0% Confidence of Acceptance

[cbttcher]

This post was great for two reasons:

 

First, it is ridiculous that anyone would question you about studying Anglo-Jewish lterature because you're German. I'm 1/3 Native American, and, while I don't study NA lit, most of the work done on NA authors is by white people and, like you said, no one ever seems to question them! It's just my opnion, but I think any study of Anglo-Jewish lit, especially outside of the more mainstream mid-twentieth century research, is really valuable! There's so much talk about the importance of studying under-represented works, but when it comes to actually doing it there's not as much as support as there should be.

 

Also, in the likely event I will be re-applying, it's good to know I will have others with whom discuss the myriad of things wrong with my non-traditional application.

 

Thank you. I was actually really offended when my professor told me that. I'm just confused as to why they're not letting in something new. I'm convinced that professors can learn just as much from grad students as grad students learn from them.

Yeah, I don't hold out much hope for this round. But I know that my applications were all too rushed and my interests are too non-traditional. In terms of the literature that I study. I would love to keep researching on Anglo-Jewish literature but 19th century British literature would interest me just as much and I think I can make them like me more if I do something traditional like Jane Austen. Or even George Eliot.

But yes, it's definitely nice to know that one is not alone.

[InHacSpeVivo]

Ok, that makes sense. I come from a similar background in terms of record keeping, poverty and mixes of ethnicities. My family is Creole from Louisiana, so whenever someone asks about my ethnicity I'm like, uhhhh, I don't know how to answer that question precisely, so I just list all of the things that I know are thrown in there, but I couldn't tell you how "much" of any one background I am.

Yes, I know exactly what you mean. I've done a lot of research over the years and was hoping to dig into things a bit more this summer, but it looks like I'll be working on apps again. The best I'll ever get is my approximations. Most of my friends have much more storied genealogies than I do, so it's nice to come across someone also from a hodgepodge of non-nobles.

[thatjewishgirl]

How strange to me that someone would tell you that because you are German you should be careful studying anything Jewish. I have found that the Germans are really invested in the study of Jewish culture.

 

Jewish studies in English departments is a weird situation. . . I do not believe that anyone would ever tell me I couldn't study it in a million years. I wrote every single seminar paper in my MA program on Jewish literature, and my thesis was on Anglo-Jewish literature. I did encounter hostilities from professors and students alike because I'm religious, but a lot of that, I think, is misdirected hostility toward Christians, since Oklahoma has quite a few of those, and intellectual leftists here tend to lump all religious people into the same category.

 

I'm really glad to see that some people on this board think there is value in Jewish studies in English. I strongly believe that to be true. I spoke via email and phone with several professors from around the country who also work on Anglo-Jewish literature, and they all told me the same thing--it's a growing field. But there is a difference between people letting you study it in a program you are already in and committees being willing to take you if that is your major interest. While I don't think anyone would ever tell me I couldn't do it, I think a lot of people just don't know what to do with it. . . I think a lot of people don't see a place for Jewish lit in English department and think it all belongs in Judaic studies depts.. but unless you are fluent in Hebrew or Yiddish and want to work on Hebrew or Yiddish lit, good luck getting into one of those programs. I haven't noticed much of a place for English language Jewish lit in Judaic studies depts.

 

But cbttcher, I will be so so interested in the progress of your career, so I hope you stay in touch, and I hope you continue to work on Jewish literature (even if you don't emphasize it in your future sops!).

[InHacSpeVivo]

Thank you. I was actually really offended when my professor told me that. I'm just confused as to why they're not letting in something new. I'm convinced that professors can learn just as much from grad students as grad students learn from them. Yeah, I don't hold out much hope for this round. But I know that my applications were all too rushed and my interests are too non-traditional. In terms of the literature that I study. I would love to keep researching on Anglo-Jewish literature but 19th century British literature would interest me just as much and I think I can make them like me more if I do something traditional like Jane Austen. Or even George Eliot. But yes, it's definitely nice to know that one is not alone.

