SOP anxieties

[cquin]

I was talking with one of my English professors tonight and gave him an overview of my general areas of interest--gender theory, feminist psychoanalysis, Simone de Beauvoir, Julia Kristeva, etc.--and he told me in the gentlest way possible that a lot of these subjects are somewhat old; that is, they've been exhausted and are not areas in which new, original work can be produced. I told him that I understood that a massive amount of work had already been done on these topics, but I was under the impression that when it came to accepting new students, ad coms would look more at *how* I engaged with the text and produced a topic of study rather than *what* my topic actually was (within reason, of course). He said that may have been the case some time ago, but as of late ad coms are more interested in students who can produce fresh work, and they look for that as early as one's SOP. I walked away feeling incredibly depressed and like I don't have a shot at getting in anywhere. (I also imbibed a fair amount of wine immediately prior so I'm sure that was impacting my mood.) Anyway, I just wanted to share my feelings of anxiety and worthlessness with others who are in similar situations. Misery truly loves company.

[bdon19]

I suppose I'm having a somewhat similar problem to the one you're encountering, though in a different sort of way. I'm primarily interested in the history of the novel and novel theory, but most of the theory that I'm methodologically influenced by is pretty old. I'm currently working on an independent study course in theory, and my professor is encouraging me to read some recent theory, so that I can at the very least display that I'm familiar with current trends in the area. There's not a ton of new stuff going on in the novel theory realm, but it's still there all the same. Same with psychoanalysis for you, I'm sure. Feminist psychoanalysis may not be the most relevant trend in theory right now, but that doesn't mean it's completely dead, any more than it would be fair to say that postmodernism is dead.

As far as the SOP goes, don't despair. Haven't you ever written a paper that you felt was so kick-ass, just because nobody had ever written something exactly like it? Since I committed to being an English major, it's been my goal to come up with original and interesting arguments. Take what you know and what you've done, and put that in your SOP. It doesn't have to be exactly what you want to do, but it's better than simply saying you want to study gender and psychoanalysis.

[cquin]

As far as the SOP goes, don't despair. Haven't you ever written a paper that you felt was so kick-ass, just because nobody had ever written something exactly like it? Since I committed to being an English major, it's been my goal to come up with original and interesting arguments. Take what you know and what you've done, and put that in your SOP. It doesn't have to be exactly what you want to do, but it's better than simply saying you want to study gender and psychoanalysis.

I've definitely had experiences like that, but I'm so scared that when I present what I believe to be an awesome, original paper, I'll find out that it's actually old news. It's like that scene in the 1992 film Candyman when the grad student protagonist discusses her thesis with her (very smug) adviser, and he says, "Oh yes? Well you really must read the paper I wrote on that topic ten years ago." Cut to grad student's crestfallen face as she struggles to hide her embarrassment. I'm expecting that to happen to me, again and again with every application.

[Phil Sparrow]

The way to avoid reiterating older arguments: research and read exhaustively, until you can be confident that your approach is original. That's what you'll be doing in grad school (and forever, if your goal is academics).

I've definitely had experiences like that, but I'm so scared that when I present what I believe to be an awesome, original paper, I'll find out that it's actually old news. It's like that scene in the 1992 film Candyman when the grad student protagonist discusses her thesis with her (very smug) adviser, and he says, "Oh yes? Well you really must read the paper I wrote on that topic ten years ago." Cut to grad student's crestfallen face as she struggles to hide her embarrassment. I'm expecting that to happen to me, again and again with every application.

[cquin]

The way to avoid reiterating older arguments: research and read exhaustively, until you can be confident that your approach is original. That's what you'll be doing in grad school (and forever, if your goal is academics).

Of course, and I would expect nothing less of myself once I am in grad school, but I'm worried that right now, as merely an applicant, I do not possess the breadth of knowledge required to produce a wholly unique SOP or writing sample. And then that freaks me out because I think I will never get accepted anywhere.

[perrykm2]

I am in the same position, Cquin. I feel like everything I do is a regurgitation of the theorists I like.

Edited November 4, 2011 by perrykm2

[lolopixie]

While your professor poses a valid point, I also think that it may be a little bit of an overstatement. This board was swamped with people getting accepted into PhD programs last year studying Renaissance lit. Hasn't everything that needed to be said about that era already been said? Clearly not. I think if you can cleary prove that you have a new approach to this area of study, or think that something has been overlooked and you can prove that you will be a valuable scholar in that field, then you should not be worried that you want to pursue a field that has been "done to death".

[cquin]

While your professor poses a valid point, I also think that it may be a little bit of an overstatement. This board was swamped with people getting accepted into PhD programs last year studying Renaissance lit. Hasn't everything that needed to be said about that era already been said? Clearly not. I think if you can cleary prove that you have a new approach to this area of study, or think that something has been overlooked and you can prove that you will be a valuable scholar in that field, then you should not be worried that you want to pursue a field that has been "done to death".

