jabberwocky

Intextrovert, the thing is, if you take a look at the last MLA job postings, most jobs still ask for candiates to lean towards one side of the Atlantic. Of course, 20th century studies has been going transatlantic for years, you'll notice it in the sort of classes colleges now offer, even at places which are not R1 or research based at all. The problem seems to be that you end up having to apply as 20 c. American or Mod. British to do that sort of work. Most departments offer those classes to entrenched modernists who lean toward one one side of the ocean, so they're generally not looking to hire new people specifically for this. Moreover, even if you get away with applying as a 'transatlanticist' you can be refused a job because you're not specialized enough, you become a jack-of-all-literatures who does not seem qualified. This seems to extend down the academic bean-pole to graduate admissions. I would urge caution. Ecocriticism is quite interesting, but if you could extend that to another period, preferably pre-20th century (though contemporary popular might work as well), so much the better, the more innovative, and the more groundbreaking. Make sure you do speak to your interest in other themes of whatever period you choose, so that you are not considered over-specialized (the other pitfall in this process). What if the prof you want to work with is not on that admissions committee? You want to sound appealing to as many people in the department as possible while maintaing a strong interest in one sub-field. All in all it's a delicate balancing game which, as everyone below points out, is unfair most of the time.

Everyone above has given great advice and has said most of what needs saying. I just want to emphasize and re-emphasize, for the glory of Shakespeare, the Virgin, the Buddhas and everything else sacred, unless you are truly, deathly, and undeniably passionate about Modernism, apply as something else. This sub-field has been impacted for the last twenty years, and it has gotten to the point where profs in my undergrad program have said that the put the modernist apps in one pile and take 2-3 because they can't place their graduates, regardless of the quality of their students. I would recommend reading this thread at the Chronicle forums: http://chronicle.com/forums/index.php/topic,48190.45.html, but in case you don't have the time to go looking, I will post a forumite's response here. Pandora says:

Funding is a different matter! Then yeah, Dartmouth would be great if you think it's a good fit. Email a few people, see what sort of answers you get.

Well my situation is a little different, but yes I turned down Harvard because an unfunded MA, even from Harvard, is not worth the financial sacrifice, especially in times like these, when job offers are scarce and loan repayment invoices start coming in regularly once you've finished your program. I've seen enough, lived in enough places to realize that prestige of the institution is not the foremost determining factor in your career. Rather, it's what you do, and how good at it you are. Look at Cornell's comp. lit. program. This year they took the grand number of THREE applicants out out a pool of four-five hundred. That's ridiculous. And no one can guarantee that just because you were one of those three applicants, you would have better job prospects when you came out. In fact, most job offers right now are coming from two-year colleges who are looking for part timers. What they want is teaching experience and a solid educational foundation, they're not interested in how famous your school is or in what school of theory you've made your stake, but in how much training you've had and what your recommendations say. And the fact is that at a lot of these big-name schools you don't get much attention, especially as a MA student, because most of these MA programs are cash-cows for the department. They know you'll be in and out in two years max and the money is what they care about. You're not a long term investment or an asset to them, but a customer, which means you might not get a lot of one on one time. Do take a look at Dartmouth's placement list and where candidates have gone. And email a few people and ask how they like the program. I ended up choosing a state-school PhD program that would allow me to teach and design my own courses, take classes across a broad range of areas, and ensure that I received some personal attention so that I could get to know faculty members and get decent recs. for my dossier. (That becomes hugely important later on.) I went to an Ivy as an undergrad and I know what the prestige of a place can do, as well as how horrible it can be to be stuck in a department that's considered top-three in the country, where the profs are super-stars who bicker among themselves and don't give a damn about their graduate students. A friend of mind is currently working with the best Auden scholar around but he's so busy with his conferences and his inflated ego that he never seems to find the time to review her work or help her form contacts. And then employers start to wonder: how come your dossier is so thin? There is this old Croatian proverb (I do comp.lit too, with English) that says: "better to be first man in the village than the idiot of the town". And these PhD programs you mention aren't even that bad! They're great in fact! It's a win-win situation. And I think you'd get to work with people who would really care about what you do and would help you perfect your skills and become a good prof. And that's what you want because in the end, it's yourself and your mind that are the most important thing in this business. We all study literature because we love it, knowing fully well what our earnings will be like. So if for once someone is extending a hand and saying -- look, I'm going to pay you to do what you like best, it's an amazing thing. Take advantage of that.

Don't be silly. I got an MA offer from Harvard and turned that down. In this economy and with forcasted budget cuts across the board (some PhD programs are staring to consider accepting applicants on only alternate years) it's a much better bet to go with the PhD program. Always go where the money is, not just in this economic clime, but in general. As humanities people we can't afford overwhelming debt, especially given the less than stellar job prospects. Moreover, it is not about the reputation of the school, it's about YOUR reputation while there. What I would do is take the offer from Penn State, do your masters portion, and TRANSFER if you hate the program. Yes, you can do that. Yes, I have friends who have done it and it has worked out just fine for them. But you might find out that you really like your PhD program and the people there. You must be a fit (right?), you were accepted. Personally, I would go wherever there is funding. You can always transfer or do a postdoc or teach at Dartmouth if you decide that that's really where you want to be. Also, make sure you look at your specialization. Which school is ranked higher for that? I'm not saying the program itself, but which school has profs working specifically in your area? Email those people, ask them about the program, ask them if they'd be willing to work with you, ask them what sort of research they do, etc. You might find that taking another look at what you previously thought to be an unappealing option actually does a world of good.

I think all funding decisions have been made, from what I understand only a third of the people accepted this year will get funding, due to the severe budget cuts. But everyone who did get funding has a chance to accept or deny it along with the admission offer. You can log in with your Banner # from your acceptance letter on the student services website and check out your financial aid.