of the top-ranked programs, for a variety of reasons, but that's no real matter yet, I suppose.

Yes. I'm quoting my own post. I still hope someone out there can answer this question for me; I'm not hoping for a certain response so any thoughts you guys have are welcomed.

First, to Timshel: thanks for explaining all of that, your earlier post makes perfect sense now. : ) However, in regards to the post I quoted above, what BelleofKilronen says is simply not what I've heard from anyone I've ever spoken to about the matter. The specific name of the program or school to which the letter is directed is, at the very least, an element of "tailoring" that if I were on an adcom would pretty much expect to see. It seems to me that not even taking five seconds to insert a school's name or whatever title is relevant to the program is basically a slap in the face that translates to "I literally couldn't be bothered, since this way I got to print out all X number of letters simultaneously and I am just that lazy." Evidently I'm the minority in this one. I'll just say that the numerous sources I've consulted about this subject, which include professors from a few different generations, current graduate students, an acquaintance who used to work on an adcom until a year or two ago (and the unavoidable standard prep books/websites/etc., all of which I read with several grains of salt between my teeth) ALL agree that some level of tailoring--nothing grand or strenuous, but at least the specific program name if not a bit more for the schools the applicant cares the most about impressing--is definitely helpful when adcoms read through the zillions of LoRs.

Oh, and off the top of my head, for anyone not too familiar with or confident about Chaucer: - First: Wikipedia rhyme royal; Chaucer essentially fathered it and if you can recognize it when examining a poem, there's a good chance it's something Chaucer wrote...at least if it's in Middle English...or French... - The Wife of Bath's Prologue (the Tale might be helpful but is rarely the subject of test questions itself)* - The Merchant's Tale - The Knight's Tale - The Miller's Tale* - The Pardoner's Tale - The Clerk's Tale* - Parliament of Fowls (fairly short and comparatively easy) * = think about marriage when reading these http://www.librarius.com/canttran/wftltrfs.htm ---> this site is useful, if not entirely user-friendly, as it takes some getting used to with the different sections separated on the same page, etc.

I, along with everyone at my university, had to take a comprehensive exam last spring that each department requires in order for seniors to graduate. At least in regards to the English department's exam, I ultimately studied infinitely too thoroughly, having been unaware that despite the exam's five-hour length and its content consisting of everything covered in all the English courses available at my institution, the responses the faculty expected were basically on par with the GRE Lit subject test. WIKIPEDIA EVERYTHING. I think the Vade Mecum's material is heavily drawn from Wikipedia articles already; but seriously, with a few exceptions that insist upon slightly more in-depth studying in order to acquire a basic familiarity with the works, Wikipedia concisely outlines all the information one really needs to know for this type of exam. Meaning...my 5-page handwritten analysis of Titania's speech in II.i (the one that begins with "Set your heart at rest," and one of the rare textual explications/interpretations I've thought up that I consider among my tiny top handful of legitimately really good ones) was 4 1/2 pages too long, given that all I actually had to identify was who wrote the passage, what work it's in, who says it in the work, and a basic outline of the context in which it's said. My point is that I think making a spreadsheet, or I guess a Word document with a gigantic table, in which basic information is organized altogether (separate columns for writer, work, period and/or year published, main characters or similar relevant info, BASIC plot summary, etc.) could be a really efficient way to go about studying for this. Most of the info needed is already on the VM and HL sites, so compiling it shouldn't be too terrible.

I had assumed from your remark about how you write LoRs for your students that you were the one with the most advice on the subject. Nobody is arguing; I was just precluding a potential squabble over nothing, which these forums can sometimes provoke unintentionally and usually through user miscommunication. Like this. My mistake for misunderstanding your position.

I think this is probably one of those issues that will inherently result in varying opinions based on how both individual applicants and LoR writers approach the idea of "tailoring" recommendations. A number of legitimate discrepancies factor into the level of personalization one LoR writer feels is worthwhile and/or necessary, and they seem obvious enough that I don't feel the need to detail each one right now. In my opinion, an LoR doesn't magically become more useful for a program's adcom just because it's more tailored to their own school and program. One that might technically be situated on the more "generic" end of this LoR spectrum could easily manage to convey a certain applicant's strengths or high potential to succeed at a school better than another applicant's LoR which, though written with the same school in mind and thus including pertinent details toward that regard, might fail to provide a necessary sense of confidence and enthusiasm that the LoR writer is presumed to have for the applicant to some extent. Anyway, that musing is probably a huge blob of stating the obvious, but I didn't want to see this discussion turn into an argument when there are so many reasons why there's not going to be a universal "right answer" concerning the matter.

