Looking for advice

[Chombo]

Hi. I'm interested in applying to Ph. D programs in Comparative Literature and I'm looking for some advice.

I did a BA at Yale in Philosophy, but by the end of it I walked out of there thinking that Philosophy was just a big headache, and basically swore myself off the stuff.

I had developed a strong interest in Art during that time and since graduating 15 years ago I've pursued that above all else.

Last fall in enrolled at Penn to do a Master of Fine Arts degree so that I might be able to teach, but midstream I find myself strangely turning back towards my original interest in Continental Philosophy, which seems at this point to be taken up by the Comp Lit departments.

So this Fall I'll take Penn's graduate-level Literary Theory Class--the one that all incoming Ph.D students are required to take, and see how that goes. I'm hoping that through that experience I'll get a good feel for whether or not this direction is really a good fit for me or not.

In the meantime I'd like to find out more about who's doing what and where, and I am hoping that some of you out there might be able to give me a few tips on where I should look. John's Hopkins Humanities Center looks, at least from the outside, like a perfect fit for me (if I can get in). But where else would you suggest looking? I'm interested in finding programs that are more rather than less progressive and open to radical interpretations of what the field of Comparative Literature might mean. Though I have some French and German, I'd be more interested in thinking about Contemporary Art as a disjointed family of languages, for example, than dealing with a requirement in Greek or Latin.

And sure I'd love to hear some details and current feelings about about top-tier stalwarts like Stanford and Princeton and so on, but I'm just as keen to hear about 'others' whose 'rankings' aren't so high but who are producing strong work. I know very well how out of date and or/inappropriate a lot of the rankings systems really are and would love to hear more about what's really going on from people who are already in there doing the work.

Thanks in advance for your time and good luck with your work.

[Chombo]

?Nobody has anything to say?

I asked a current Stonybrook Prof the same question and she said that Temple, Emory, Oregon and Stonybrook were good programs producing interesting work--with particularly generous funding available at Emory.

Can anyone confirm this and/or offer more details? Thanks again in advance.

[lyonessrampant]

Well, I'm not your field, so I don't have a lot to tell you. I can tell you that I was accepted to Oregon. If you have background teaching at college, you'll TA. I was offered RA and some other stuff with guaranteed funding of about $10,500 for the first year and then more later. This was a lot less than three of my other offers, so I didn't pursue it a lot further. However, if you're looking for schools strong in theory, in addition to the list you have, check out U of Chicago, U of Minnesota, and Berkeley. Other comp lit people would be a lot more helpful, but that's not me. . . On cursory response, your languages could be stronger. By saying you have some French and German, do you mean you're fluent enough to read say Goethe in German or Rousseau in French? I would think you'd need strong competence in these areas for comp lit. I'm early modern, so Latin is important for me, but my understanding is that you don't have to have an ancient language if it isn't applicable for your research and instead have two or more (for comp lit people) modern languages. Sorry I can't tell you more, but I'd recommend checking throughout the summer. You'll get a lot more responses starting in August/September/October when the number of people on these boards increases a lot.

[Chombo]

Well, I'm not your field, so I don't have a lot to tell you. I can tell you that I was accepted to Oregon. If you have background teaching at college, you'll TA. I was offered RA and some other stuff with guaranteed funding of about $10,500 for the first year and then more later. This was a lot less than three of my other offers, so I didn't pursue it a lot further. However, if you're looking for schools strong in theory, in addition to the list you have, check out U of Chicago, U of Minnesota, and Berkeley. Other comp lit people would be a lot more helpful, but that's not me. . . On cursory response, your languages could be stronger. By saying you have some French and German, do you mean you're fluent enough to read say Goethe in German or Rousseau in French? I would think you'd need strong competence in these areas for comp lit. I'm early modern, so Latin is important for me, but my understanding is that you don't have to have an ancient language if it isn't applicable for your research and instead have two or more (for comp lit people) modern languages. Sorry I can't tell you more, but I'd recommend checking throughout the summer. You'll get a lot more responses starting in August/September/October when the number of people on these boards increases a lot.

Thanks for your response.

I realize that most programs in Comparative Literature place a high importance on the nature of the field being rooted in a literal interpretation of that term.

