echo449

Your advisors don't need to be directly in your area of study (after all, you will probably have an outside reader for the diss!). What is important is finding faculty in field that you feel would support your own research--this is a different question than having the same particular interests. Your advisors are not there to direct your research so much as ensure that your research responds to and recognizably fits in with your area of study in general. I.e., if there are more than a few faculty working in the time period that you've chosen, and their methodologies are not directly opposed to what you want to do, you shouldn't worry about having no one to guide you. 

I wouldn't worry too much about what you wear. I would advise you mostly to look clean and put together, but not necessarily even business casual. Honestly, if you've been admitted, they are selling you on the school, and, so long as you don't dress as if you couldn't give a shit to be there, then you'll be fine. 

They almost certainly will not care about something small like that, &, if that was enough to disqualify you, just remind yourself that a department with that little generosity is probably a bad fit for you. 

One problem that you should be aware of is that these schools that you've listed may not support a "pure" theory dissertation--you may have to write a dissertation about literature, and/or go on the job market with the training they offer as a literature program. You should look at recent dissertations and the work of current students before you apply to these places, if literature as such is not your bag. 

I don't have the time right now to speak to how you should tailor your SOP, but Max Cavitch at Penn works at precisely this intersection. 

Also, FWIW, psychoanalysis is still major in many avenues of theoretical thinking today. If you wanted to pursue it as a project, I think, with a little tinkering, you could easily make your interests sound relevant and up to date. We can talk more over PM if you want to discuss these things in more depth/ get some recommended texts. 

To clarify, when I said application package, I mean potential problems in both the content of the package but also with the schools that one is applying to. In the sciences, it's very possible to have a perfectly fine application package content but if an applicant is applying to schools that they're not well suited for, then one might not get any offers. But if one is able to find 10 good-fit programs (both in terms of research interest and educational background/experience) then not getting any offers out of 10 would suggest that one is doing something wrong in the essays or other aspect of the application.
I am not familiar with the humanities / literary programs of course, so maybe you do mean that even with 10 good-fit program selections, it's common to have no offers. But in case it wasn't clear, just wanted to say that by "problems with the application package", I also include not picking schools that are good fits.
I forgot to mention this! Good point! Usually not available to foreign students but a great resource to consider for American students applying to US schools.
I agree with you that with unlimited resources, applying to more schools is certainly better than fewer! I also think echo449 makes a good point that there is an actual cost to these applications and so each (pair of) applicants will need to do their own cost-benefit analysis. For some concrete examples, let's say there are 4 schools in the LA area, 4 in the Seattle area, 7 in Boston, 3 in New York City, 2 in Philly and 2 in Ithaca. That's 22 programs. If a couple can afford all of them then of course applying to 22 programs will maximize the chances of getting what they want. But with limited resources, they might choose to skip the Philly and Ithaca schools and only apply to 18. (or perhaps even narrow it down to 15). 
I think this is also an important factor because most people don't have goals that they want to achieve "no matter the cost". It's very reasonable for a couple in this situation to decide to pursue other career paths or options other than both partners attending PhD programs in the same place at the same time. Perhaps a couple might decide the cost of submitting 7 additional applications ($1400, potentially, plus time taken away from working on the other 15 applications) is not worth this extra cost.
So, I think it still makes sense to include context when discussing tips/opinions/advice. Applying to 20-30 programs isn't the best path for everyone and depends on each person's goals.

@TakeruK's....take is smart and well considered. My opinion also has to do with the market and funding--if you are both applying to 20-30 programs, thats 4-6k. If you both get accepted to proximate schools with less than ideal funding structures, there may be loans that you both have to take out. Almost no program, in the current market, can guarantee better than 50% placement, and the job market for 20th century american lit is bleak. Last year there were around 8 jobs interviewing at MLA. These are bad numbers, and, while I respect the energy and passion of other people in this thread, I think that life on the other end needs to be considered when recommending how many schools one should apply to. 

I feel like I should be more than a negative nancy, though, so, to OP, I guess I would advise you both to apply to the maximum number of schools that you can justify in the Northeast. If you both get into programs based around here, commuting to see each other/living together becomes a much more reasonable proposition than anywhere else in the country, imo. For people w/ yr interests, that would mean apps at Penn, Rutgers, Princeton, Columbia, NYU, Brown, Yale, CUNY, and Harvard. I know these are scary big name places, but idk if I'd rec anywhere else on the corridor. But, if you're grades and profiles are as encouraging as your profs say, then you should have decent shots anyways.