I agree with the above posts: submitting what you consider to be the stronger of the two essays is by far your best bet. Your LoR writer will inevitably talk about the first paper in her letters, which to me implies that she'll practically have to include the fact that it won a top award, and that at the very least. She sounds as if she'll have lots of good things to say about you, so I wouldn't fret about this part if I were you. The only thing I feel compelled to add to the unanimously solid advice you've received thus far is that you should try to figure out as best you can if there is a program--or, for that matter, more than one--for which you're planning on applying where even one faculty member under whom you'd like to study has a focus/specialty/concentration that fits especially well with the subject you explored in the first paper. If there is, you might consider an alternative for your WS such as submitting portions of both papers to the specific programs where the first one would likely be just as relevant. However, the policies each school outlines concerning the details about the writing sample(s) requested vary from program to program, as I'm sure you know. Ones that specify their demand for 20-25 pages from a single paper could make this more difficult than it needs to be. Call or email the right people at whichever programs that problem might arise, and I think you'd be surprised how many might be perfectly fine with 2 shorter samples instead. If a program where the faculty member (who you also would presumably name in your SoP) specializes in a subject or topic that he or she then reads about in the sample consisting of your first paper, that factor alone could be what gets you into that program at the end of the day. It's not uncommon for individual faculty members to fight for certain candidates with whom they feel strongly about in regards to how well he or she would do in the program. Not to suggest that such circumstances always or even typically end with the applicant getting accepted; often that faculty member loses the fight for whatever reason and a rejection letter follows despite how close the acceptance notification had been. Of course, perhaps you'll find that the second paper you want to submit anyway is actually more conducive to matching you with specific faculty members' concentrations and personal research. : )

I don't think you need to ask whether a range of 750-800 is "good." The highest anyone can score on the either the Verbal or Quant. sections is 800, which you know, so don't ask questions like this. Regardless of whether you intended to initially (and despite whatever disclaimers of modesty you include), you end up just fishing for compliments in most users' eyes. And no one likes that. Just a tip; take it or leave it, really. In regards to the Quantitative range, that one is worth asking about simply because there's an extra 50-point breadth that extends the possibilities of your exact score. A 650 would be more than fine if you're looking at English programs. I heard of someone who got into an Ivy Ph.D. program with something like a 250 on the Quant. section, and I think most people would agree with me when I say that they're primarily concerned with the Verbal and AW components. Even if you score a 550, that would almost never be *the* reason you got turned down from a program (though there are always snarky new ways they can justify rejecting applicants, so don't quote me on that statement). If it puts any of this into context for you, or perspective, rather--I took the old GRE last October after studying for half an hour in my car outside the testing center. Literally. I was busy and had already decided I wasn't going to apply to programs till this fall, but it was too late to get a refund so I just took the test for practice. My scores with only a half hour's worth of flipping through an ETS guidebook were Q: 580, V: 660, and AW: 5.5. I am absolutely brainless when it comes to all things math, and I honestly guessed randomly on 90% of the questions and happened to do so pretty well that day. My verbal was so low almost entirely because of the antonyms questions, which aren't on the revised GRE, as you're aware, so hopefully it will be like the rest of the Verbal section, which was easy, simply sans antonyms. I've never personally heard of anyone that got a full 6 on the writing. I don't anticipate getting any higher than my last score of 5.5, which I'm pretty sure might have been a typo, or else what I considered to be the two foulest essays I've ever written (aside from my grammar, which I checked about four times before hitting 'complete' or whatever) are actually great examples for how to please the graduate assistants that grade the GRE AW parts. Hope some or any of this is useful for you.

I realize I didn't phrase what I was trying to convey very well in my earlier post. You're obviously right about the pointlessness of wasting money on applications that are premeditatedly submitted with no intentions to accept the potential offers at hand. That is not exactly what my reference, whose B.A. from U Chicago and multitude of friends that got their M.A.s through MAPH (not all of which were fellow undergraduates from U Chicago) seem like decent credentials, suggested. Not exactly at all, really. He said most of the people he knew that had gone through MAPH loved everything about it, and again, there is no implication that some or any of these people to which he's referring also got their B.A.s at Chicago. I quoted what he said to me poorly in my last post; he didn't mean that everybody should apply to random programs they have no desire to attend just for the hell of it. At all. That is stupid. He meant that it's a good program to apply for even if it might be the last place you'd want to go ON your list, meaning it did still make it onto your list, so can't be entirely terrible in this theoretical applicant's eyes. What if you apply to 15 programs and only get into MAPH? I will not waste time going over my last post's content about finances again. However, if you are one of the applicants that doesn't already have loans piled up from your undergraduate studies and furthermore can afford MAPH, and you ONLY get into MAPH, you could do a lot worse than just go and get your Master's. You clearly weren't ready for a Ph.D. program anyway, or possibly, depending on which programs to which you applied, you weren't ready for a more long-term Master's program either. He basically was saying to suck it up and get your Master's in a year and don't complain. The next time you apply, presumably for Ph.D. programs, you'll at least HAVE your M.A., putting you a step above where you were the last time and thus above many other applicants that could very well be equally as qualified as you, but don't have that extra degree. I'm expecting at least one person to find some part of this offensive in some way, so go ahead... But I see no real argument against what I just explained, as long as you take into account the variables I laid out (particularly regarding financial capabilities...YES, MAPH IS EXPENSIVE. SO ARE LOTS OF OTHER PROGRAMS THAT STRICTLY LIMIT ALL FUNDING TO Ph.D. CANDIDATES AND MAKE M.A. STUDENTS PAY THE FULL WAY). Sorry for shouting. I didn't realize till most of that was typed out that I'd left capslock on after "expensive."

