Jack Cade

An anecdotal tidbit. In looking over my app material, I have realized that the best offer I received was from a school in which the third sentence of my SOP was a fragment. It was an early application and I was in the middle of writing seminar papers, but I not only got accepted to this school, R1 competitive middle of the pack, but also was nominated for a fellowship. The reason given for the acceptance and nomination was my sample (which was far from perfect) and fit for their department. One of the other admittance offers I received from another R1, competitive had a horrible sample, but a finalized SOP that was in 'good' shape, but I also fit in there as well. Just an FYI.

Ditto, Semenza is a must read; although I would advise you to take him with slightly less salt then he and others have given his text. The picture has changed quite a bit in just the four years since this book came out--obviously it was written a year or two earlier. Also, his essentially meritocratic outlook obviously limits the book's validity. You could also start looking through the Chronicle of Higher Ed to kind of familiarize yourself with the world that you'll soon be landing in. And if you know what you are interested in working on, make sure you've read as many of the important texts as you can. For instance, early modern folks should read Greenblatt, everybody pretty much has to read Foucault (as in all of his major works)--although I hear tell that 17th cent folk don't, but I do not believe those rumors. But I repeat my earlier advice, repeated by others, enjoy this last period of freedom as much as possible, it will end.

Read, write, think, do what you love about the game as much as you can, as freely as you can. But do make sure that you are getting better at it. Because come August all of that will stop, except for the getting better. You'll get better, but in ever more specific, constricted, and ultimately directed ways. Enjoy the next four months of complete freedom. But don't not do the thing (I say fuck Webster, et al. I like double negatives, most everybody else has them), just do it on your terms while you can. This is the last chance you get until you're a full prof or maybe until you're a DP. To be clear though, I wouldn't trade being in the game for being out.

We did what many said was impossible. MSU in the Fall. One of my top choices since last fall.

All things being relatively equal I'd have to go with Ohio State University. [Edit] I totally have no idea if that was good or bad advice. Lets just say my advice was biased and leave it that. Ok, and dishonest. Glad you didn't take it.

Amen to that. It's cause we're trained to think. By definition of our training we reflexively think beyond boxes, while understanding those boxes, whatever they may be.

Seconded. And the rest seems right on as well.

But only the idiots, like all of us, are going into English...

But do we want to do that half-way through April?

exactement!

Ah well don't be loquacious, sometimes that is annoying when you're working with someone who likes you and you don't like them. And yes, that happens. Its not personal, it just is. If everybody liked you, what a dull person you'd have to be, or painfully, pathetically needy to try so hard to get them to like you. Recognize the situation and do your best to make it professional and painless for you both. THAT will reflect well on you. Second, double check what kind of work he does, see if maybe what you're doing is profoundly uninteresting to him; I do power, social theory, class identity sorts of stuff, gender, sexuality, or body studies stuff makes me want to brain myself after a shockingly short amount of time---this is tricky cause that is the exact kind of work my partner does, fortunately my stuff sends her looking for a way to change the conversation channel just as quickly. My MA advisor for instance, is not really even remotely interested in the way I do the thing, but for a variety of reasons we're stuck with each other for a few more months. I like her, I think she kind of likes me. So it works, but we don't get on all that well, we're just nice people working together. Third, you could summon up your courage, be forthright, and ask... Fourth, some people have a hard time being friendly when they are in the evaluating chair. Also, he may intimidated by your knowledge or something, or interprets your conversation as a boorish effort at self-promotion. Or perhaps there is some screwball attraction thing going on... Maybe you need to brush your teeth/tongue better or more often. Maybe you've done something that somehow was misinterpreted... Maybe you're a republican and he's a raging liberal or vice versa. Maybe your thesis project is weak, and he just hasn't had the heart to tell you---I honestly doubt this, if you are doing it, it has been filtered, and that process usually insures that even us dumb asses produce something reasonable. All in all, it is almost over, it is probably mostly in your imagination. And if it isn't who cares, he'll be in the rear view mirror by this time next year.

Seriously considered the unfunded year. Few people that I have known get funded in their second year. Very very few, like 1 versus about a dozen who did not end up getting funded for their masters despite hinted promises. Take the year break, unless you are older, there is no rush. And the debt just isn't worth it. The funded positions are fairly important. That said, I know folks who are successful who paid for their MA.

Ah interesting that you all think reapply. There are other things I'd might do, but a PhD ain't involved in any of them.

I hear tell that the aquarium has a wale shark... The airport is huge, and there seems to often be low lying cloud cover. It is a pretty part of the US. Sa'll I got.

Some have already begun that extrapolation. I said it to a friend today who is on the Job Market now, things are never intractable. If enough of us believe a fix must be made, then we can make it. Who I worry about are the folks coming out of the top programs with a vested interest in the status quo. Folks on top really like merit-based rationales. They are are a really stroke to the ego, if you happen to already be at the top. Its all so very early modern.