It's so funny because grad school is supposed to be all about adding to a field, but I'm starting to get the feeling that getting is about conforming to existing research. I thought my SOP just out of ug seemed pedestrian, but it seems to have worked better than my latest effort...

[t1racyjacks]

Thank you. I was actually really offended when my professor told me that. I'm just confused as to why they're not letting in something new. I'm convinced that professors can learn just as much from grad students as grad students learn from them.

Yeah, I don't hold out much hope for this round. But I know that my applications were all too rushed and my interests are too non-traditional. In terms of the literature that I study. I would love to keep researching on Anglo-Jewish literature but 19th century British literature would interest me just as much and I think I can make them like me more if I do something traditional like Jane Austen. Or even George Eliot.

But yes, it's definitely nice to know that one is not alone.

well I think one thing against me is that I am doing literature that's fairly traditional -- but my LOR writers and faculty tell me I would have better luck if I played the race card and did asian-american lit or something [i'm not even american!]. and of course affect studies isn't the rage....

[Theresa8710]

I'm sorry your prof wasn't much help, but I'm curious now, too. What did you write about? Because the "serious" literature claim is really lame on your professor's part. Scholars have written theses on Harry Potter and as for Twilight (bluh), every time I check listings of call-for-papers and upcoming conferences lately there is tons of stuff for "supernatural romance" and "urban fantasy". Heck, even rom-zom-coms. Understanding popular literature (why it's popular, what its influences are, questions about fandom) is just as important as understanding older, more "serious" literature. A good scholar can write a good paper on just about anything.

 

However, I do agree with Magical Realist that if your application is stressing a, shall we say, "genre studies" angle— if your writing sample was about popular fiction or even "bad" fiction— you need to be mindful of where you're applying because not every school has the resources for or interest in that kind of research. And then there's just the frustration of knowing that even if you do your research and find good fits, there is still a chance of being rejected. All the schools I shot for are Top 20, but, with the exception of Cornell, all had POIs and other resources for my sub-concentrations (children's lit, fantasy, science fiction etc.). That hasn't kept me from being rejected pretty much across the board.

 

It's kind of horrible, but if I really am down and out, I'm wondering if I should downplay my interest in genre studies on my apps next cycle. I'm really curious about how much it hurts/helps/dooms(?) you, even at schools that do do that kind of work.

 

It was about Lewis Carroll and his Alice books. The prof doesn't consider childern lit serious. Modernism is his thing.

 

The frame of analysis of the paper just happened to match the kind of analysis I want to engage in at grad school.

Didn't have enough time to write another whole paper  .

Edited February 17, 2013 by Theresa8710

[DontHate]

I wrote a whole new paper twice, once when I applied for an MA and again this year for PhDs. I don't think writing a new paper is too much work to secure 5-7 years of your future.

[Theresa8710]

I wrote a whole new paper twice, once when I applied for an MA and again this year for PhDs. I don't think writing a new paper is too much work to secure 5-7 years of your future.

 

 I don't have anything to say to that. Guess I'm a lazy person   

[DontHate]

Maybe you can write something new if you have to apply again, I guess?

[cbttcher]

It was about Lewis Carroll and his Alice books. The prof doesn't consider childern lit serious. Modernism is his thing.

 

The frame of analysis of the paper just happened to match the kind of analysis I want to engage in at grad school.

Didn't have enough time to write another whole paper  .

 

I think that's kind of weird. I thought Lewis Carroll was pretty much accepted. I know that a friend of mine just got her paper on film adaptations of Alice accepted at a conference.

[cbttcher]

It's so funny because grad school is supposed to be all about adding to a field, but I'm starting to get the feeling that getting is about conforming to existing research. I thought my SOP just out of ug seemed pedestrian, but it seems to have worked better than my latest effort...

 

Right?! It all just seems contradictory.

 

well I think one thing against me is that I am doing literature that's fairly traditional -- but my LOR writers and faculty tell me I would have better luck if I played the race card and did asian-american lit or something [i'm not even american!]. and of course affect studies isn't the rage....

 

I don't know about that... I think it has more to do with the fact that Asian-American lit is actually growing. Anglo-Jewish lit? There's not much out there. I guess you can have a small field or a almost non-existent field. And apparently, they like the small field better than the almost non-existent one.