Fair enough, I suppose; like I said in my post this morning, I was writing my opinion based off what the previous user had said when describing Interfolio. Clearly I was at least somewhat mistaken, so my apologies for sounding too harsh or anything. But yes, my LoRs will be at least somewhat personalized for each program or school to which I'm applying; I've been working on a detailed spreadsheet for my writers that indicates which programs I'm especially interested in. Not surprisingly, those are typically the ones I also have the most details thought out toward already, at least in regards to my desired research focus or concentration, faculty members under whom I'd hope to work, etc., which are bits of information my two main writers said has usually been helpful when composing really exceptional LoRs. Also, the "two main writers" I mentioned I can explain, in case others have advice or thoughts on this strategy. Two professors are writing letters for every program to which I'm applying. One has known me for years and is my thesis advisor, also now one of my close friends. The other was super excited when I asked if she'd write for me, and said she loves writing LoRs and is evidently quite good at them. For the third letter most programs request, I'm getting various other professors that like and respect me, and also know me both as a student and as a person. There's one professor who will likely do the majority of the third letters, but for a few schools I've asked professors of the nature just described that earned their own Ph.D.s at the same programs to which I'm applying. So, for instance, one professor I asked whose doctorate was received at Chapel Hill is thus far only writing that one letter for me. Similar situation for UVa and I think OSU as well. Anyone have positive or negative feedback on this? Is it actually better to have the same three people write every letter for every application? Just remembered this question I've been meaning to ask: Is it worthwhile to send 4 LoRs if the instructions say they demand a "minimum of 3"? Is it worthwhile if they say more specifically that they "need 3"?

My final research paper for my last medieval literature class was on Sir Gawain and the Green Knight and Pearl. I'm very interested in the works linked to the "alliterative revival," and hope to keep expanding that paper (it never became as thorough as I originally wanted it to be, predominantly because I ran out of time before I managed to include much of my more interesting research, and had to turn it in if I wanted to graduate...). Now I want to revisit it, despite the fact that it's already too long to be a good writing sample (I've already got a better one anyway). I'll definitely check out the alliterative version of the Morte you mentioned. Any particular edition you'd recommend? I've found that with medieval texts, the traditionally reliable publishers don't always provide the best editions for some reason.

I've personally never heard of Interfolio, or really of any other comparable program, site, application, etc. that offers the same "convenience." My advice to anyone who comes across this particular forum discussion is NOT TO USE Interfolio or anything like it. Timshel is completely right in expressing concern over one generic recommendation not really encompassing everything a valuable LoR should. I think about them as my LoR writers' supplement to my SoP--for each individual program or school. The personalized SoPs are great material for the LoR writers to use when they're composing bundles and bundles of letters that, ideally, all individually suggest similar senses of personalization written with one specific program or school in mind. I haven't even Googled Interfolio yet, so literally know only what I've read here. I may very well be mistaken, but it just seems like a service that would end with applicants paying extra money for a handful of formulaic LoRs to submit to every program in which they're interested. Such an emotionless LoR could ultimately be that *one* application component that sets one hopeful on a tier below another, even if it's the only sign of differentiation between the two. Somewhere in a related TGC discussion a user posted something to the effect of a description of a rejection letter he or she received that specifically mentioned the LoRs as not being "gushing" enough. Or something similarly annoying yet now the thing I'll inevitably feel compelled to quote when talking to my LoR writers later this month... le sigh.

