A Question about Theory/Criticism

[Two Espressos]

I second this advice. This is precisely the approach I took. I realized that the theorists I like the most are concentrated in the late-20th century onward (including contemporary theorists) and represent various schools of thought so I just made that clear in my SOP. As for the generalist/specialist question, it's probably better to be more specific than general. Your best bet is to develop (if it's possible at this point) a rather specific interest in a certain author, theorist or work (or multiple of the above) with a specific and interesting approach, framework and/or set of questions coupled with some general theoretical and literary interests (i.e. the best of both worlds). That way they won't write you off as too lopsided or too general. Remember that your interests can and most likely will change in graduate school, so none of this will be set in stone. They may not expect you to end up working on the same author(s) or work(s) you mentioned in your SOP but they probably will peg you as a prospective 20th century/contemporary student. Literary departments make admissions decisions largely based on students' and professor's period interests, so again, this isn't something you can escape. Of course you could always unexpectedly fall in love with medieval literature (this was a friendly joke amongst fellow students at my departmental visits). Whatever your interests are, make sure you convey a real passion for them in your application, and you should have a fair shot! Best of luck!

Haha well I respect medieval literature immensely, but I don't foresee myself falling head over heels for it anytime soon.

But yeah, your advice is solid. I have to read more widely before I can talk about favorite theorists, but the specific issues I'm concerned with seem very contemporary, so latter 20th century/contemporary feels like the best fit at this point. Then again, maybe they'll change (they've changed too many times to count already!).

[ThePoorHangedFool]

Disclaimer: I did not truthfully read every single reply that has been posted regarding Two Espressos's questions on aesthetics in literature. I've admittedly perused the responses, skimming many of them but reading ones that catch my eye.

Two Espressos: Let me give you this advice concerning your desire to concentrate on theory (and, unless I am mistaken, criticism). There is going to be much difficulty in not eventually centering in on a specific period of literature if you do, in fact, maintain your primary interest in theory. Additionally, you'll find at some point that you DO have an historical period in which your developing analytical approach(es) best fit, and once you've situated yourself in one subfield, you'll discover that you're actually far from confined to it. My studies concentrate on Shakespeare, but currently I'm pursuing research that will result in a comparative explication of Faulkner, Eugene O'Neill, the book of Job, and Shakespeare. The thesis I've been working on since January concerns a play and a poem of Shakespeare's, but also Ovid, Chaucer, feminist theorists Irigaray, Cixous, and Kahn, and multiple other sources. Basically what I'm trying to explain is that eventually it becomes impossible not to favor certain historical brackets.

Similarly, while it is fantastic that you're already interested in literary theory, you are of course going to want to take a wide variety of English literature classes while an undergraduate. I would STRONGLY advise you NOT to choose which courses to take solely based on whether a particular theorist or group of critics or subset of theory/criticism applies itself frequently to the content studied. You should refrain from aligning yourself this early with one critical or theoretical perspective; it will greatly hinder your chances of getting into graduate programs if your writing sample and personal statement limit your abilities and interests to JUST a feminist/Marxist/psychoanalytical/etc. lens. Take courses before you graduate that form a foundation for your understanding of literature; I'd personally recommend (not knowing, obviously, what you have and haven't already taken) Shakespeare, modern American and/or British fiction (contemporary fiction is equally valuable), any course relevant to "women in literature," and whichever American literature course(s) offered that study Hawthorne, Emerson, Whitman, Poe, Melville, and Dickinson.

As far as aesthetics in literature is concerned: if you're talking about something like "gaze," feminist theory is the place to start. Feminisms (2nd ed.) has some great essays on gaze, which I'd be happy to list for you if you're interested. If you're thinking along the lines of ecphrasis/ekphrasis, I can also recommend some good reading that might be useful. If neither of these routes is what you have in mind, do clarify "aesthetics" for me and I'll let you know if I can be of help. The term "aesthetics" is quite broad, and thus can be used in various ways when discussing different types of literature or even specific writers.

I hope this isn't entirely a repetition of earlier replies...forgive my lengthy comments if so.

[Alephantiasis]

Considering your interest in theory and your reluctance to focus on a precise period, I think you should consider Comparative Literature programs.

[ThePoorHangedFool]

Of course you could always unexpectedly fall in love with medieval literature (this was a friendly joke amongst fellow students at my departmental visits).

Truth. I can vouch for this; my thesis advisor chairs the Medieval Studies Department at my undergrad university, in addition to being one of the most amazing professors in the English department (and, at 33-ish, one of the youngest). Medieval literature is difficult at first, but is great because not only does it heavily incorporate both religious, liturgical, historical, and geographical information by necessity as part of the very essence of understanding motivation behind the literature, but you effectively get to learn new languages (Old and Middle English, at the very least).

AWESOME.

You may now commence berating me for what can best be described as pure dorkdom.

[Two Espressos]

Truth. I can vouch for this; my thesis advisor chairs the Medieval Studies Department at my undergrad university, in addition to being one of the most amazing professors in the English department (and, at 33-ish, one of the youngest). Medieval literature is difficult at first, but is great because not only does it heavily incorporate both religious, liturgical, historical, and geographical information by necessity as part of the very essence of understanding motivation behind the literature, but you effectively get to learn new languages (Old and Middle English, at the very least).

AWESOME.

You may now commence berating me for what can best be described as pure dorkdom.

Haha, I'd never berate you for "pure dorkdom."

Hell, I get really excited about basically anything associated with literature/literary theory. I don't think I'd ever take the medieval literature route, but I immensely respect those that do. Medieval literature is very cool.

