Chicago Schools

[Guest Amon-Ra]

as much as this bunch of masochists may think they want to know everything right now, no matter the cost, i'd venture to say this brand of sneak-peek, from the "source" info isn't helpful, and at this point verges on taunting. as painful as it always is, at least an official rejection letter has the benefit of not being delivered anonymously, via some web-based forum. i'm happy to know when/if a school makes their call, but if i'm gonna hear that i didn't make the cut at chicago (again), i'd much rather hear it from the "source" itself. thanks, queen, i know you're trying to help, but as a current student, you couldn't possibly understand.

To the modernists: I'm really sorry if this conversation upset you. The application process is as stressful as it is strange and irrational, and I hope we all find ways into programs that we love!

To our liege, Queen of Prussia: Thanks for your good intentions and expertise :-) It's nice that you're concerned about the next batch of grad students!

[curiouser and curiouser]

To the modernists: I'm really sorry if this conversation upset you. The application process is as stressful as it is strange and irrational, and I hope we all find ways into programs that we love!

To our liege, Queen of Prussia: Thanks for your good intentions and expertise :-) It's nice that you're concerned about the next batch of grad students!

frankly, the tone and/or intention of queenofprussia's contributions to this conversation (many of which have been quite welcome) are irrelevant. once her insight became personal -- and by letting us know there would be no modernists in this year's round of admits, by taking it upon herself to deliver, anonymously, some of the most important news many of us will ever hear over the course of our academic careers, it's personal -- i think a line was crossed. to offer a sneak-peek into the schedule of a school's admissions process is one thing; to deliver the results of that process, unambiguously but anonymously, is unprofessional.

[Ramblr]

Ladies and gents, hard feelings aside & i totally agree with the last post, may this be a lesson to all of us... Grad school is vicious!!! Toughen you're skin or you won't make it.

[anonymousbequest]

If this is true, I actually applaud Chicago for it's decision not to take any modernists, though I know it is tough for a lot of the applicants. Balance in specializations needs to be maintained for the larger good of the discipline, and if I may sound so melodramatic, for the retention and production of knowledge. Areas like ancient and medieval (which are far more difficult than modern and contemporary because of languages and harder to access research materials--part of the reason why fewer people take them on) are dying. Looking toward the future, there are going to be a huge number of newly minted PhDs in modern/contemporary chasing a limited number of positions, which will only contribute to the erosion of tenure and the increasing number of "temps", adjuncts with no insurance working for slave wages. Art history, and the other humanities, may need to start discounting what a prospective applicant "likes" and start assigning them specializations, taking up a model similar to that found in the hard sciences and medicine. Chicago has always been known for its role in shaping social policy, they may be at the forefront of a coming trend.

It also could be that the modernists at Chicago have too many students right now and don't feel they can take on any new people. There are lots of reasons why this info might be true. And to say that queenofprussia went to far is not in keeping with the tone of this entire forum, which is completely based on rumor and innuendo seems silly. Everyone is clamoring for inside information, she gave you some.

Edited February 3, 2011 by anonymousbequest

[violetvivian]

Anonymousbequest, that is certainly one very realistic way to look at the situation. I think you are right, particularly considering the field and the job market as it stands right now.

But I do think there's something to be said for the much-needed (in my opinion) reshaping of Art History as a discipline. I think that some "contemporary" specializations such as critical theory, visual culture/theory, material culture/theory play quite an important and necessary role in how the discipline views itself AND those fading fields that you mentioned. Not everyone who studies something 19th century+ wants or needs to add to the glut of canonical studies.

Look at WJT Mitchell at UChicago, for instance. I'd qualify him as a modern/contemporary scholar (he lists his specialty as 1800-present) but much of his work, like Landscape and Power, provides constructs for seeing that can be applied to the classical or the contemporary.

When UChicago bypasses everybody interested in 19th century and on (and again, who can blame them, based on the state of the job market that you mentioned!) they bypass some opportunities for growth and change in the field itself. I think it would be disappointing yet understandable if this is actually the case.