[KeelyMK]

It was about Lewis Carroll and his Alice books. The prof doesn't consider childern lit serious. Modernism is his thing.

  

.

Really? Children's lit and modernism *totally* converge on the fronts of nonsense and experimental/invented language, which I gathered to be a pretty hot topic right now. I'm sorry he/she didn't feel that way, but I wouldn't be discouraged if it's a topic you're passionate about. From all the recent courses I see posted that have to do with children's lit (Seuss, HP, kid detective fiction) taught by very respected faculty, it seems like an up-and-coming field that if you examined/presented in an innovative way would be a great career move.

[Tybalt]

Thank you. I was actually really offended when my professor told me that. I'm just confused as to why they're not letting in something new. I'm convinced that professors can learn just as much from grad students as grad students learn from them.

Yeah, I don't hold out much hope for this round. But I know that my applications were all too rushed and my interests are too non-traditional. In terms of the literature that I study. I would love to keep researching on Anglo-Jewish literature but 19th century British literature would interest me just as much and I think I can make them like me more if I do something traditional like Jane Austen. Or even George Eliot.

But yes, it's definitely nice to know that one is not alone.

If you do need to re-apply, it might be more beneficial to find schools/potential mentors that really fit your interests. Have you thought of applying to Columbia? They have plenty of folks there who do the kind of theory you seem to be interested in, and you could probably make a strong argument for why James Shapiro would be beneficial for your work as well (he's early modern, but absolutely brilliant--and he's written a very well regarded book on a topic somewhat similar to yours).

[chaucerettescs]

It was about Lewis Carroll and his Alice books. The prof doesn't consider childern lit serious. Modernism is his thing.

 

The frame of analysis of the paper just happened to match the kind of analysis I want to engage in at grad school.

Didn't have enough time to write another whole paper  .

 

Lol, ok, that's madness. Even really traditional scholars who don't give much thought to children's literature consider Lewis Carroll "serious" literature. Eric Rabkin, the fantasy/sci-fi prof here at Michigan, does entire units on Alice and would probably teach whole courses on Carroll if he could.

 

See, this is where I get frustrated. I haven't any problem with traditional scholarship (I like most of it and a lot of my work could be considered traditional), but I get pretty peeved when people don't consider children's literature worth the same amount of analysis as adult literature. As though because it's for children, it must be fluff. How is William Blake or Christina Rossetti or Lewis Carroll or Charles Dickens or J.M. Barrie fluff? Shenanigans, I say!

[Tybalt]

Lol, ok, that's madness. Even really traditional scholars who don't give much thought to children's literature consider Lewis Carroll "serious" literature. Eric Rabkin, the fantasy/sci-fi prof here at Michigan, does entire units on Alice and would probably teach whole courses on Carroll if he could.

 

See, this is where I get frustrated. I haven't any problem with traditional scholarship (I like most of it and a lot of my work could be considered traditional), but I get pretty peeved when people don't consider children's literature worth the same amount of analysis as adult literature. As though because it's for children, it must be fluff. How is William Blake or Christina Rossetti or Lewis Carroll or Charles Dickens or J.M. Barrie fluff? Shenanigans, I say!

 

I have nothing to add to this, but you mentioned a couple of Victorian writers and used the word "shenanigans" so I felt compelled to post the following:

 

 

[chaucerettescs]

.

Really? Children's lit and modernism *totally* converge on the fronts of nonsense and experimental/invented language, which I gathered to be a pretty hot topic right now. I'm sorry he/she didn't feel that way, but I wouldn't be discouraged if it's a topic you're passionate about. From all the recent courses I see posted that have to do with children's lit (Seuss, HP, kid detective fiction) taught by very respected faculty, it seems like an up-and-coming field that if you examined/presented in an innovative way would be a great career move.

 

Yeah, one of my profs/advisors told me that on the MLA job bulletin this year, there were a surprising number of universities seeking professors who could teach courses in children's lit, which both pleased me and worried me because NO DON'T FILL THEM YET! I HAVEN'T GOT A PHD YET!