[Two Espressos]

I'd like to post again to thank everyone who has contributed to this discussion. I've learned and changed so much in just a few months. I'm no longer interested in pursuing the aesthetics route. And, the more I think about it, I don't even agree with my former position on canonicity, etc. I'm actually pissed at my months-ago self for being so damn naive about some things!

JoeySsance was right: I had no clue how helpful everyone's advice was.

Had I not encountered the "tough love" of this and other threads, I would absolutely be shut-out of PhD programs come application season (I still might, lol). This thread has been tremendously helpful in aiding me to both broaden and narrow my perspective. I'm so glad that I found thegradcafe.com back in January!

I do have a new question to ask:

As of now, I'm considering the possibility of an interdisciplinary route, bridging comp/rhetoric and literature/literary theory. In your opinion, where would this type of research be best appreciated/supported--in comp/rhetoric departments, in English departments (with a strong theory bent), or in an interdisciplinary program (Stanford's Modern Thought and Literature, etc)? I realize that this is somewhat of a vague question, but I'm asking because I've heard/seen some academic "rivalry" (don't know how better to put it, lol) between comp/rhetoric and literature.

Thanks again for all your help.

Edited August 13, 2011 by Two Espressos

[runonsentence]

Glad we've helped so far!

I'm not sure that one "type" of school will your best fit; I think you should look around for lit MAs that have rhet comp offerings and teacher training as well as schools that offer an MA in rhet comp and might allow you to take lit classes as well. The degree to which the program allows your to be interdisciplinary (or take on a secondary interest) is going to vary widely by individual program.

If you do want to feel out both subfields, the only thing you might avoid are programs where the two are housed in different departments (e.g., Syracuse, MSU), as I'd imagine this would make it much more difficult to test out both your interests in your MA. (But I could be wrong—some of these programs might have "minor" options that would allow you to work with both departments.)

The power dynamic between lit and rhet comp is a bit interesting; peruse some of that Bullock and Trimbauer anthology I suggested once (Politics of Writing Instruction) if you want to know a bit more....

[Two Espressos]

Glad we've helped so far!

I'm not sure that one "type" of school will your best fit; I think you should look around for lit MAs that have rhet comp offerings and teacher training as well as schools that offer an MA in rhet comp and might allow you to take lit classes as well. The degree to which the program allows your to be interdisciplinary (or take on a secondary interest) is going to vary widely by individual program.

If you do want to feel out both subfields, the only thing you might avoid are programs where the two are housed in different departments (e.g., Syracuse, MSU), as I'd imagine this would make it much more difficult to test out both your interests in your MA. (But I could be wrong—some of these programs might have "minor" options that would allow you to work with both departments.)

Yeah, that makes sense. As of now (subject to change, of course), I plan to apply to a mix of PhD and MA programs--probably 75% PhD programs and 25% (funded) MA programs. Do you think your MA advice would apply in a PhD program also, or would that be a different dynamic? I definitely agree that I should supplement a generalist/literature MA with coursework or a minor in comp/rhetoric (or conversely, supplement a comp/rhetoric MA with literature coursework).

The power dynamic between lit and rhet comp is a bit interesting; peruse some of that Bullock and Trimbauer anthology I suggested once (Politics of Writing Instruction) if you want to know a bit more....

Yes, it definitely is interesting. I remember you mentioning that anthology before, but your mysterious use of the ellipsis has intrigued me even more...

[runonsentence]

Ah. A PhD would be a different beast altogether, because the committee will be looking for a stronger focus. There are PhD programs out there that are interdisciplinary friendly (e.g., check out U of Milwaukee-Wisconsin), but my guess is that you'll still need to articulate a primary research interest in one field. For instance, I have colleagues who are creative writers but are doing one of their exam areas in rhet comp.

There might be some interdisciplinary people out there who can direct you better than I can, but I think that what you need to do is decide what kind of work you want to do: literary analysis and theory that is influenced by rhetoric, or rhetorical work with a side interest in literature. That will determine what kinds of departments and programs you look into.

[Two Espressos]

Ah. A PhD would be a different beast altogether, because the committee will be looking for a stronger focus. There are PhD programs out there that are interdisciplinary friendly (e.g., check out U of Milwaukee-Wisconsin), but my guess is that you'll still need to articulate a primary research interest in one field. For instance, I have colleagues who are creative writers but are doing one of their exam areas in rhet comp.

There might be some interdisciplinary people out there who can direct you better than I can, but I think that what you need to do is decide what kind of work you want to do: literary analysis and theory that is influenced by rhetoric, or rhetorical work with a side interest in literature. That will determine what kinds of departments and programs you look into.

I still have a year before my application season, so I'm fairly confident that I can hone my interests enough for PhD programs (at least, that's what I'm telling myself, haha). If I had to choose between "literary analysis and theory that is influenced by rhetoric" or "rhetorical work with a side interest in literature," I'd definitely choose the former. Obviously, much more research is needed on my part before I can say anything definitively, but I feel that it is telling that I'm having trouble finding comp/rhetoric professors with whom I'd like to work.

I'm struggling to find my "academic identity," so to speak. Others have said that that is a good thing during this stage of my academic career. I suppose that I agree. When I visualize my academic future (pending that I get in a PhD program, etc), I see myself pursing a literary PhD over a rhetorical one. But that could change.

Thanks for the school suggestion! I haven't looked into Milwaukee-Wisconsin at all yet; I'll definitely have to check it out.