bdon19

http://www.thenation.com/article/160410/faulty-towers?page=0,0 This article is a must-read. I want to go to grad school because, as he says, my happiness depends on that. But I also want to play a role in reforming the system. The more I know about academia the more strongly I feel about it, and I want to go to grad school with my eyes wide open, knowing what problems will need to be addressed by the time I'm on the job market but also already trying to come up with possible solutions. I also get to meet this guy in the spring. So. Freaking. Excited.

I'm not an Irish lit person, but WashU has a research area focusing on Irish Literature. I'd suggest you check it out if you haven't already! https://english.wustl.edu/irish-literature

Okay, so, as some of you know (based on my blog entry), I had a really discouraging meeting with one of my letter-writers earlier this week. She had a very pessimistic attitude towards my applications in general, particularly regarding the schools I had on my list and the fact that my writing sample does not engage with the period I will be focusing on. I won't go into specifics now, but I've decided that I feel so strongly about using the writing sample I'd planned on that I will NOT be taking her advice in that matter. I know how to tie my writing sample together with my interests in my SoP, and I will do that. Interestingly, almost all of the schools that had (until now) made the final cut on my list do not specify that it is preferred to submit a writing sample in your proposed field (which many others, I can now see, do). Any advice contrary to (or in support of) my decision regarding the writing sample would be appreciated. However, my main concern lies with the programs I'm applying to. Up until now, I felt fairly confident in my list. I've made a few substitutions here and there, but it has for the most part stayed the same. Now, I want to do some drastic re-considering. I know some programs will remain the same--Indiana, Rutgers, Texas--but others may (sadly, in some cases) have to go. How might you suggest I go about re-researching? Previously, I was looking into programs that were strong for all of my interests; should I instead be considering one field a priority? Or is it still smart to look at the whole picture?

Haha...I answered that question (interpreting the entire passage based on the identification), three different ways, finally giving up. I sure as hell hope I remembered to ultimately leave it blank.

My focus is on novel theory and the history of the novel. For applications that require me to choose a period, I'm calling myself an 18th-centuryist, but I'm more interested in the development of the form from its rise in 1740 through the early Modernist period. I'm particularly interested in studying the novel from a Bakhtinian perspective, looking at the ways in which different types of novelistic discourse play with one another in a formal/generic sense as well as a socio-historical sense. I'm also interested in issues of canonicity regarding the history of the novel. Edited to clarify my research interests and adjust it more towards what I plan to write in my SOP.

*Sigh* I adore Cornell with my whole heart. I met with a LoR writer last week who kept saying, "If you were to end up in Ithaca," and every time I died a little inside. I'm not counting on it because I know I shouldn't. But I love that place. So much.

Ohhhhh, man. This is getting ridiculous. I'm finding answers to things EVERYWHERE lately. I'm reading Bakhtin for a class, and I just happened upon an answer to a question I didn't even look at because I'd never seen the name before. Figures. At least I'm learning...? ETA: I JUST FOUND TWO PASSAGES THAT I IDENTIFIED CORRECTLY. I need to stop obsessing about this test, but guys, really, this makes me feel so much better about my life. And a little bit smarter. Hahaha. Oh, well, at least it's keeping me motivated to make my writing sample even stronger!

Ohhh I like this! It's fun seeing where everyone else is applying, especially as we get to know each other around these parts. Mine are in my signature, too, and have been for a while... Though my formerly solidified list has undergone some modifications of late (for the better)! Wouldn't it be fun if some of us ended up in the same places? Haha...my roommate makes fun of me because I'm always talking about "my virtual friends." I'm so lame sometimes...but hey, I'm an English major. Most of my friends aren't real in the first place!

I didn't find TripWillis's joke very funny. Mainly because there may have been a question on the exam that could have been Lord of the Rings trivia. And at one point I interpreted it as such.

Yep. My roommate kept yelling at me yesterday for randomly remembering things to look up. She got so sick of me saying, "Well, there's another one I got wrong" in my most dejected voice that she banned me from talking about the test at all. Hahaha

@Two Espressos: I definitely say still study. The thing that helped me most was reviewing poetry forms the night before--types of sonnets, stanzas, you name it, most of that was tested. That being said, all of the "cocktail party" stuff I'd studied for the past two years basically went to crap. It simply wasn't necessary. @Phil Sparrow, I get what you're saying, that prior knowledge is what is tested here, I really do. However, when you're expected to answer questions that are dependent upon small details in a part of the work that is not included in the passage on the text, I just don't see how that's all that fair. I can understand testing things like that in the identification format, for sure. I just don't get when six to ten questions depend on knowing the larger context, especially when it's a work that's a bit of a "fringe" canonical text. I'm just still bitter about this test. And about the fact that I may be losing a shot at getting into 7 schools that I love because of how horribly I've done, despite the fact that I started studying for this test two years ago. It's just not fair. Also, I realize that I am being overdramatic and that this test is not the "be-all or end-all" (I definitely failed to correctly identify that passage, fml) of grad school admissions. I also realize that there's a chance I did better than I'm currently thinking I did. But there's also a chance that I did much, much worse. I've been in a weird slump all day, and I know it's because of this stupid test. If only I didn't have to wait so long for the inevitable bad news... :/

Me neither! Double

I took the Literature in English test today. It was, well, awful. I cried for a good hour after the test because I was so frustrated. The test format was completely different from what I was expecting, based on the practice tests and information provided by the ETS. There was a lot of really obscure literature tested, and there were no identifications like the test has always (to my knowledge) had in previous years. Instead, it was all reading comprehension--way too much to read and analyze crammed into 170 minutes.