[chaucerettescs]

Love Daniel Deronda! Such a good one. I hate how so many critics dislike the "Jewish part" of the novel. It is nice to see that other people are interested in the Jewish experience. I face a lot of flack now at my school and in my former program because I'm fairly religious (I say as I'm playing on the internet on Saturday afternoon after I've skipped shul for the past month). I have never yet worked with a professor or other students who share my interest in Jewish literature, so it is nice to know they exist. http://forum.thegradcafe.com/public/style_emoticons/default/smile.png

So, do the two of you feel like people question your interest in Jewish literature because you aren't Jewish? Being Jewish is what prompted my interest in the subject, but I've known a fair number of people interested in minority studies, Native, African American, Asian, Hispanic, etc., who are not ethnically related to their subject of study.

Sort of. I was raised in a predominantly Jewish neighborhood in south Florida and so grew up surrounded by Jewish culture. It wasn't until I moved to Michigan that things got a little weird. I use so much Yiddish slang in my casual lexicon that when I got to Michigan everyone here was convinced that I was Jewish, which was strange to me because it had never really occurred to me until then that so many of those words aren't just every day parlance for most people. And then when I became so defensive of Shylock in my Shakespeare courses people were absolutely positive I had to be Jewish. When I told them I wasn't, people got kind of funny about it. They just couldn't understand why I cared so much if I wasn't actually Jewish myself (the answer "I don't like seeing people be dehumanized" apparently wasn't obvious).

And when we did Daniel Deronda in Victorian lit... forget about it. Granted, pretty much everyone in that class loved Daniel, but, yeah, people weren't all that interested in the "Jewish part" which really bummed me out because that was all I wanted to talk about. I dunno, it's probably because of how and where I grew up, but representations of Judaism touches a sensitive spot in me... which is really hard to explain without sounding like a complete ass. People tend to think I mean "I GREW UP IN A JEWISH NEIGHBORHOOD THEREFORE IT'S LIKE I ~AM~ JEWISH" which is really, really not what I mean (I was not raised Jewish, the Jewish religion and Jewish history are not my own, I have never experienced anti-Semitism, and so I would not dare presume to even suggest something so ridiculous). It's just that when most of your neighbors, friends, and parents' friends are part of a culture different than your own, it leaves an impression on your life and your interests.

tl;dr

It's funny, I actually didn't mention this interest in my SOP (I already had way too many interests shoved in there and it was beginning to look a bit scattered), but I just realized that an adcomm would know it from reading my CV because I did a guest lecture on Elizabethan anti-Semitism a few years back at a community college. Which, good, I'd like them to know, but now I'm wondering if it looks a bit funny having a guest lecture on the Elizabethan period when I'm a Victorian concentrator.

• Is anyone else's CV a bit jumbled when it comes to your declared interests (you're a Victorian concentrator, but you have a guest lecture on an Elizabethan topic or an essay published about American modernism, etc)?
• How much of the talking should you let your CV do as far as your interests go? Example: Would it be wise not to strongly emphasize my interests in children's lit and speculative fiction in my next round of SOPs and then just let the work I've done which is listed on my CV imply those interests?

Edited February 17, 2013 by chaucerettescs

[katja454]

• Is anyone else's CV a bit jumbled when it comes to your declared interests (you're a Victorian concentrator, but you have a guest lecture on an Elizabethan topic or an essay published about American modernism, etc)?

 

Lots of yes. I haven't talked to the people at the places I've gotten in about how they perceived my CV - in reality, it's so jumbled because a.) my current research interests took a while to evolve, so I've been interested in lots of other things along the way, and b.) I just like researching and writing about different things. I'm a Victorianist who wants to focus on animal & food studies, but the two pieces I used for my writing sample, sometimes together, depending on what the program wanted, were a reading of phrenology in Villette (traditional Victorian) and an analysis of humanity/animality in a contemporary Finnish novel. On top of that, my one publication is on a Romantic era Irish novel and concerns none of my interests... it was just an idea I got really interested in in a grad seminar. 