Many of the papers you will write in coursework will be 20 pages, so I would strongly consider expanding your work to at least 20 pages so you can demonstrate your capability to make a longer argument. Is there a portion of the paper that can be fleshed out theoretically? Is there historical background that could add nuance to your claim? Ask yrself questions like that to see where you could build a little more

Your advisors don't need to be directly in your area of study (after all, you will probably have an outside reader for the diss!). What is important is finding faculty in field that you feel would support your own research--this is a different question than having the same particular interests. Your advisors are not there to direct your research so much as ensure that your research responds to and recognizably fits in with your area of study in general. I.e., if there are more than a few faculty working in the time period that you've chosen, and their methodologies are not directly opposed to what you want to do, you shouldn't worry about having no one to guide you. 

Your advisors don't need to be directly in your area of study (after all, you will probably have an outside reader for the diss!). What is important is finding faculty in field that you feel would support your own research--this is a different question than having the same particular interests. Your advisors are not there to direct your research so much as ensure that your research responds to and recognizably fits in with your area of study in general. I.e., if there are more than a few faculty working in the time period that you've chosen, and their methodologies are not directly opposed to what you want to do, you shouldn't worry about having no one to guide you. 

Your advisors don't need to be directly in your area of study (after all, you will probably have an outside reader for the diss!). What is important is finding faculty in field that you feel would support your own research--this is a different question than having the same particular interests. Your advisors are not there to direct your research so much as ensure that your research responds to and recognizably fits in with your area of study in general. I.e., if there are more than a few faculty working in the time period that you've chosen, and their methodologies are not directly opposed to what you want to do, you shouldn't worry about having no one to guide you. 

I hear what you're saying here, but, to be honest, this kind of problem is very much a product of you being in the early stages of your academic career. If your readings, when you decide to use a "lens," are coming out the same way every time, perhaps you should consider exploring more widely in the theory/criticism. One of the limits of the "lens" framing of critical language is that it makes decades of writing appear homogenous--it is a real possibility that you'll find these approaches much more lively and exciting in the future, after you've gone beyond the introductions to these fields that you received in undergrad. 

I understand this may sound a little condescending, but, speaking for myself and my experiences here, it's very hard to understand the scope of a field, and its possibilities, until you've been reading around in it for a couple years. 

I hear what you're saying here, but, to be honest, this kind of problem is very much a product of you being in the early stages of your academic career. If your readings, when you decide to use a "lens," are coming out the same way every time, perhaps you should consider exploring more widely in the theory/criticism. One of the limits of the "lens" framing of critical language is that it makes decades of writing appear homogenous--it is a real possibility that you'll find these approaches much more lively and exciting in the future, after you've gone beyond the introductions to these fields that you received in undergrad. 

I understand this may sound a little condescending, but, speaking for myself and my experiences here, it's very hard to understand the scope of a field, and its possibilities, until you've been reading around in it for a couple years. 

AdornosDoorknob, I'm saying this as an Americanist, though not as an expert in Southern Literature, but any decent admissions committee will expect you to account for the white nationalism of the southern agrarian project if you decided to pursue it. I understand that you don't want to work on race, but I think critical race theory is going to be viewed (rightly, imo) as central to the project as you are articulating it right now. 

In terms of wanting to define post-postmodernism, well, I think that's a HUGE project that many people are already engaging in--even though, simultaneously, many people are also becoming tired of precisely that sort of labeling. I work on contemporary American literature, so I'd be happy to talk more over DM about recent work in the field.

AdornosDoorknob, I'm saying this as an Americanist, though not as an expert in Southern Literature, but any decent admissions committee will expect you to account for the white nationalism of the southern agrarian project if you decided to pursue it. I understand that you don't want to work on race, but I think critical race theory is going to be viewed (rightly, imo) as central to the project as you are articulating it right now. 

In terms of wanting to define post-postmodernism, well, I think that's a HUGE project that many people are already engaging in--even though, simultaneously, many people are also becoming tired of precisely that sort of labeling. I work on contemporary American literature, so I'd be happy to talk more over DM about recent work in the field.

