American Art PhDs in New England area?

[aojumper]

I am about to begin the application process for a PhD, interested in Colonial and 19th c. American art, my career goal being research and teaching, maybe some curating on the side. I am applying to Harvard, MIT, BU, Yale and Brown. Here are my specs:

I have a 3.9 GPA in my master's program at a respected private top-50 university, finished at the top of my class and won the department academic award, have been very involved with extracurricular activities (pres. of the AH student assoc.) and curating the student gallery; I am older (31); GREs were ok - 600s verbal and only 5 on writing (my scores dropped from the 1st time I took it at 5.5 but don't have the time or $ to take a course; will be presenting at my first symposium this fall, but am thin on the curriculum vitae and work experience (I worked in the communications field prior to starting my masters); I know my recommenders will write very good letters. I have reading knowledge of French, but still need to learn German.

I am wondering if I have a prayer? Especially with a mediocre GRE score, lack of research/work experiences, and no German yet? Would appreciate thoughts, especially from anyone who got into those schools... as well as any "insider" info about the faculty and programs that might not be listed on their websites. Thank you.

[condivi]

sounds promising to me--you're definitely in the ballpark. a lot will depend on how well you articulate your interests in your personal statement and demonstrate your scholarly potential in your writing sample. gre scores don't really matter that much--and yours are fine--so i wouldn't worry about it too much.

[fullofpink]

sounds promising to me--you're definitely in the ballpark. a lot will depend on how well you articulate your interests in your personal statement and demonstrate your scholarly potential in your writing sample. gre scores don't really matter that much--and yours are fine--so i wouldn't worry about it too much.

I agree.

[anonymousbequest]

I'm wondering whether you should nix MIT and Brown, they are not known for American art. Look at Delaware, Penn, and maybe Temple instead? Also you should read work by Jennifer Roberts and (particularly) Alex Nemerov before deciding on Harvard or Yale. They come from a certain methodological tradition that doesn't suit everyone. BU may be losing Pat Hills soon.

[aojumper]

Thanks for the responses. I am glad to hear my qualifications are somewhere in the range of these schools, though I know it's a tough road anyway.

I'm wondering whether you should nix MIT and Brown, they are not known for American art. Look at Delaware, Penn, and maybe Temple instead? Also you should read work by Jennifer Roberts and (particularly) Alex Nemerov before deciding on Harvard or Yale. They come from a certain methodological tradition that doesn't suit everyone. BU may be losing Pat Hills soon.

I like Jennifer Roberts, have read her research and definitely have similarities in how we approach things, and for that reason Harvard is a top choice, but also probably one of the most difficult to get into. I need to read up on Nemerov, that was a recent decision to look into Yale. I've also heard the same about BU losing Pat Hills, but I would hope they would replace her with another quality American scholar. My advisor recommended Brown (she went there and thought it could be worked out) and MIT. I will probably apply to both, even MIT because I have an interest in utilizing 21st technologies in analyzing existing art historical knowledge and methodologies. I'll have to look into Temple, Penn and Delaware - though I'm purposely looking into New England so I can move back closer to family; hence why I am applying to any school in the region!

[losemygrip]

Delaware is still pretty widely recognized as the best in American art, particularly the early period you're interested in. That should be your first choice.

[violetvivian]

Delaware is still pretty widely recognized as the best in American art, particularly the early period you're interested in. That should be your first choice.

Delaware has lost 3 (that I can think of) great Americanists over the past few years...

[anonymousbequest]

Delaware did lose three "first generation" Americanists, who have nearly all retired at this point, but Wendy Bellion is there now and recent Ph.D.s have continued to be successful in academic and teaching. Historically, Yale, Penn, and Delaware were the hotspots for the training of Americanists on the east coast with Harvard refusing to have anything to do officially with teaching of American art (until Jennifer Roberts). I can understand wanting to be near family, but if your conviction to become a scholar is not strong enough to take you to a school within a long train ride from New England, you might want to reconsider your chosen path. After all, once you finish who knows where your first teaching/curatorial position might be?

[violetvivian]

Bellion is great and an excellent reason to apply to Delaware. The three that I am thinking of left Delaware for other tenured positions but have not retired. They (or two out of three, at least) are also still advising the last of their Delaware graduate students remotely, from their new positions. I think in the next two or three years, when the last of their advisees have graduated, we will see a change in the success/output level of recent Americanist PhDs from the program, unless there is a new hire or two.

I would look at Penn and Temple, as others have said. Not in New England, but a cheap megabus ride away.

After all, once you finish who knows where your first teaching/curatorial position might be?

And yeah, that's a very good point.

[losemygrip]

I agree with anonymous..., and while greenpen has a point, Delaware will be able to rest on its reputational laurels for some time. Penn and Temple are also great options, especially because of the plethora of American art in Philly.

