Writing Sample Q

[Rhoda]

Hi everyone,

I'm very new to this process, and I was wondering about the writing sample. In undergrad, I was an English major and an art history minor, so the majority of my writing has focused on literature. For art history, it was mainly just short papers and presentations and tests. Is it okay to submit a writing sample that's not on art history? And if not, should I just write something specifically for this application?

Thanks for your help!

[snooze]

Hi everyone,

I'm very new to this process, and I was wondering about the writing sample. In undergrad, I was an English major and an art history minor, so the majority of my writing has focused on literature. For art history, it was mainly just short papers and presentations and tests. Is it okay to submit a writing sample that's not on art history? And if not, should I just write something specifically for this application?

Thanks for your help!

I would definitely try to make sure it was about art history, and better yet, about something somewhat related to the subfield you want to study (if you want to focus on abstract expressionism, don't submit a paper about byzantine mosaics - unless it's truly exceptional). I would expand on one of your old shorter papers (aim for 15 pages-ish). A lot of people say "they just want to see how you write," which is true, but with admissions being as competitive as they are, you're probably better off demonstrating your skills in your intended field of study.

For what it's worth, during this past application cycle I've learned that you really want to make sure you're putting your best and strongest foot forward. Make sure your writing sample is as strong as possible, that way you won't have any regrets. I submitted a writing sample that was "pretty okay" in my book, and now I'm left wondering if my app would have been stronger had I submitted something better.

Are you applying for MAs or PhDs? I would think that for PhDs you'd want a paper very tailored to what you want to ultimately focus on, but for MAs I'm sure something a little outside of that area (if you even have a chosen area at this point) would be fine.

[MadameNon]

I agree with Snooze. While interdisciplinary work is important and I'm sure you gained a lot of useful skills as an English major that will serve you well in any grad program, there are specific writing skills to art history, I'm thinking of visual analysis and weaving it into your argument, specifically, that you want to demonstrate. Are you in touch with any of your art history profs, who might help you expand a paper (and help you revise it)?

[fullofpink]

1: It must be a research paper. This means you need at LEAST 8 different sources in your bibliography. This shouldn't be a paper about your opinion or strictly on formal analysis. You need to make an argument and tie it in with what other people have said.

2: Definitely make sure your citations are in Chicago Manual of Style (my school's English department teaches MLA. It's a pain in the ass).

3: Make sure the sources you use are about 75% current. They aren't just looking at your writing, they are looking at your research skills. If they see that most of your resources are in books dated 1980s and before, they aren't going to think you know most of the current research on the topic you are looking at nor will they think that you know how to use newer research methods (databases). This is circumstantial though - unless there really ISN'T any new research on the topic -- and honestly, in that case, I'd changed topics. It's very difficult to argue on those grounds unless you have something VERY solid and you can give it a good historical context by supplementing the older works with newer sources on historical significance.

4: Make sure you have academic journals in your source list. You should have at least a third. It shows that you know what sources to go to and you know how to differentiate the good from the bad. If you can help it, no websites -- unless they are well-respected in academia.

5: Between 12-15 pages is what seems to be the norm.

I don't necessarily agree that it must be an art history paper. My DGs gave us a great article to read that was English based on Jane Austen arguing how her literature exposed the feminine virtues that ladies learned while on the European tour. It was an interdisciplinary study on art history/culture(anthropology) and English. It was quite well donet. Something that touches all corners would suit nicely.

[hopelesslypostmodern]

I agree fully with everything fullofpink said. I would like to add a couple things, though:

- If at all possibly, use primary sources in addition to secondary, academic sources. The types of primary sources you turn to will depend greatly on your topic. In my writing sample, I used a fair amount of speeches and interviews by my artist. That's pretty typical, but I have also used film, literature, and journalistic accounts for historical purposes in other writings. There was another guy in my undergrad (a year or two ahead of me) whose writing sample was about depictions of the poor in Victorian era painting, and he discussed Dickens a lot. Basically, remember the "history" aspect of "art history," as well as the "art" aspect (formal analysis and whatnot).

- Also, your writing sample should convey that you understand art historical methodology/theory. Again, this will depend on your topic/approach. I would imagine, however, that this shouldn't necessarily be too difficult since there is a great deal of overlap between the theorists that art history and English like to turn to, especially in regards to post-structuralist approaches (Everyone uses Foucault!).

- I've found that 15-20 pages is the norm, but I applied to mostly PhD programs. I might be more like 12-15 pages for MA programs.

- I'm a bit ambivalent about whether it needs to be a strict art history paper. I would advise having a least a portion of your paper be related to art or visual culture (film, advertising, pop culture, etc.). You might want to revisit some of your old English papers and see if there are moments like that already existing in them or places in them where you could bring in elements of visual culture. I do imagine, however, that the success of this will vary depending on the approaches of the programs you apply to. More "traditional" art history programs seem to prefer more "traditional" art historical focuses, while programs that place a greater emphasis on interdisiciplinary work seem to be more open to such an approach.

[fullofpink]

And I agree fully with hopelesslypostmodern. lol.

[Rhoda]

This was extremely helpful, everybody. Thank you so much. I guess what I'll do is write a new piece. I'm doing a Masters program right now (not in art history - in library, archives, museum studies) so I at least have access to a lot of resources. I'm thinking I'll focus on Bataille for the writing sample. I'm still unsure about whether or not I want to apply to an MA or a PhD (while I have a very strong GPA and great recommendations, I'm wondering if only being a minor will hurt me?) but I know I'd like to go somewhere with an interdisciplinary focus and that I'd like to focus on some of the avant garde movements in the early 20th century, like Surrealism, Dada and even Poetism. I am in the very, very early stages of this, however and I have a lot of research to do -- I know basically nothing about where I would apply because I don't know much about the faculty research interests (I'll have to ask an old prof for advice!) Thank you guys so much though because since I'm totally starting out, I'm lost! I may make a new thread for this because I don't know if anyone will see this, but are there any rankings for just masters programs in art history? All I can find are PhD rankings.