Harvard, for example, which is I think the oldest such department in the country, requires Ph.D candidates to demonstrate working knowledge of literature in at least 4 languages--"including at least one of which must be premodern (diachronic) or cross-cultural"--and what they mean specifically is "literature" as a written rather than as an otherwise aesthetic body of consideration--that's what they're looking to 'judge'.

That's fine. I have no problem with that as a basic premise. It's just that that position does not represent exactly what I'm looking for at this particular time.

I am not saying that I discount language ability in general, nor my own in that direction. When I say I have, "some French and German", perhaps I should clarify that I speak French at a near-fluent level after living and working in French-speaking countries for 3 years, and my spoken ability in German--which is a far more complex tongue--is a bit less than that, but that after having lived and worked in it on a daily basis for a few years in Berlin, I feel that I'm within reach of not just making rough translations of the sort that is required by most Ph.D programs in Philosophy. Beyond those experiences I also have 'some Spanish'--meaning that my mother was born and raised in Uruguay and though she didn't 'teach' it to me, I picked enough of it up to be conversational. When one has developed some language ability one also develops some language sensitivity and respect for it's depth, a fact which I'm sure you must understand in Latin. Thus I wouldn't say at the moment that my languages are perfect, exactly because I know the longing between my level and the level that I would need to achieve in order to be able to even think about attending to all Balzac's many concerns in any sort of responsible manner.

If I have to refine my languages (as I would expect to do) beyond the mere level of learning a spoken language, I'm confident that I can work that out, but my concern isn't exactly there.

My primary concern is that I'd like to work on Aesthetic Philosophy as the basis for, rather than the product of, other philosophical systems. It might seem that that means I should go back to studying Philosophy, but the trouble is that in the U.S., most of the situations that might be friendly to my perspective have been surgically removed from Philosophy departments and are now couched in the departments of Comparative Literature.

As far as Goethe is concerned, I've always agreed with his statement that we should "talk less and draw more" --In this context and in general I'd go further to say that drawing is quite literally it's own "language". Further that that "language is really not the same "language" as photography, for example--but that both of them at this point in intellectual history must be accepted as "languages" and should be considered as such like and by other "Literatures".

I realize clearly that Art History may well be my best fit along lines of thinking like this--but again--that's why I'm here and asking you what you all think. I realize I might be better off in an Art History Department. It has just seemed more like that direction has always been more about the History and less about the Art for me, and further that it looks to coordinates much more from Philosophy rather than the other way around. --Maybe I'd be better off in of the few remaining Continental Philosophy departments in this country that are still alive and doing good work. I don't know exactly where I should be applying right now and that's why I'm here on this forum right now trying to figure that out.

Once again, thank you for your help. Allbest

[truckbasket]

It's difficult to gauge exactly what you're looking to do from your posts. It doesn't sound much like comp. lit.

I do a hybrid of literature and art history, but that's mainly because I'm interested in the visual rhetoric of modernism (so I'm also looking at 20th c. classical music and theater in addition to lit and art). Depending on who you're interested in writing about, it might be wise to seek out specific names in the field that you align yourself with. For example, I was drawn to Liz Kotz's "Words to Be Looked At" so that played heavily in deciding where I'd like to study.

Edited May 24, 2011 by truckbasket

[lyonessrampant]

Yeah, it sounds like, as you say, you're looking for your home departmentally, so I'd definitely echo truckbasket's advice that it would be best to start by finding work of professors you find inspiring and then seeing where they teach and what department they are in. It seems that you're more interested in working with visual media than, say, literature but approaching your study of that media through a philosophical lens. I think some variation of art history might let you do that more. The comp lit people I know may reference and use some visual media (especially graphic media like comic books or graphic novels), but their work still seems very grounded in some analysis of literature. There are programs that are a lot more interdisciplinary (I understand that Oregon's is pretty progressive), and while some programs like U of Chicago support interdisciplinarity, it seems that they still require you cover the more traditional bases in terms of languages and lit study. Your speaking ability in the languages you listed seems quite strong, so undoubtedly, your written and reading abilities would quickly become strong as well, but if you're wanting to focus more on the visual media associated with the cultures who speak those languages, perhaps writing and reading the languages isn't as important? I don't think I'm really providing any helpful advice here, other than to just second truckbasket's suggestion that you start with people whose work you find stimulating and then apply to places where those people are. If you don't know a lot of people whose work you like, MLA searches will help you find them. Also, if you do know of just a couple people you admire, start with them and then see who they frequently cite and research those people. You could also email those professors and say you have interest in their work and ask for recommendations of others to research. This might also let you start figuring out what their recommendations for where to apply and what departments to apply to.

