Another Article on the 'Crisis' in the Humanities

[wtncffts]

I was going to post this in the humanities section but I'm sure much of it is relevant to other fields. To be honest, I haven't read it yet, but saw the title and knew it had to be posted here. I'll read and comment if there's something I have to say, but thought I'd just put it out there first.

http://www.slate.com/id/2300107/pagenum/all/#p2

[Strangefox]

"I can only recommend graduate school in the humanities—and, increasingly, the social sciences and sciences—if you are independently wealthy, well-connected in the field you plan to enter (e.g., your mom is the president of an Ivy League university), or earning a credential to advance in a position you already hold, such as a high-school teacher, and even then, a master's degree is enough."

Well, I believe it's too harsh.

[starmaker]

This is the same guy who has written a bunch of these pieces, like the Just Don't Go one.

I find some of his points ridiculous. TA exploitation is a problem, but I've never understood why TAs teaching a class is presumed to be intrinsically bad. I've had plenty of TAs who were better teachers than most profs, and since they learned the material that they're teaching more recently, they're sometimes more up to date on it or remember it better. And, aren't VAPs the norm in some fields, much like postdocs are in others? How is that an unsuccessful placement? If it doesn't lead to a permanent position (in or out of academia) down the road, that's a problem, but the placement itself is a useful step.

I agree strongly with some of his other points (make info about grad programs easily available, stop regarding non-academic jobs as second class, accumulate skills that will make you employable outside of academia in order to avoid exploitation).

I think the bit that Strangefox quoted is nonsense. I get the point that the author is trying to make, but he paints with too broad a brush. Plenty of people (like my sister) aim for and start grad school in the humanities with their eyes open and viable plans for a non-academic career if the academic option doesn't work out. And a lot of social and natural sciences already have real non-academic job markets for PhDs (and yes, a PhD can provide an advantage over an MS even in these non-academic settings - I've been working in them without a PhD for four years now, I probably understand how they work better than the author does).

[runonsentence]

Pennepacker is more interested in doomsday mongering than actually offering solutions (especially in his Just Don't Go article in the Chronicle).

[Just me]

Sorry, but I have to agree. Not as a bitter student, but just as someone thinking realistically. Unless you aspire to teach, the humanities are pretty useless otherwise. But if someone's good at art or was in band in high school, they get told by everyone how amazing they are and how they should go to college for their skill. Sometimes those people fall so far in love with their hobbies and talents that they go to grad school for them, but in my opinion, anything beyond a bachelor's degree in any of the humanities is not only worthless, but could sabotage job hunting efforts. If you try to work at a store, do you think for one second they'll take someone with a master's degree in anything? No way - you'll be overqualified for most normal jobs and those positions will be given to junkies and dropouts because they're dumb enough to not question when they're getting screwed over and won't ask for more money.

I would personally never ever encourage anyone to major in the humanities unless they want to teach - not even a bachelor's degree. Such things as music and art just don't have much of a place in a practical job market anymore - the best of the best have already been hired and I'd say about 85 percent of those who get "creative" degrees will never actually get to use them for their intended purposes. Frankly, I'd encourage someone looking to major in the arts to major in something more practical (like accounting) and minor in art so they would have a higher chance of actually finding a job while being able to study their passion a little. Or if you want to take a couple college art classes, great - just stay away from a full degree.

I only say this from experience - I've had my bachelor's degree for two years and haven't gotten a lick of creative work despite loads of hunting and sending out resumes. It got me a call center job which I was fired from because I wasn't a good little slave. Not to mention a person can be creatively successful without a college degree. Case in point...Johnny Cupcakes. The man dropped out of college his first semester, came up with one cute little logo, knew nothing of marketing, and now he's a millionaire from selling shirts and buttons. Not being mean to him - hell, I met the man and bought a shirt, but I think it's shoved down everyone's throats way too much that you NEED to go to college to be a success and that is so far from the truth. If you're really good, you don't need a degree - someone who gave a lecture to my class last year said he hasn't even the slightest bit of formal art education, but is a tremendously gifted painter who is being offered a professorship.

Master's degrees in many other fields are practical, but not so much things like religious studies, music, philosophy, and art. If you're filthy rich or you're retired and have money to waste, then yeah, by all means go get a few master's degrees to decorate your wall. Otherwise, good luck putting a master's in photography to use. From what I have seen with my own eyes, creative passions don't make for good careers.

[Phil Sparrow]

I am so sick of all of these doomsday articles that suggest that there is no intrinsic value to a humanities education, or that there is no value to education generally unless it helps one nab a cushy corporate job. I've had a cushy corporate job, and it drove me to grad school-- in the humanities no less! I know exactly what I'm missing out on now, and good riddance. I'd prefer to spend my life earning a pittance for doing something I love than pull a high salary and hate myself and my life every day.