THIS. There were some works that I was familiar with that I am absolutely certain very few people taking the test would actually know--things that I only know because of offbeat professors and whatnot. I felt like way too many of these passages dealt with really obscure texts (or at least obscure portions of more familiar texts), but even more frustrating was the extent to which THEY RELIED ON PREVIOUS KNOWLEDGE OF THOSE TEXTS. Seriously. The questions I actually liked the most were the ones that didn't ask to be identified but instead just provided an author's name, because those didn't expect previous knowledge. I'm really depressed that my newly-acquired knowledge of Chaucer and 17th-century poetry ended up being completely useless, too.

Sigh. Well, now my breakdown moment is over, and I'm glad to see that I'm not alone in this post-exam frustration--though I'm surely not glad that we all had to suffer through this awful exam. I feel like we should have had some sort of heads up at some point in the game that the test format wouldn't necessarily always be the same. While I agree with dokkeynot that the reading comp questions were easier in some cases, as the questions often followed from one another, this really was mainly the case when I already was able to identify the passage in question. For passages that I couldn't as easily identify, there were some moments when I'd get through the first four or five questions and then realize that I was reading it incorrectly--then I'd have to go back and re-think all the answers, wasting precious time. Overall, it was time that was the main issue. I don't have time to go through four stanzas of a poem just to find the main verb of the sentence. It just didn't work out, given that I had somewhere around, oh, I don't know, like 40 seconds per question. I was banking on those "easy" identifications to allow me lots more time for the reading comp questions. I really felt one of the worst feelings of my life when I opened the test book and didn't find it at all similar to what I was expecting. Also, I don't want to sound pretentious or anything, but as far as canonical literature is concerned, I may not be well-versed or anything, but I definitely can recognize just about any canonical writer by name--it was one of my memory's strengths that I was banking on helping me through this test. There were names on this test that I've never heard in my entire life, and not just because I was blanking. I've just never heard them. Ever.

I just cried for the past hour after finishing the test. It was that horrible.

Aaaaaargh just have to chime in with my frustration again. I thought the Princeton Review was helpful for stuff like Chaucer but I DO NOT LIKE their practice test. I just finished it, and it was brutal. I really, really doubt that we're going to be expected to identify a quotation from The Notebook of Malte Laurids Brigge. It's just not important enough a text. I can understand if it was something based on style, but in that case it just wasn't. There were a lot of other really arbitrary things in there, too. I wasn't a fan of the Princeton Review for the regular GRE, either. I always scored the lowest on those practice tests. And in this case, too I was really, really frustrated by the Princeton Review.

I have the Princeton Review book, and I've used it, to an extent. I didn't like the test, so I stopped taking it, but I may go back to it tonight. I did like that it concisely summarizes Chaucer and some other people I'm really behind on, but for the most part I've been relying on the Vade Mecum site and such.

Ahhhhhh, yes. That makes me feel a lot better, too. I guess I shouldn't be freaking out so much. I scored 700 and 730 on my most recent practice tests, though I'm not sure how accurate those scores are because I've taken the practice tests before and therefore was able to anticipate quite a few of the questions and answers. I guess I've just been kind of feeling like this test will validate my worth as an English major or something, even though that's clearly not true. God, I just can't wait to get this over with.

Okay...I'm having another late-night freakout. I really have NO ****ING IDEA what kind of scores my schools are looking for. The only clue I can get is from Indiana, which says "Verbal and Subject scores should approach 700." So if I'm gauging myself at around a 700, am I fine? I HAVE NO CLUE. Gahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh. Why must the stupid multiple choice test be the most frustrating part of the entire application process???? Seriously. I started studying for this test the summer before my junior year. But I still feel unprepared. BECAUSE NOBODY IN THEIR RIGHT MINDS CAN MEMORIZE ALL THIS STUFF. I'm going insane right now. Better go off and read some Ruskin and Cardinal Newman. Because apparently I'll need to know them. Oh, and learn to tell the difference between Herrick and Marvell and Crashaw and Herbert. HOW IS IT FAIR to ask me to distinguish between them? HOW? /end rant. Sorry, guys. One more day.

Honestly, I'm tempted to just giving up and not studying any more for this stupid subject test. Nearly all the questions I got wrong on the practice test I just finished are from such obscure works that studying wouldn't help anyway. I'M SO FRUSTRATED. Gahhhhhhhh I could have recognized Coleridge had they used a stanza including Christabel...but Geraldine?? COME ON. Sorry for the rant. It's just...it's 3 am and I have only a few more days and I'm going to ask for two letters of rec tomorrow and I'm stressed to the max without this stupid test adding to it!

Just a pointer, to relieve the potential for a LOT of added stress on the test day: I've heard a lot of stories from posters about test centers being moved the day of the test. So, though I was able to register for the subject test at my school, I wanted to make sure that the test center was correct (something about it just didn't seem right). I e-mailed my university's career center, and, sure enough, the test location was somewhere else. The woman had no idea ETS had been telling us something different! Thank god I checked when I did!!

Well, I don't know about their Art History program, but I know that I'm in love with Cornell's English program. Though I hate to admit it (for fear that I won't be admitted), it's currently my top choice program--not for prestige reasons or because it's an Ivy, but because of the faculty there and their relation to my primary interests. I've heard the same thing--about the grad program not being the best--for just about every Ivy out there, including Yale and Harvard, for various reasons and various programs. It's really all subjective, and one program is going to inherently be "better" or "worse" than others in different areas and for different reasons. Again, it all boils down to fit. That keeps getting crammed down my throat, but I'm coming to believe in it more and more.