[wreckofthehope]

I would think your language preparation would be sufficient for almost all Comparative Literature programs - I was very close to admission at Rutgers' program this year and have only French at a high proficiency (comparable to yours, or perhaps lower) - my German is intermediate and I have just begun a third language.

Rutgers' program would probably be worth a look, as they are very open to interdisciplinarity - but they do have a three language requirement (but not on admission - you should have your three languages by the end of coursework). NYU, if I remember correctly, will waive a language if you can show specialization in another discipline - which could work for you. Similarly, Chicago allows you to go a comparative disciplines route - which looks really interesting (but still maintains the language requirements).

Another option for you could be interdisciplinary programs: Emory's ILA is really exciting, as is Stanford's MTL. Also, both UCSD's Literature and their Communications program looked very wide ranging when I looked into them. UCI has the Culture and Theory PhD (if it is taking people).

[Phil Sparrow]

It really doesn't matter if you want to study written literature or other media. If you're doing comp lit, you must have a strong reading knowledge of your languages for a number of reasons, not least the following: 1) it's what the department requires and you can't break the rules until you master them; 2) even if you're studying visual rather than written media, you will need to read criticism in languages other than English, and this is usually more difficult and requires a higher level of reading comprehension than does reading literature; 3) *especially* if you are interested in continental philosophy, you will need to be able to read the texts in the original (if you want to study aesthetics, for example, you should be able--eventually, at least--to read Kant in German).

Finally (and I'm sorry if this sounds pissy, but...oh well), there have been two recent posts here from prospective applicants who want to study theory/philosophy but don't want to learn Latin or Greek. You all need to get over your fears of dead languages. If you really want to study, say, Derrida or Lacan or Badiou or whatever theory guy, you would do yourself well to learn an ancient language eventually (not necessarily before applying), so you can read and understand the ancient texts they refer to. Think of how often philosophers and theorists (particularly those who take on aesthetics) engage with, say, Aristotle. How often they refer to Greek words using the Cyrillic alphabet rather than transliterating Into the Roman alphabet. If you really want to study theory and philosophy for a living, don't dismiss ancient languages so easily. Again, I'm not saying you have to be proficient in those languages before applying, but don't be scared of programs that will require them of students. There is a reason why Harvard comp lit insists you learn them.

Caveat: I'm not in comp lit, but I do a lot of language work. It sucks! But it's really useful.

[ecritdansleau]

Are you familiar with Berkeley's "Rhetoric"/("Discourse") program or Duke's Literature program? These departments might be a little more flexible for your interests, but the students coming out of them are often literature students, and these programs are open to continental philosophy in the same way comp lit departments often are (at least moreso than philosophy departments). I would recommend checking out the faculty and seeing if there is anyone whose project particularly interests you, and take it from there.

[Chombo]

Are you familiar with Berkeley's "Rhetoric"/("Discourse") program or Duke's Literature program? These departments might be a little more flexible for your interests, but the students coming out of them are often literature students, and these programs are open to continental philosophy in the same way comp lit departments often are (at least moreso than philosophy departments). I would recommend checking out the faculty and seeing if there is anyone whose project particularly interests you, and take it from there.

Thanks for your input and the posts of the others as well--helpful perspectives all.

I've spoken with the Graduate Chairs of both the Philosophy and Art History Departments here at Penn over the past few days, and they've reassured me that their own Humanities forum is very open to interdisciplinary work and that I may well not have to move at all. Plus as Kaja Silverman has left Berkeley and is now on the roster here, the option to stick around (if they'll have me) seems quite a bit more attractive.

So beyond that, and through your advice, I'm looking into John's Hopkins Humanities Forum, Stanford for Modern Thought and Literature, Rhetoric at Berkeley, Literature at Duke, Literature at Notre Dame, ILS at Emory, Modern Culture and Media Studies at Brown, Comparative Studies in Discourse at Wisconsin, and potentially Comp Lit and/or Philosophy at Stonybrook, Oregon, UCSD and UCI.