Grad school, in many ways, sucks. It's hard, it's often demoralizing, you don't get much respect from the average non-academic (indeed you don't get much respect from the average academic), and--yes--I'll be lucky to get any academic job at all, let alone tenure-track, after I'm finished. But it's the best job I've ever had. My worst days in grad school are better than my best days in the cubicle. I love what I do, and I thank my lucky stars every day that I'm here. I know exactly what I'm getting into, job-wise, and I'm okay with that.

And P.S. I got my sweet, soul-crushing corporate gig with an undergraduate English major. If you know how to market yourself, a undergraduate humanities major is INCREDIBLY useful for business-related jobs and job-searches. Most humanities undergrads, however, hear so often that their majors are useless that they don't even bother to learn how to market their valuable skills. This is something we should put serious effort into rectifying. If we collectively learned how to market ourselves better, we might not have to endure so many lectures on our so-called "useless" educations from boneheads who can't compose an email to save their lives.

Edited July 30, 2011 by Phil Sparrow

[caffeinerd]

And P.S. I got my sweet, soul-crushing corporate gig with an undergraduate English major. If you know how to market yourself, a undergraduate humanities major is INCREDIBLY useful for business-related jobs and job-searches. Most humanities undergrads, however, hear so often that their majors are useless that they don't even bother to learn how to market their valuable skills. This is something we should put serious effort into rectifying. If we collectively learned how to market ourselves better, we might not have to endure so many lectures on our so-called "useless" educations from boneheads who can't compose an email to save their lives.

AMEN. amen.

[Mal83]

Phil Sparrow is right on, we all have to take a little personal responsibility as well. You have to prepare yourself for what comes after graduation by having an understanding of what exactly you will be qualified to do, a sense of what the job market is like, and work on perfecting the art of marketing yourself as well as your skills so that you do actually land a job rather than going through school with blinders on assuming that the initials B.A or M.A will automatically get you hired. Difficulties getting a relevant job in your field of choice is just a fact of the times we live in and declaring the degree worthless because you haven't managed to do it immediately is a little self-defeating. You're basically saying that you've discarded the skills and knowledge it's taken years to acquire. If you know for a fact that a particular degree will be worthless or not as lucrative as you'd like then it's on you for pursuing it in the first place.

[Strangefox]

@Phil Sparrow and Mal: I could not say better!

@Just me: Boo on you! You are not realistic, you ARE bitter! And we know that perfectly well. When you came here for the first time to ask for advice - we tried to support you but you have apparently not done anything we recommended. Instead you come now to pour your bitterness on us, telling us in different posts that what we are doing is worthless, that academic path we have chosen won't lead us anywhere. I say, it's a very bad way to thank us for out attempts to help you.

[indalomena]

*sigh* This article makes me sad. There is nothing more draining than being told that you are naive and unrealistic just because you pursue something that might not have incredible financial benefits and that might not get you the perfect job at the end. Everyone has to take risks whatever their chosen path, nothing is certain, and a guaranteed way to stop yourself from doing anything remarkable with your life is to be bitter and cynical.

I find it so bleak when so many humanities students jokingly make comments about their 'useless' degrees, and yet continue to pursue them in this half-hearted, ironic way. We all need to believe in the importance of what we do. So often we get trapped in these comfortably pessimistic attitudes and forget the sheer urgency of life and the wretchedness of the prospect of living it with no conviction! Yes, this conviction must be supplemented with a substantial practical intelligence and it alone won't get you where you need to be. But that's no excuse to lose it altogether and lead a bitter, unfulfilled life...

[runonsentence]

I find it so bleak when so many humanities students jokingly make comments about their 'useless' degrees, and yet continue to pursue them in this half-hearted, ironic way. We all need to believe in the importance of what we do.

I'm happy to say that I've actually found it to be the opposite, in my department: because we know how shitty the market can be, all of the English grads I know are really serious and driven, have a clear idea of what they want to do with their degrees, and are committed to making their time in graduate school as rewarding as possible.

[Just me]

You give me so little credit - I'm not saying ALL graduate programs area waste of time. I understand many career fields require a master's degree and maybe even something higher. And if you want to teach humanities at either a grade school, high school or college level, then a master's in whatever creative field you prefer may be necessary. But what I am saying is try finding a career at all outside teaching with a master's in the arts. This isn't even about money - just try finding work with it at all - any work. Nobody takes artists and musicians seriously. I speak only from what I have seen first-hand. If you want to go six figures into debt for a degree you will never be able to use, then that's your choice - maybe taking on that kind of debt and making two dollars an hour as a freelancer is your life's dream. I'd personally never encourage someone to do that, though.

But if they were really adamant about pursuing a master's in philosophy or graphic design or something equally unreliable, I would tell them to simply not get their hopes up too high as far as landing a six-figure job...or a job that pays a salary that is too far above the poverty level. Like I said, I am only being realistic...the humanities in general just plain don't offer too many bright futures.

