rems

Well, now, in thestage's defense, I think it's totally possible to make astute observations of my mental health and the effectiveness of those whom I address my mental health with based on the information provided through this forum. I also think it's very effective to judge all peoples based solely on one factor. I mean, s/he does have experience.

I actually have a therapist, and he said that if I want to compulsively check app pages, then I should do it because it at least offers a few minutes of relief from the anxiety. And he actually has a PhD.

HAHA I wish!

YYYYYYYYYYYAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yup -- but everything else on the calendar is split into a "region" or place or whatever bc it is WORLD lit. So I thought it was a little weird to all of a sudden have a text that didn't have a location. I suppose I could call it British, but I don't really think that's accurate. Or I could call it, "tsk tsk, white people." Or "White Perceptions" might be a little more pc. I suppose I could just not call it anything, or call it "Postcolonialism Cont." and not worry about it. But I like categories.

While we're all here, I'm developing a syllabus for a world lit survey class, and I'm including Heart of Darkness. I can't think of what to call it -- my course calendar lists what the "theme" for the week is, e.g. Contemporary Indian Lit or Russian Realism. What would you list Heart of Darkness as? I'm pretty sure Conrad is Polish, but he lived in Britain so he's one of those weird inbetweeners like Eliot. Any suggestions? I could just call it Modernism, Early Modernism, or Postcolonial Lit (I'm thinking that one might be it), or maybe, "What Happens When White People Go To Africa." Ideas? Thoughts? Comments?

Good point -- I didn't think about an email that pretty much asks, "should I apply/do you think I have a chance?" I would strongly discourage that sort of email.

I could be completely wrong about this, but I just don't see the problem with emailing a prof. If you're being really annoying, rude, or whatever, then it could hurt your chances to email someone. But, I can't help but think it's not weird or even rude to attempt to contact someone. If they don't want to talk to you, they won't email you back. But I highly doubt that they would open your email and think, "The nerve! How dare thou attempt to email me! I am a distinguished scholar of learning! How dare anyone attempt to talk to me without my permission!" How else did people learn about programs BEFORE the internet? They probably picked up a phone, and called that motherfucker. So, I think a quick email can't hurt you. I also don't think it's necessary, but I don't think it carries a doomsday warning.

Ditto.

I didn't email anyone who's work I wasn't familiar with so it didn't look like I was "fishing" for profs who would bite at good schools. I think I emailed 6 profs, but only heard back from 2. Most were emailed in late August, so I assume they were too super busy to respond, and I didn't bother re-sending.

UMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM Harry Potter definitely counts.

This scares me sometimes. That's even why I took out the schools I'm applying to from my signature. I hope they don't realize I haven't read Paradise Lost

One of my apps asked for this, and since I had been in contact with the prof, I listed it. I'm not totally sure why they ask for this -- I was thinking maybe they specifically contact that prof about you if they're not on the adcom, etc. WHAT?! That's debated? I've heard people say "they" personally don't like the idea, but I didn't know there might a "general" rule or etiquette about it.

Gotcha -- I agree, actually.

I think you're taking this a little too seriously. It's not like I go to confession guilt ridden over not having read a book. These posts are hyperbolic at best, and just supposed to be funny and lighthearted. I apologize if words like "shame" or "guilt" thrown around in a forum are offensive/uncomfortable for you, but they aren't for me. I certainly didn't mean to suggest that anyone should feel guilt and/or shame over not having read a book.

Oh good question! Mine would Paradise Lost. Because these forums are anonymous I feel that I can admit I was supposed to read it for a Romanticism course in grad school, and I just sparknoted it. Now, when someone talks about it, I act like I've read it. For shame me, for shame! And I think I've been required to read Heart of Darkness, like, six times. I'm even teaching it this semester. I'm actually impressed that you haven't read it (not sarcastic).

I haven't read any of these books except Moby Dick which I though was good but not life changing. Does that reflect poorly upon me as an English major?

I think the issue with "love of literature" angles is that they tend to overshadow research interests. I think if you have a strong SOP and whatever else, then writing that you also love literature isn't going to change anything. BUT, if you're applying just because you love literature, and you don't really have any research plans, I think that comes off as a big warning sign to the adcoms.

No, I didn't mention anything about adjuncting in my SOP because it was on my CV. The only school that even specifically asked me to address teaching in the SOP was Ohio, and for them I just mentioned which classes I've taught as a TA and as an adjunct. I'm not really sure what mentioning this in the SOP accomplishes.