Am I missing any good programs out there that might fit into this group?

And thanks again for the input. I really appreciate it all.

[intextrovert]

Plus as Kaja Silverman has left Berkeley and is now on the roster here, the option to stick around (if they'll have me) seems quite a bit more attractive.

Kaja Silverman is amazing. Lucky anyone who gets to work with her!

[stillthisappeal]

On 5/25/2011 at 1:25 PM, Chombo said:

So beyond that, and through your advice, I'm looking into John's Hopkins Humanities Forum, Stanford for Modern Thought and Literature, Rhetoric at Berkeley, Literature at Duke, Literature at Notre Dame, ILS at Emory, Modern Culture and Media Studies at Brown, Comparative Studies in Discourse at Wisconsin, and potentially Comp Lit and/or Philosophy at Stonybrook, Oregon, UCSD and UCI.

That sounds like a good list for someone with your background and qualifications. From here, you might think about other factors such as funding and school culture. For example, I knew a Phi Beta Kappa triple-major who got into Stanford and he received an offer of the same $10K TA stipend from Oregon that someone else mentioned. So unless you are independently wealthy, I would advise against wasting time on their application. It just isn't worth it. In contrast, I recently visited WashU and had a chance to meet with the head of their comparative lit program and I was impressed with the quality of their program despite its small size.

Good luck.

[Chombo]

Jeez. I had no idea the funding situation at Stanford was so miserly. I thought they had a massive endowment and would be dishing out sweet deals.

I wouldn't have been surprised to hear that California state schools got their funding slashed because the state of California is bankrupt. But Stanford?! Wow.

Any other good tips out there on the matter? Who does have good funding?

By this time next year I'll be carrying about 80k in school loans from my current course of study--so there's no way that i'm going to go anywhere without solid funding.

[stillthisappeal]

Jeez. I had no idea the funding situation at Stanford was so miserly. I thought they had a massive endowment and would be dishing out sweet deals.

I wouldn't have been surprised to hear that California state schools got their funding slashed because the state of California is bankrupt. But Stanford?! Wow.

Any other good tips out there on the matter? Who does have good funding?

By this time next year I'll be carrying about 80k in school loans from my current course of study--so there's no way that i'm going to go anywhere without solid funding.

Sorry. That wasn't entirely clear. He got into Stanford and Oregon. Despite his qualifications, the only financial aid he received from Oregon was the 10K (in other words, there aren't many fellowships). Stanford's funding is good.

[rainy_day]

You mention that languages aren't your highest priority, but demonstrable strength in a number of languages is one of the most important qualifications for Comp Lit; it's what distinguishes English from Comp Lit. So if languages aren't your thing, I'd look at Continental Philosophy influenced Theory-heavy English Depts (Duke, for one, comes to mind) and Philosophy Depts (which I know less about).

Good luck!

[ComeBackZinc]

Now that's an interesting position.

 

Edit: this made sense before a bizarre spam post got deleted.

Edited August 11, 2013 by ComeBackZinc

[Bennett]

I think you have a good list going here, and I second the recommendations for Berkeley Rhetoric and Duke Lit. I'll also put in a plug for Minnesota's Comparative Studies in Discourse and Society program; while not as highly ranked as the other two, they're doing some really innovate and interdisciplinary work, and sound like a good fit for your interests. (Frankly, the rankings don't reflect the actuality: I think Minnesota's doing some of the very best work out there.) All three of those programs have fairly minimal language requirements, and I imagine you'd be able to pass them with your current language skills and/or with a very minimal amount of work.

 

Basically, when it comes to Comp Lit, there are really two kinds of programs: those that do a traditional comparatist approach (with heavy emphasis on languages), and those which are more theoretical and a great deal harder to pin down—sort of the intersection of continental philosophy, cultural studies and aesthetic theory. It sounds like you should steer away from the first type and towards the latter sort, which is also what I did when applying to comp lit programs. 

[egwynn]

Now that's an interesting position.

 

Edit: this made sense before a bizarre spam post got deleted.

 

 

I saw it!  I believe you!