To Jbarks: Asking you simply out of curiosity, I'm interested to hear whether or not you've done (or ever do, or plan on undertaking) much work and research involving Malory's Morte d'Arthur. I've taken a number of English classes that focused on Old and/or Middle English texts, truly love medieval literature, and rather consider it and Anglo-Saxon "lit" somewhat of a secondary "specialty," although I don't particularly plan to concentrate on medieval lit during my potential graduate research and writing (aside from in occasional classes I'll inevitably take if I do ever get into a program). That being said, and I assure no offense is intended toward anyone...but Malory nearly killed me. Or rather, Malory nearly made me kill me. Perhaps because the Morte was the only lengthy ME text written in prose I've ever had to read in a class... : ) I'm just wondering what someone like you, with significantly more background on the subject, might have to say about it. If anything.

Thanks for clearing that up so neatly; I didn't at all want to appear as though I was under a misconceived assumption, but have this problem where I take everything far too seriously... You're definitely right, though, about that "feel" of familiarity one usually gets just by taking a particular test even once; the revised GRE will cause basically the same emotions and anxieties in test takers as the former version did. Although, at least from my perspective, any calculator that works at all will exponentially (hah) improve how I approach the quantitative sections. I ended up scoring literally 300 points higher on the quant. portion of the GRE I took last fall than what I'd been consistently hitting in the multiple practice tests I'd half-heartedly sort of at least attempted mostly. It was probably the best effort in successful random guessing made in the history of time (I say this with no exaggeration, as I honestly didn't ever know how to work 3/4 of the problems in every practice test I took, and still don't, for that matter). I've actually been coming to the grim conclusion that I never truly learned how either to add, subtract, multiply, or--God forbid--divide fractions, nor was I taught how to do anything with the square root of any number higher than 4 other than to draw the big angle thing exactly how my teacher drew hers. Also, if someone can give me a legitimate circumstance, other than when taking the GRE, that I will ever need to know anything about either of those topics, I will edit/proofread his or her writing sample, or an SoP, or something to that effect that by its nature scorns the very existence of maths.

All I've heard directly about the MAPH program is that it's "worth applying to, at least, even if you don't plan on accepting a potential offer to attend." Such words came from the professor I had for a few classes, who also served as my thesis advisor and who is now simply a good friend of mine whose input I typically value. He attended UChicago for English as an undergrad, and got his Ph.D. in English from Duke within the past five years (in other words, he's pretty familiar with what we're all going through and/or undertaking). When I asked about the MAPH option, he said that I shouldn't immediately disregard it solely because it's not a degree "IN ENGLISH," and that while it's obviously friendlier to applicants with less restricted financial capabilities, for those people (that do, in fact, exist) it's actually a great option. That being said, I personally am planning to apply, if only because there's not a very good reason for me not to do so; if I were actually accepted, which itself is unlikely, I'd only commit AFTER finding housing and a job in Chicago first. I'm going into the application process with no hopes whatsoever (mainly so that the splintered shards of my heart don't hit the ground as loudly when it breaks later in the spring); if I even get accepted to one program on the one condition that I donate my family in order to be allowed a spot, I'll probably buy myself a cake or something. To catch the tumbling heart-shards, at the very least.

FOR EXAMPLE (copied and pasted directly from the current online practice test ETS has available for the Lit in English subject exam): Questions 27-29 refer to the excerpts below. You may find it helpful to read the questions before you read the excerpts. ( A ) Methought I stood where trees of every clime, Palm, myrtle, oak, and sycamore, and beech, With plantane, and spice blossoms, made a screen; In neighbourhood of fountains, by the noise Soft showering in mine ears, and, by the touch Of scent, not far from roses. ( B ) Nor where Abassin kings their issue guard, Mount Amara (though this by some supposed True Paradise), under the Ethiop line By Nilus’ head, enclosed with shining rock, A whole day’s journey high, but wide remote From this Assyrian garden, where the fiend Saw undelighted all delight, all kind Of living creatures, new to sight and strange. ( C ) And in the midst of all, a fountaine stood, Of richest substaunce, that on earth might bee, So pure and shiny, that the silver flood Through every channell running one might see; Most goodly it with curious imageree Was over-wrought, and shapes of naked boyes, Of which some seemd with lively jollitee, To fly about, playing their wanton toyes, Whilest others did them selves embay in liquid joyes. ( D ) So twice five miles of fertile ground With walls and towers were girdled round: And there were gardens bright with sinuous rills, Where blossomed many an incense-bearing tree; And here were forests ancient as the hills, Enfolding sunny spots of greenery. ( E ) Here waving groves a chequered scene display, And part admit, and part exclude the day; As some coy nymph her lover’s warm address Nor quite indulges, nor can quite repress. There, interspersed in lawns and opening glades, Thin trees arise that shun each other’s shades. 27. Which lines occur in a description of the Bower of Bliss? 28. Which lines occur in a description of the Garden of Eden? 29. Which lines occur in a description of Xanadu?