At Rutgers, the teaching and fellowship years are split. You're on fellowship for your first year. You teach comp as a solo instructor your second year (1/1 course load). In your third year, you do a mentored TA for an introductory lit class in the fall and either teach Comp again in the spring or hope that you get assigned to another lit class (I was the TA for my advisor's Shakespeare class that semester) - you're also reading for exams this semester. In your fourth year, you do a 2/0, usually a mix of stand-alone Comp and Lit classes (double Comp if you're unlucky or if you already got a stand-alone during the previous summer). So in the spring semester of that year you're not teaching. Fifth and sixth years you're on fellowship again (sixth year you can choose to take a fellowship or a TAship, but most people take fellowships). You teach another 2/0 in your seventh year. The administration encourages us to do 2/0s our two teaching years after orals exams, since it gives us more time to write in the second semester. You can request a 1/1 however if you really want it.
I'm in the second semester of my fourth year, and I really like this system. If you can switch a 1/1 to a 2/0 and you're the kind of person who would benefit from that, it might be worth doing. I find that teaching is such a strain on my time and mental resources that I'd rather do it all in one semester and pick away at an article or a chapter I've already written, then do all my serious work in the spring with no other responsibilities.
I wouldn't worry about teaching. I got tossed into a classroom first semester of my second year with maybe a weekend of Writing Program pedagogy training? It's fine. With most introductory classes, the syllabus is designed for you and you're given a selection of texts to teach. You develop pedagogy skills by being in a classroom and using them, so you'll become a much better teacher by the time that first year is over! It's also worth contacting Writing Program folks (who know so much more about this stuff than we do and are actually properly trained) and they can put together a list of pedagogical resources for you. I also get a lot of of reading Composition and Pedagogy journals (many of which are open source and available online).

This is sorta unrelated (I think if they money is better, choose UIUC), but you should remove the email you received in your original post. It's a bad move to publish private correspondence online without permission. 

This is sorta unrelated (I think if they money is better, choose UIUC), but you should remove the email you received in your original post. It's a bad move to publish private correspondence online without permission. 

This is sorta unrelated (I think if they money is better, choose UIUC), but you should remove the email you received in your original post. It's a bad move to publish private correspondence online without permission. 

Just to chime in on the article discussion: In general, you will be able to publish more articles in departments where you have more time off from teaching. Period. There are exceptions to this, but the reason that "elite" programs offer so much time off--whether their students want it or not--is that it gives people time to write, revise, and edit for the journal publication. So! If thinking about rankings is too abstract and determining, it's more useful to think about the material support that you will be offered. 

Just to chime in on the article discussion: In general, you will be able to publish more articles in departments where you have more time off from teaching. Period. There are exceptions to this, but the reason that "elite" programs offer so much time off--whether their students want it or not--is that it gives people time to write, revise, and edit for the journal publication. So! If thinking about rankings is too abstract and determining, it's more useful to think about the material support that you will be offered. 

Indeed, and I didn't mean to imply that MAs aren't good/useful -- of course they are, and I'm sorry if my initial post implied otherwise!
But even putting aside the fact that many of those schools (at least in the US; this is different in Canada and the UK) that say they require an MA prior to PhD study have either joint MA/PhD programs (like OSU) or (relatively) likely admission to the PhD for their MA holders (like UIUC), a statement that "PhD programs these days seem to almost require an MA" is demonstrably false. To take just one example from many, in my PhD cohort less than a quarter of the students had MAs, and the more recent cohorts at my institution have been equally BA-heavy.
And it's worth being clear about that for other people who might be reading the fora wondering whether they need to get an MA before applying for a PhD. Getting an MA first is very much the right thing sometimes, and can usually only be a good thing (assuming it's funded) that will necessarily improve a PhD application. But to say that it's in any way a requirement for PhD study rather than potentially desirable preparation does a disservice to potential applicants.

You should prioritize the placement record of the people that you conceive of yourself working with. If, say, you wanted to work with a poetics person with recent placements at a top 30 school vs a top 10 with no record of placements, then you should think carefully about your options. While most of the faculty members who have good placement records are at top 20 institutions, this is not true of every field. 

People don't care about W's, if they are not indicative of a consistent pattern. If you are worried, discuss the circumstances with a faculty member that you feel close to, and express your concerns. In general, though, a one-off bad term is not counted against you, as far as I can tell. 

The academy is, almost by definition, not the place to look for "unacademic criticism." I will say the there's far more diversity within programs than you might expect -- while certain schools do have certain flavors, there's usually a wide range of methodological approaches taken by both faculty and students at any given place. But graduate programs in literary study are (for better or worse, given the job market) designed to produce scholars of literature that engage with literary studies as an academic discipline.