Most people I know who have their master's degrees are working retail because nobody even needs teachers anymore. When schools lay off their staff or make budget cuts, the humanities are the first ones to suffer. But the sports seem to stay intact, and that is the only thing I'd discourage even MORE as a career path than the arts because there is an even smaller chance of getting a career as a professional athlete.

And I don't want to get into my own issues in someone else's topic...if anyone needs to argue that with me, send me a private message instead.

[Strangefox]

Nobody takes artists and musicians seriously.

[90sNickelodeon]

I think people underestimate the power of a double major. Major in something you like (English, Art, Medieval Studies) and couple that degree with a practical major (Chemistry, Biology, business etc.). You get the best of both worlds. You study something you really like, and something you really need.

As for grad school in the humanities, I wouldn't recommend it. Teaching jobs (decent ones, at least) are SCARCE and super competitive. You are likely end up in the adjunct wasteland. Plus no one really wants a Renaissance Studies professor anymore. I hate to push for "practical" degrees, because university shouldn't become a vocational school. But really, students must be hip to the job market (such as it is) and trends to figure out the best course of action to effectively market themselves.

[qbtacoma]

A common thing these doomsday articles assume is that the grad students in question are 1) not knowledgeable about the kinds of opportunities available in the academy (i.e. very few), and 2) just going to grad school because they don't know what else to do with themselves, as opposed to a passion for their subject.

Obviously members of the Grad Cafe are probably among the most informed of all the applicants to graduate programs, and so people who are already attending will know better than I if that is true, BUT in my own estimation these assumptions do not appear to reflect the grad student population. Am I wrong? Are grad students just sheeple blindly following the advice of out-of-touch professors? I really do not think this is the case.

[Just me]

Like I said, I am only basing what I say on what I have seen. Places where I used to go for creative work would have job descriptions like, "If you want more than a dollar an hour, don't bother applying." I was told my rate of $8.00 an hour was too high. It's because morons think artists take an idea, push three buttons, and Photoshop makes the art for them. The average person believes making art requires no work whatsoever, which is why you get ignorant clients who want websites saying, "Your rate of $50 an hour is good, but can you have everything done in one hour?"

Art, music, and the likes are not bad at all by themselves - believe me, I love to draw. But I'd never tell anyone to try and make a living doing it beyond maybe an Etsy store on the side and having a practical day job. And I know for a fact that there are a couple people here and there who are in grad school because they don't want to find a job or they can't, so they go play student for three more years. That is by no means every student, but a couple folks I know personally are who I would describe as "professional students" because they don't know what they're doing with their lives and are just playing and going into debt until they figure something out.

I think someone already mentioned this too, but students in any creative major usually are never taught how to market themselves and their skills either. Yes, they can learn this on their own, but I think if you're throwing away tens of thousands of dollars and years of your life for a degree that might not even mean anything to many employers, shouldn't you at least learn how to whore out your skills that you pick up? It's like the difference between working with a publicist and self-publishing - if you already know what you're doing in every aspect, then just go do your thing. But if you're flailing around like a headless chicken, get someone to help you so you don't fall totally on your ass.

But if you're an arts major and you're really passionate about it, neither the cost nor the bleak chance of landing a career may dissuade you. For some, passion overrides the need to afford to live or have food - not what I'd choose for myself, but to each their own. I know many famous artists were starving and poor, so maybe that's the key. Growing up and continuing to be poor may influence my own opinions in the sense that I lean toward preferring financial security than I do having degrees I don't need in something I love doing.

[rising_star]

Just Me, I feel like you're too down on arts degrees and working artists. I have several friends that make their living as artists. In one case, that artist is contributing the same amount to the household income as her husband, who is an assistant professor. I'm not saying that my friends are the norm but, based on what I know about them and those they went to school with, they aren't exceptional either.

[Strangefox]

I think people underestimate the power of a double major. Major in something you like (English, Art, Medieval Studies) and couple that degree with a practical major (Chemistry, Biology, business etc.). You get the best of both worlds. You study something you really like, and something you really need.

I am not sure it's so easy to major in English and Chemistry, for example, for one person. Different sets of skills, different types of mind are required for these. But I agree that double majoring on the whole is a good idea.

[runonsentence]

Just came across the following blog post on this article, and thought it was excellent: https://jsench.wordpress.com/2011/07/28/working-classes/

[qbtacoma]

Thanks a lot for posting that, runonsentence. One thing the author points out that struck a chord is that going to grad school can be equivalent, money and labor-wise, as working almost any other job right out of school for those of us in our early 20s, except we don't risk our bodies to do it. And a point that really needles me in the "just don't go" camp is the implication that the life of the mind is only for the independently wealthy, like there are no other forms of compensation. Obviously this rebuttal shows what bunk that is.