 

In my CV, I just let the jumble stand, but in my SOP, I tried to pull things together into a semi-coherent narrative of my interests, so maybe it actually sounds like I know what I'm doing? But yeah, so this is all to say that, from my experience anyway, you shouldn't need to shy away from experiences and interests that don't quite fit with your stated focus. Hope that helps!

[champagne]

(the answer "I don't like seeing people be dehumanized" apparently wasn't obvious).

 

Ha! This was my exact thought process when reading your predicament. Just because anti-semitism was the fashion of the time, doesn't mean we need to condone it in the 21st century.

[Lycidas]

It was about Lewis Carroll and his Alice books. The prof doesn't consider childern lit serious. Modernism is his thing.

 

The frame of analysis of the paper just happened to match the kind of analysis I want to engage in at grad school.

Didn't have enough time to write another whole paper  .

 

Sheer insanity. William Empson dedicated the entire last chapter of Some Versions of Pastoral to a discussion of Alice back in 1935, and that's now a canonical piece of criticism. As Empson says, children's literature produced by an adult mind is rarely intended solely for children

[cbttcher]

If you do need to re-apply, it might be more beneficial to find schools/potential mentors that really fit your interests. Have you thought of applying to Columbia? They have plenty of folks there who do the kind of theory you seem to be interested in, and you could probably make a strong argument for why James Shapiro would be beneficial for your work as well (he's early modern, but absolutely brilliant--and he's written a very well regarded book on a topic somewhat similar to yours).

 

I thought about Columbia. But in the end, it was the money that kept me from doing so. I wouldn't even have been able to apply to Brandeis if they hadn't offered me an application fee waiver. Columbia's definitely on the list for next year. Maybe I'll have better chances if I can actually show that I already have the MA degrees.

[jazzyd]

• Is anyone else's CV a bit jumbled when it comes to your declared interests (you're a Victorian concentrator, but you have a guest lecture on an Elizabethan topic or an essay published about American modernism, etc)?
• How much of the talking should you let your CV do as far as your interests go? Example: Would it be wise not to strongly emphasize my interests in children's lit and speculative fiction in my next round of SOPs and then just let the work I've done which is listed on my CV imply those interests?

 

This is something about my application (particularly CV + transcript) that I feel I did particularly well. The department here is VERY British oriented and this is reflected in our graduation requirements (out of all our required courses, 5/11 of them are British literature topics; meanwhile only 2/11 are American literature topics), so I've had to fight tooth and nail so squeeze in as many American literature courses as I could. But I've also known that I wanted to work with American literature (and race) since deciding on grad school sophomore year. Meaning everything I've done since then (symposium presentations, summer research) for the most part have revolved around the same broad area(s).

 

(I should note however that my CV is VERY bare; 2 presentations [both at my home institution], 2 summer programs [one at my home institution], 2 scholarships, and my part-time employment since college that primarily consist of journal editing and web development work.)

 

So I don't think it's utterly crucial (and for all I know it doesn't make a difference) that everything on your application and CV match perfectly with what you now know you want to research. In fact, I think the opposite (being too focused and too set) can hurt even more because it shows that an applicant is not willing to be flexible with changes in research, advice from faculty, knowledge from classes, etc. 

 

I'll finish off to just say that I consider my CV a supplement, not a major portion, of my graduate applications. And that's the way a lot of programs tend to frame it. Your SOP and writing sample should tell the story, and the CV is more of a nice anecdote to maybe further supply that you're ready for graduate level work. And as I mentioned above, my CV is quite bare, so in terms of telling the story it doesn't in any way at all encompass my ideas and preparation for grad work. My transcript does a better job of that than my CV.

[InHacSpeVivo]

Sort of. I was raised in a predominantly Jewish neighborhood in south Florida and so grew up surrounded by Jewish culture. It wasn't until I moved to Michigan that things got a little weird. I use so much Yiddish slang in my casual lexicon that when I got to Michigan everyone here was convinced that I was Jewish, which was strange to me because it had never really occurred to me until then that so many of those words aren't just every day parlance for most people. And then when I became so defensive of Shylock in my Shakespeare courses people were absolutely positive I had to be Jewish. When I told them I wasn't, people got kind of funny about it. They just couldn't understand why I cared so much if I wasn't actually Jewish myself (the answer "I don't like seeing people be dehumanized" apparently wasn't obvious).