But! All classes are canceled at UChicago today because of the snowstorm, so I'm not holding my breath for an email anytime soon. Stay warm, all of you who are buried under ice!

[Herbie]

I empathize with curiouser and curiouser.

I don't believe anyone is interested in deriving pleasure from forum rumors. The forum simply provides every applicant the opportunity to discuss graduate program issues - primarily acceptance and rejection letters due to graduate schools generally being silent, and people want immediate knowledge of their situation. Despite the information queenofprussia provided, getting an unofficial rejection based on your "category" via non-professor is not only disheartening, but tasteless. In this sense, this is where too much information begs the question for less anonymity behind user handles, because it's not just skepticism anymore. It's likened to any situation, like "I got accepted to X today. If you don't hear from them by X, you're totally out."

Not knocking you, anonymousbequest, but I mainly started posting on this forum because of the realization that it was a support group, not a "which concentration is more difficult," or "which concentration needs less focus." I'd be interested in discussing the situation of art history discourse with you, but I aim to articulate certain issues with more experience behind my belt (which I don't believe I have . . . unless I cite AF/CAA/etc).

The only thing I can think of is that those who were in touch with graduate professors asked the significant question: "Are you accepted graduate students under your supervision for Fall 2011?" I believe that may ameliorate some of the building tension. Otherwise, good luck in whatever you're doing.

[Atlantis]

Well. I never had any bad intentions.

And I'm not responsible for other people not being able NOT to ask certain questions.

Also, if this kind of information ( what category of scholars has been accepted for example ) is basically freely floating within the department, I consider it "public". It's not like us graduate students have no contact to other people in the world, especially other art historians. The public sphere is a murky concept because it is murky in reality.

If anyone is offended, don't come here. It's like those people complaining that facebook is encroaching on their privacy... Just don't use it?!

Edited February 3, 2011 by queenofprussia

[cato9tails]

queenofprussia/Atlantis knows just enough to be dangerous! Formal letters will go out in the next month. 11 is the correct number. And the class will have a smaller proportion of modern/contemporary students than in the recent past—but not zero.

[Ramblr]

queenofprussia/Atlantis knows just enough to be dangerous! Formal letters will go out in the next month. 11 is the correct number. And the class will have a smaller proportion of modern/contemporary students than in the recent past—but not zero.

Love it! He said... she said... This forum is getting better than Gossip Girl...

[phoskaialetheia]

The whole reason this site exists is to serve as a place where people with insecurities about themselves can come for affirmation as they take on a process that more often than not leads to rejection. Everybody here (myself included), if we're honest, is posting some sort of superficial ping against a sounding board to see where she or he stands. If somebody responds and offers information that you don't like or fails to affirm your chances, you can't take it out on the messenger. It's not like anyone posting information that most people would find useful on this site is trying to single anyone out or exploit their insecurities or vulnerabilities. I don't think its fair to use this site and expect only affirmation. Especially at the PhD level, there should be enough objectivity and circumspection to be able to deal with difficult news. And if you don't want news or information about graduate admissions, gradcafe is likely not the best place to be. Academia is tough, and requires a thick skin. There are so many places where aspirations can derail (each admissions season, qualifications, dissertation, paying for education, the job hunt, seeking tenure track, tenure), I think some realistic expectations are in order.

That said, everyone who goes into this racket does so because they believe they have what it takes. The truth is, most probably do, but there is a lot of luck involved, so due sensitivity is involved when people's self-perceptions are involved. Does rejection from a program because your interests don't align with some quota mean anything about your self worth? Absolutely not. Take the information that honestly, in a place like this, is the major object, for what it's worth and wait for something official. And you are right that due sensitivity should be observed in the delivery thereof.

[Atlantis]

Well put!

[hopelesslypostmodern]

But I do think there's something to be said for the much-needed (in my opinion) reshaping of Art History as a discipline. I think that some "contemporary" specializations such as critical theory, visual culture/theory, material culture/theory play quite an important and necessary role in how the discipline views itself AND those fading fields that you mentioned. Not everyone who studies something 19th century+ wants or needs to add to the glut of canonical studies.