Very true, but seeing as I only have my BA and I'm still at the early stages of my academic career, I cannot possible know of all the works published on my chosen field. So I just imagine a professor reading my SOP and thinking, "Doesn't this girl know that Professor X already wrote a paper on this five years ago?? Hahaha!" and then, chortling, she throws my essay in the trash.

[cquin]

I am in the same position, Cquin. I feel like everything I do is a regurgitation of the theorists I like.

It's so disheartening, isn't it? Sigh. Best of luck to us.

[Two Espressos]

I was talking with one of my English professors tonight and gave him an overview of my general areas of interest--gender theory, feminist psychoanalysis, Simone de Beauvoir, Julia Kristeva, etc.--and he told me in the gentlest way possible that a lot of these subjects are somewhat old; that is, they've been exhausted and are not areas in which new, original work can be produced. I told him that I understood that a massive amount of work had already been done on these topics, but I was under the impression that when it came to accepting new students, ad coms would look more at *how* I engaged with the text and produced a topic of study rather than *what* my topic actually was (within reason, of course). He said that may have been the case some time ago, but as of late ad coms are more interested in students who can produce fresh work, and they look for that as early as one's SOP. I walked away feeling incredibly depressed and like I don't have a shot at getting in anywhere. (I also imbibed a fair amount of wine immediately prior so I'm sure that was impacting my mood.) Anyway, I just wanted to share my feelings of anxiety and worthlessness with others who are in similar situations. Misery truly loves company.

Feminist psychoanalysis and gender theory are not areas in which no original work can be produced. I staunchly disagree with the professor who told you, more or less, that those are obsolete areas of research.

As for one's SOP just being a regurgitation of the theorists one likes (mentioned by perrykm2), I wouldn't worry about that too much. I don't see how admissions committees could possibly expect evidence of completely original theoretical work in a BA applicant's SOP.

I only worry for applicants who attempt graduate school without prior knowledge of theory. There are those on these forums who have successfully applied to PhD programs without it, but I imagine that they are special cases.

Edited November 7, 2011 by Two Espressos

[TripWillis]

Feminist psychoanalysis and gender theory are not areas in which no original work can be produced. I staunchly disagree with the professor who told you, more or less, that those are obsolete areas of research.

As for one's SOP just being a regurgitation of the theorists one likes (mentioned by perrykm2), I wouldn't worry about that too much. I don't see how admissions committees could possibly expect evidence of completely original theoretical work in a BA applicant's SOP.

I only worry for applicants who attempt graduate school without prior knowledge of theory. There are those on these forums who have successfully applied to PhD programs without it, but I imagine that they are special cases.

With you on this one, TwoEspressos, but I'll add in this tidbit:

As far as I can tell, grad school applicants are in the messed up position of not being allowed to dictate or designate newly canonical work, so they are forced to work with literature that, to a certain extent, has already received at least one, if not multiple batches of criticism. The best way to navigate this is to begin the research process not by exploring every single article every written on your topic, nor by finding a bunch of random scholars who agree with your position. Instead, try garnering a sampling of critical articles (30 or so) from the last 20 years only on the topic or text you are pursuing. Then, characterize different strains of criticism and find where yours falls in. This way, you can get a sense of what discourses are occurring at present and how you can be a part of that critical conversation; what scholars you tend to fall in with and what ones you are diverging from. It will make people take you more seriously if you acknowledge scholarly approaches from the last few years; it's a way of showing your ability, as a student, to work in cooperation with contemporary scholars, not just to read and analyze in isolation. This is, for all the isolation that a library symbolizes, a very conversant and social field we are entering into, and we are co-creating discourse.

Edited November 7, 2011 by TripWillis

[Two Espressos]

With you on this one, TwoEspressos, but I'll add in this tidbit:

As far as I can tell, grad school applicants are in the messed up position of not being allowed to dictate or designate newly canonical work, so they are forced to work with literature that, to a certain extent, has already received at least one, if not multiple batches of criticism. The best way to navigate this is to begin the research process not by exploring every single article every written on your topic, nor by finding a bunch of random scholars who agree with your position. Instead, try garnering a sampling of critical articles (30 or so) from the last 20 years only on the topic or text you are pursuing. Then, characterize different strains of criticism and find where yours falls in. This way, you can get a sense of what discourses are occurring at present and how you can be a part of that critical conversation; what scholars you tend to fall in with and what ones you are diverging from. It will make people take you more seriously if you acknowledge scholarly approaches from the last few years; it's a way of showing your ability, as a student, to work in cooperation with contemporary scholars, not just to read and analyze in isolation. This is, for all the isolation that a library symbolizes, a very conversant and social field we are entering into, and we are co-creating discourse.

Excellent post, I agree completely.

By the way, TripWillis, you've a fascinating mix of interests.

[lolopixie]

Very true, but seeing as I only have my BA and I'm still at the early stages of my academic career, I cannot possible know of all the works published on my chosen field. So I just imagine a professor reading my SOP and thinking, "Doesn't this girl know that Professor X already wrote a paper on this five years ago?? Hahaha!" and then, chortling, she throws my essay in the trash.