And when we did Daniel Deronda in Victorian lit... forget about it. Granted, pretty much everyone in that class loved Daniel, but, yeah, people weren't all that interested in the "Jewish part" which really bummed me out because that was all I wanted to talk about. I dunno, it's probably because of how and where I grew up, but representations of Judaism touches a sensitive spot in me... which is really hard to explain without sounding like a complete ass. People tend to think I mean "I GREW UP IN A JEWISH NEIGHBORHOOD THEREFORE IT'S LIKE I ~AM~ JEWISH" which is really, really not what I mean (I was not raised Jewish, the Jewish religion and Jewish history are not my own, I have never experienced anti-Semitism, and so I would not dare presume to even suggest something so ridiculous). It's just that when most of your neighbors, friends, and parents' friends are part of a culture different than your own, it leaves an impression on your life and your interests.

 

I am out of up votes, but I just had to thank you for this post. I was born and raised in Hawaii, but my family background is European/Native American. I've basically had to develop a completely new lexicon over the past 12 years or so, but every once in a while I will say something that throws people completely for a loop. I look white, so everyone just assumes I'm from New England originally. When they find out I'm from Hawaii I get this ridiculous line of questioning that none of my Flipino, Samoan, Japanese, etc friends would ever receive just because, apparently, you can't be from Hawaii and not be Asian.

 

Anyway, I know how you feel in a way, and I was especially happy you shared your experience because I really like hearing about people who grew up surrounded by Jewish culture. I find it fascinating, but I didn't meet anyone who was Jewish until I was 17. I often come across Jewish traditions, etc. in the Boston suburbs that don't really make sense to me, but can rarely find people willing to explain things that are so familiar to them (I guess it's so ingrained there's no way to articulate it to someone with no background in that society). Anyway, thanks!

[thatjewishgirl]

That is a really interesting story, chaucerettescs! I'm actually really jealous of your experience. I grew up midwest Reform, and starting affiliating Conservative after I met my husband. We do not have a large Jewish population here, and it is definitely an aging one, so I am always jealous of people who have been able to experience a type of Jewish culture, Florida, Boston, etc., that I haven't.

 

And Pericles, I would be willing to bet that they aren't interested in explanation because they feel like they don't have to--I assume that in places where Jewish populations are larger, they just assume you already know. Here, we're used to explaining every little detail. Our rabbi painstaking explains things, even though she should know better because she's largely talking to a Jewish audience. But we're just used to overexplaining for the benefit of the dominant culture.

[Gwendolyn]

I am out of up votes, but I just had to thank you for this post. I was born and raised in Hawaii, but my family background is European/Native American. I've basically had to develop a completely new lexicon over the past 12 years or so, but every once in a while I will say something that throws people completely for a loop. I look white, so everyone just assumes I'm from New England originally. When they find out I'm from Hawaii I get this ridiculous line of questioning that none of my Flipino, Samoan, Japanese, etc friends would ever receive just because, apparently, you can't be from Hawaii and not be Asian.

 

Anyway, I know how you feel in a way, and I was especially happy you shared your experience because I really like hearing about people who grew up surrounded by Jewish culture. I find it fascinating, but I didn't meet anyone who was Jewish until I was 17. I often come across Jewish traditions, etc. in the Boston suburbs that don't really make sense to me, but can rarely find people willing to explain things that are so familiar to them (I guess it's so ingrained there's no way to articulate it to someone with no background in that society). Anyway, thanks!

Your story reminds me of one of my sorority sisters. She's African-American (both of her parents are African-American and the entire family has dual citizenship), but she was born and raised her entire life in Japan. When she tells people she's from Japan they always think she's just joking and never choose to believe her until she proves she's fluent. I suppose being Black and from Japan is a little less common than being white and from Hawaii though. 

Edited February 17, 2013 by Gwendolyn