Look at WJT Mitchell at UChicago, for instance. I'd qualify him as a modern/contemporary scholar (he lists his specialty as 1800-present) but much of his work, like Landscape and Power, provides constructs for seeing that can be applied to the classical or the contemporary.

When UChicago bypasses everybody interested in 19th century and on (and again, who can blame them, based on the state of the job market that you mentioned!) they bypass some opportunities for growth and change in the field itself. I think it would be disappointing yet understandable if this is actually the case.

I know I don't really say much on these forums, but I just wanted to say that this is the most intelligent statement I've seen on this forum in some time. Many of the changes in the discipline in the last 40 or 50 years (for better or for worse) has been the result of an increased interest in interdisciplinary ideas. Where would art history be today without semiotic theory, Marxism, psychoanalysis, or the contributions of philosophers like Foucault or Derrida? My concern is that if we cannot respect the contributions of other art historians just because we perceive their specialty as "easier," then how are we to improve our discipline? I can't help but feel that by degrading one specialty or another (without really thinking about the challenges of that specialty or how the work being done in that specialty can relate to one's own) our various specialties will become comfortable resting on their laurels and not strive to improve by looking at the work of other specialties in our discipline or even at contributions from other disciplines.

Then again, maybe we respect the work from those outside our discipline more than work from those different subspecialties of our own. But I hope, naively perhaps, that this is not the case.

[Atlantis]

I would like to add that decisions on which candidates in what field are being accepted can have many, many reasons. One being, hypothetically speaking, that the professors in one field have been taking on many students in recent years, and others not so many, and that it might be their turn to supervise somebody.

This doesn't necessary reflect any broader policy or judgment on the state of Art History. That can be usually gauged by things such as who is teaching, who is being hired, etc. The best programs will have to, and generally do, aim for balance. And that's how it should be.

[The Folded Leaf]

So...has anyone heard anything from U Chicago yet??

[Ramblr]

So...has anyone heard anything from U Chicago yet??

nope, nor Northwestern. I check their app page every day!

[selphie]

Selphie, have no fear. It's a bit too early, I think... I hope! I would start worrying toward the middle to end of February. As someone posted above, when they spoke to someone at UChicago, they said the latest they can stop by is the first week of February, so that means they are still considering apps. Keep up the hope!

Thanks Ramblr! Still keeping fingers crossed (although it's coming to mid-Feb and my fingers are getting stiff).

Good luck to everyone aiming for U of C!

[violetvivian]

U of C has made its decisions. Emails probably going out this or next week. Accepted students day likely to be first week of March... Good luck!

Hey Atlantis, any news on why there's still been no word from UChicago?

[Atlantis]

I don't know, I'm afraid. May be they were busy with CAA or something. Or may be they told whomever they've accepted not to make it public. I had received a rebuke by "a member of faculty" privately on here... Go figure.

Hey Atlantis, any news on why there's still been no word from UChicago?

[Herbie]

You tellin' me GCé has faculty creepin'?

[hopelesslypostmodern]

Congrats to the Northwestern acceptance!

...

...

Now, details, please!

[hehamiltonjr]

Congrats to the Northwestern acceptance!

...

...

Now, details, please!

[carolinew]

Has anyone actually heard back from UChicago? There are no results posted either way so far.

[blackshirt]

Has anyone actually heard back from UChicago? There are no results posted either way so far.

I know I haven't! I'm thinking we should really be hearing next week...or at least, the admits should be. Especially if the visitation weekend is in early March...

[blackshirt]

I'm bumping this thread because I *still* haven't heard from U of C, and it's the only school I have yet to hear from. The results page shows a wave of rejections over the past week...Anyone else still in the dark? I'm thinking this may mean I/we will be receiving a "consolation" MAPH?

[violetvivian]

I'm still in the dark too and was thinking the exact same thing about the MAPH. I thought it odd that there had been no "consolation" MA admits posted yet. We'll see...

I'm bumping this thread because I *still* haven't heard from U of C, and it's the only school I have yet to hear from. The results page shows a wave of rejections over the past week...Anyone else still in the dark? I'm thinking this may mean I/we will be receiving a "consolation" MAPH?