Lol, I don't think it will be that extreme. Since you are applying with only a BA, I would recommend stating the area that you want to pursue, but also throw in another area you are interested in as well. Talk about ideas you are interested in studying, but don't state that you are definitely set in stone on studying these. Be specific, but not too specific. If you back yourself into a corner, you may find it hard to get out; however, being confident in what you are interested in and what you want to explore in your areas will show the research you have done. I have my Master's and have in no way read everything about my area of study. Yes, I've got a lot more under my belt than in undergrad, but there is a big, big sea out there!! You'll figure out how to approach it in your own way and be confident about your SOP once you get a good start to it.

[Grunty DaGnome]

I'm on my third, completely unique draft of the SOP. I thought I had one finished in the summer, but I showed it to Professors who strongly encouraged me to write it much differently. So I thought I took all their various advice, but it still missed the mark.

I think the best advice is to find ONE faculty member whose judgment you trust and work with ONLY that person on the SOP, otherwise it comes out like a patchwork of random advice, insecurity and hedging.

[cquin]

Lol, I don't think it will be that extreme. Since you are applying with only a BA, I would recommend stating the area that you want to pursue, but also throw in another area you are interested in as well. Talk about ideas you are interested in studying, but don't state that you are definitely set in stone on studying these. Be specific, but not too specific. If you back yourself into a corner, you may find it hard to get out; however, being confident in what you are interested in and what you want to explore in your areas will show the research you have done. I have my Master's and have in no way read everything about my area of study. Yes, I've got a lot more under my belt than in undergrad, but there is a big, big sea out there!! You'll figure out how to approach it in your own way and be confident about your SOP once you get a good start to it.

Thank you, this is actually very reassuring advice. I already have a somewhat specific focus, but it could definitely benefit from advanced study and additional whittling down, and I want to convey that in my statement.

[TripWillis]

Excellent post, I agree completely.

By the way, TripWillis, you've a fascinating mix of interests.

Hey, thank you! Yours too. I bet we could write a pretty good paper about Samuel Delaney/Octavia Butler between the two of us.

Sometimes I have trouble figuring out how to reconcile all those things or cram into an SoP narrative how I arrived at an interest in all those things... I mean, there is no narrative, I just read stuff where that stuff was and now I like the stuff and want to study the stuff... wait, that's the SoP! Gotta go write that down! "Read stuff... want to study stuff... genius!" Best I can tell, they all seem to have something to do with oppression, the subaltern, identity, and emergent literature. Makes sense. I'm a huge ol' Marxist.

You have cool interests yourself. I noticed you were interested in Haraway in the other thread. You know, I have read certain ecocritics who use Haraway to talk about symbiosis, but I can't remember exactly who it was or how he/she phrased it. Maybe Louis Palmer? Anyway, it's interesting stuff. Not my field, but certainly is interesting.

[Timshel]

Hey, thank you! Yours too. I bet we could write a pretty good paper about Samuel Delaney/Octavia Butler between the two of us.

Sometimes I have trouble figuring out how to reconcile all those things or cram into an SoP narrative how I arrived at an interest in all those things... I mean, there is no narrative, I just read stuff where that stuff was and now I like the stuff and want to study the stuff... wait, that's the SoP! Gotta go write that down! "Read stuff... want to study stuff... genius!" Best I can tell, they all seem to have something to do with oppression, the subaltern, identity, and emergent literature. Makes sense. I'm a huge ol' Marxist.

You have cool interests yourself. I noticed you were interested in Haraway in the other thread. You know, I have read certain ecocritics who use Haraway to talk about symbiosis, but I can't remember exactly who it was or how he/she phrased it. Maybe Louis Palmer? Anyway, it's interesting stuff. Not my field, but certainly is interesting.

I used to do a lot with Marxist theory, and it still creeps into my writing from time to time. It's so hard to pin down what I want to propose I am interested in when I feel like I have my hand in many pots. (Is that the saying? My brain is mush these days.)

[rawera]

I believe the saying is "I am basting a number of roasts."

[perrykm2]

I'm on my third, completely unique draft of the SOP. I thought I had one finished in the summer, but I showed it to Professors who strongly encouraged me to write it much differently. So I thought I took all their various advice, but it still missed the mark.

I think the best advice is to find ONE faculty member whose judgment you trust and work with ONLY that person on the SOP, otherwise it comes out like a patchwork of random advice, insecurity and hedging.

I have had about 20000 completely different statements of purpose. My boyfriend thinks I am crazy because he wrote his in two seconds (physics phd, yeesh.) But this is actually good advice, and I would add a little tidbit on top to say to ask a mid-level professional who hasn't been out of their own PhD program for 100000 years and maybe serves on your school's adcomm.

[lolopixie]

I think another thing to keep in mind is that it is YOUR statement of purpose. It isn't your professor's, your friend's, the writing center's, just yours. If you feel something is needed in there then it probably is. Yes, critiques from others will definitely help polish, look for voice change, awkward language, etc., but only you can really know what you need to tell the adcoms. Take the advice given, but don't let it rule your SOP.