[MadameNon]

fullofpink - Honestly I think that is an overly rosy outlook on the situation. For the vast majority of humanities PhDs, you have to go where you're lucky enough to get a job and beggars can't be choosers. And I think more to the point here, if you're already planning to not use your PhD because you are inflexible about location, why take up space in a program in the first place?

I don't mean to sound like a jerk but we all know how competitive our field is. And despite your anecdotal evidence, having a PhD is not generally a favorable trait on the job market outside of the field.

[aojumper]

Wow, lots of food for thought in this post. Again, thank you for the responses. I'm a bit surprised that geography is so quickly discounted as a legitimate reason for applying to a program, especially since it's not as though I'm applying to a bunch of no-name schools in the middle of nowhere. New England is certainly not devoid of top programs, so if I can get in, then it would be ideal. That's simply my perspective, but I can understand that for others they are willing to go anywhere to achieve their career goals. I just believe strongly in keeping a healthy life balance between work and pleasure; and for me part of that balance exists in New England.

I've been fascinated by the different viewpoints on where the PhD sends you. I can see both sides of the coin - the traditional research/curatorial/teaching track, which is highly competitive (with seemingly dwindling opportunities) versus the more creative route suggested. I feel optimistic about either option - whether I ended up heading for a tenure track position, or creating my own mix of jobs (adjunct, museum, consulting, etc.). Frankly, I'll worry about the 'end' goal once the finish line is near (which it won't be for 5-7 years). It seems silly to decide not to get a PhD before I start just because statistically my chances for success are slim.

[fullofpink]

Yeah - the reasoning is a little off. I would hate for someone to try and dissuade me from attempting grad school because I have no interest in living in NYC or Texas or southern Cali. I do understand that my career may take me to the far end of the earth but I do have the option of not selecting a job just because I don't want to live somewhere.

( I typed this on my phone and it won't let me scroll up to see my post - sorry for any typos)

[Herbie]

I don't want to look back after several years and put my foot in my mouth, but Patricia Hills doesn't intend to retire soon. While deciding between schools, I expressed this concern with her.

Similarly, if you discover you're interested in her research, or other Americanists like Kim Sichel, I would suggest personally messaging them to further investigate whether or not they'll be around for advising during your career there.

[anonymousbequest]

I guess my feelings of the matter are that a) why would you get a Ph.D. if you don't want to eventually get a job that requires a Ph.D.? Save yourself the hassle and years (and money, even "fully funded" people take out some loans), it's not fun. You can be a grant writer, museum educator, registrar, administrator, development officer, or even curator of a community gallery without one, if you just want to work in the visual arts. You get a Ph.D. because you have a desire and think you can contribute to the production of knowledge in art history, not write grants. And, your advisor and school will not support you unless they feel you are committed to at least trying to be tenured at Princeton or (secondarily) curator at the Getty. It damages the reputation of programs/professors not to have their graduates work in the field, plus you take up resources of more serious students. Some advisors won't even support you if you express the desire to become a *gasp* curator. b ) why would people on this forum listen to someone dispense advice (much of it misguided) who isn't even *in* graduate school much less in a position to speak to the job market beyond a few anecdotes gleaned while working as a low level research assistant god knows where?

Here's an anecdote: an Americanist at one of the Philadelphia programs is married to a curator who works at a museum in New York. They have children and commute. To me, that's the kind of thing that ambitious art historians need to gird themselves up for. If you are not ready to face that, and think you will just cobble together some adjunct teaching with grant writing you are naive. Adjunct teaching is terrible work btw, little pay for little respect. It's a vicious cycle, you have to try and find more opportunities to make a living which gives you no time for publishing which means that you won't be marketable for tenure track jobs. But carry on, fullofpink. Maybe it will work out for you, or maybe you'll end up married with kids, not working in the field, holding on to your Ph.D. as a talisman that you actually accomplished something in your life beyond breeding, that you bring up at mommy and me classes. That is, if you get in somewhere.

Aojumper, you say you want to do Colonial and/or 19th century (I'm assuming early 19th because of your interest in Colonial) American art history. Off the top of my head, the best places for that would be Delaware with Wendy Bellion, Berkeley with Margaretta Lovell, Harvard with Jennifer Roberts, and (maybe) UCSB with Bruce Robertson. Pat Hills is not working in Colonial (or even 19th century anymore). Alex Nemerov is a wild card. A lot of Americanists who formerly were interested in Colonial and 19th century have switched focus into the 20th as part of an epochal shift of the entire discipline.

Edited August 22, 2011 by anonymousbequest

[fullofpink]

Ok. That is unnecessarily cruel and a little off the marker: I was only saying that even if you don't get the curator or professor position with a PhD, there are still avenues in which to use your research skills and connections. People complete their dissertation for all kinds reasons; everyone is different in all intentions and purposes, they don't have to confirm to the expectation that you have for them.

[MadameNon]

Those are not the expectations of a specific person. Those are the expectations of the field. It isn't about being flexible with how you use your PhD. If you want to be flexible, don't get one. You'll have much more flexibility.

[fullofpink]

Yep.