AW shit -- thems fighting words. Sounds like a Canon-Off is bout to go down. I'll start: I think graphic novels are better literature than Jane Austen.

I get the props deserved for Woolf, and I would never contend that she doesn't deserve it. I just get really bored reading her stuff -- like, really bored. I don't say this much because my department is Woolf CRAZY. Can I also admit I don't get what people see in Zadie Smith either? I can't get into her stuff -- maybe I'm just really bored easily or something But I also really like Pynchon and Wallace. So maybe I'm the one with bad taste

So, I don't quotequote "hate" her, but I largely fail to see why everyone loves Woolf so much. I understand her importance in the genre and the canon, and whatever, but I honestly find her novels to be a chore with little pay off. I also think there are many female Modernists who are much better, but don't get as much credit in comparison to how much cred Woolf gets. Djuna Barnes comes to mind. Or HD (who gets some but not nearly enough). And I second the comments about Diaz and Austen. Especially Austen.

I think it's the norm for them to pick up the bill no matter level school it is. I worked the front desk at a hotel for two years in an area with one big state school and one smaller state school, and we booked rooms for potential students all the time. We could always tell when they really wanted them because they would even ask us to put cards and junk in their room before they arrived. So if you show up to a card or a basket of fruit in your room, then they must have loved your app.

Yes totally! I was even saying to someone the other day, "Well, what happens if I ACTUALLY get in?" And they were like, "Well, that would be good." And I was like, "Would it? Would it be good?" I guess I'll just get day drunk, again.

Arezoo, I think you're on the right path so far. I also got an MA before heading to PhD because, first, my undergrad GPA left a lot to be desired, and, second, because I come from a not-highly-ranked school. I thought the MA would offer me a lot of chances to make my apps better, and I feel, personally, like it was the right choice. Of course, a month from now I might be singing a different tune, but as of right now I think my app is stronger because I have two years under my belt in an MA program which let me expand my CV, gave me teaching experience, gave a writing sample from my MA thesis, etc. I'm not totally sure if I'm answering your question, and I would have to know more about your situation to really assess the situation but from what you've written I can at least say I don't think you're making the wrong choices. Everyone else, I think it's been said before and it will be said again, there's no one factor that gets us in the door of any institution Unfortunately, I looked at the GRE list, and I threw up in my mouth a little. Anyone been to UVA's page? They actually say that their admits usually score in the 99% on both the general and the subject. WFT????? This thread is basically us just blowing time waiting for schools to either graciously accept us or for to shit on our dreams. So, I agree that this conversation is fairly useless, but as far as convos on this site go recently, this one is pretty good and interesting. I've known two people who had baller numbers -- both had 4.0 undergrad and both had top-notch GRE scores. Both of them didn't get into any PhD programs, and that's how they ended up in my MA program (because it doesn't have a deadline for admission and they were in the area so they took time off before applying again). One of them actually came from a highly ranked private school. So, numbers and your ug institute don't always cut it. We each present a package deal -- typically that package deal will be consistent, AKA an accepted student will probably have great GRE scores. BUT, sometimes they are inconsistent, AKA an accepted student will have lower numbers because the rest of their package was good enough. Sometimes I wonder if it's not just a correlative trend. Like, if you have a banging writing sample, SOP, CV, and letters of rec, you probably have banging numbers too. I'm not sure numbers get people in, ever. I think that your numbers just back up what you already have to show. HOWEVER, I do earnestly believe (I could be totally ignorant in which case I'll pack up my books and head out of here with my head held low) that you can present a package that is awesome, but has mediocre numbers. I think numbers help, but I don't think they are the end-all end-all. Lots of schools are moving away from GRE scores because they do present a class and race bias (a rant for another time), and they don't really demonstrate your ability to succeed as a scholar. They show you're smart, sure, but can you produce interesting, intriguing, ground breaking work because you can answer a reading comp question? Just something to think about. And on another note, from what I've heard, AW scores don't matter too much. They probably matter for funding at state schools, but I don't think they matter too much. A 3.5 might be a tad low for an English major, but I wouldn't fret about it. My verbal scores are pretty bad, and I'm just hoping no one notices. Also, the AW portion is more for hard science students so they can prove they're able to write effectively to convey an idea -- it isn't designed for English majors. I have really high AW scores but that's because I teach freshmen comp, and I just wrote an essay I'd give an A to in ENGL 101, and, well, there you go. That's what they're looking for: Freshmen comp level writing. Your ability to write a five paragraph essay because the hard sciences need that ability. We do not, so our scores don't matter as much.