Program Insights/Recommendations (Brit Modernism/Turn Century, Theory)?

[Imogene]

Ok, this is a selfish thread, and I've been sitting on it for a while, but I've decided to just ask:

I have programs that I'm interested in, and these include "usual suspects" for my area of interest and for "top schools" -- and what I'd love some help with is insights and recommendations for getting beyond the "usual suspects." I figure that you all are at programs right now (whether as undergrads or grads) that may include great professors or departmental interests in the areas that I'm interested in. So here are my interests:

British - Modernism/Fin de Siecle - Theory of the Novel - Reception Theory (with Feminist approach) - women writers - urban studies - interdisciplinary (painting and cinema).

(These are not just ordered as general to specific, but this order also represents priority/emphasis.)

But here's another thing: I already have my MA (and an MFA), and have been out of grad school/academia for a few years now (like 5).

There are some programs/professors that interest me, but then I get the sense that these programs prefer accepting folks straight from BA, and I want to avoid them. (For example, I was interested in Delaware because of Ardis, but I get the sense that all their PhD candidates were straight from BA).

So this is a 2-parter:

1) Beyond obvious programs (like Rutgers, Brown, UVa, for example), are there any professors/programs that jump to your minds here?

2) Are there programs that I should look at/avoid based on my already having an MA?

Thanks as always, folks! ---> sunglasses to hide shyness and spark of hope in eyes

P.S. I also want to apply to Yale because, you know, it's Yale -- but it also has P. Lewis, who has the comparative approach to modernism that I really like -- plus the modernism lab aligns really well with the work I've been doing since I left academia. But I don't get a good "feminist" or "reception theory" vibe from them (and that's an understatement). Can anyone offer insights there?

[Stately Plump]

P.S. I also want to apply to Yale because, you know, it's Yale -- but it also has P. Lewis, who has the comparative approach to modernism that I really like -- plus the modernism lab aligns really well with the work I've been doing since I left academia. But I don't get a good "feminist" or "reception theory" vibe from them (and that's an understatement). Can anyone offer insights there?

A student in my cohort did his undergrad at Yale. In his discussion of the English department, he used words like "traditional," "canon," and "Harold Bloom." He was pretty intentional--and presumably accurate--in his description of the department generally; he talked about how Yale's prominence during the 70s and 80s has largely shaped the culture of the department today.

His two favorite professors, who were both younger and perhaps "less traditional," are both no longer there. Without saying it, he suggested that the reason they are no longer there may be because they were less traditional.

This might come off as cynical or critical; I mean it to be neither. If I had applied and gotten in there, I would assuredly have gone. I offer this information purely in an attempt to be helpful for you as you try to make some difficult decisions.

Incidentally, my cohort-mate did not apply to Yale's graduate program.

[Phil Sparrow]

Regarding Yale---I know this isn't your whole reason for being interested in applying, but I'll just offer this as a public service announcement to you and all the other applicants on this site. Don't apply anywhere just "because, you know, it's Yale" (or because it's any particular place). First of all, applicants who apply to places simply because they have fancy names and reputations are almost certainly not going to get in, because wanting to apply somewhere just for its (often outdated) reputation neglects one crucial part of any application review: fit. If you don't fit, you will not be accepted. It is a waste of money to apply somewhere "because, you know, it's X" rather than because it is a good fit for you. Second, as the poster above noted, beware of assuming certain programs are (still) on top just because of a general, old-fashioned reputation or storied ivy-covered walls. Those are often out-of-date assumptions. This is not to disparage Yale in particular at all, but I see over and over on these boards applicants assuming that places that have historically big names are the best and most prestigious programs today. Things have changed a LOT in academia over the last 15 or so years. Research schools like crazy to check where they stand in terms of placement, philosophy, et cetera today before you decide to spend your money on an application.

I hope I don't sound mean or rude, because I am not trying to be. I realize that I've quoted you above twice rather out of context, and I don't intend to mock you or be snide. I'm more just taking this opportunity to make a general statement to all applicants about this kind of thing, and I really do apologize if it is hurtful at all.

[Two Espressos]

Regarding Yale---I know this isn't your whole reason for being interested in applying, but I'll just offer this as a public service announcement to you and all the other applicants on this site. Don't apply anywhere just "because, you know, it's Yale" (or because it's any particular place). First of all, applicants who apply to places simply because they have fancy names and reputations are almost certainly not going to get in, because wanting to apply somewhere just for its (often outdated) reputation neglects one crucial part of any application review: fit. If you don't fit, you will not be accepted. It is a waste of money to apply somewhere "because, you know, it's X" rather than because it is a good fit for you. Second, as the poster above noted, beware of assuming certain programs are (still) on top just because of a general, old-fashioned reputation or storied ivy-covered walls. Those are often out-of-date assumptions. This is not to disparage Yale in particular at all, but I see over and over on these boards applicants assuming that places that have historically big names are the best and most prestigious programs today. Things have changed a LOT in academia over the last 15 or so years. Research schools like crazy to check where they stand in terms of placement, philosophy, et cetera today before you decide to spend your money on an application.

I hope I don't sound mean or rude, because I am not trying to be. I realize that I've quoted you above twice rather out of context, and I don't intend to mock you or be snide. I'm more just taking this opportunity to make a general statement to all applicants about this kind of thing, and I really do apologize if it is hurtful at all.

This is solid advice. My semi-finished application list still has a couple "ooh, it's [x university]!" places on it for which I need to find replacements...

[Imogene]

@ Phil Sparrow -- that is sound advice, and I think it's generally good for folks, but I also think folks shouldn't avoid big names because they're big names. I have several reasons for being interested in Yale as an institution to pursue my PhD (beyond what I've listed about Lewis), and I think folks should include "reach" programs in their mix if the "reach" is about them (i.e. they are the most competitive programs for *their* specific interests), and not just generally big names that, you know, they've heard of.

So I think that's sound advice for folks picking schools unrelated to their interests just because they have a certain prestige (even/especially outdated).

I don't think that applies to me (because there's some specific selection and consideration going on based on other things than big names, as my post should also suggest), but I'm happy to be the poster-girl for your point because I threw in the words "you know" here for some light-heartedness.

let that to be a lesson to y'all

[Imogene]

A student in my cohort did his undergrad at Yale. In his discussion of the English department, he used words like "traditional," "canon," and "Harold Bloom." He was pretty intentional--and presumably accurate--in his description of the department generally; he talked about how Yale's prominence during the 70s and 80s has largely shaped the culture of the department today.

His two favorite professors, who were both younger and perhaps "less traditional," are both no longer there. Without saying it, he suggested that the reason they are no longer there may be because they were less traditional.

Thanks for this, @Stately. This is really helpful and rather confirms my perceptions. Sounds like, at the least, some more investigation and some questions to POIs are in order here.

[Phil Sparrow]

Oops, double post.

Edited September 9, 2012 by Phil Sparrow

[Phil Sparrow]

I totally agree! I would absolutely encourage applicants to go for big names if they fit. Most definitely. Again, sorry to have taken your brief comment out of context!

@ Phil Sparrow -- that is sound advice, and I think it's generally good for folks, but I also think folks shouldn't avoid big names because they're big names. I have several reasons for being interested in Yale as an institution to pursue my PhD (beyond what I've listed about Lewis), and I think folks should include "reach" programs in their mix if the "reach" is about them (i.e. they are the most competitive programs for *their* specific interests), and not just generally big names that, you know, they've heard of.

So I think that's sound advice for folks picking schools unrelated to their interests just because they have a certain prestige (even/especially outdated).

I don't think that applies to me (because there's some specific selection and consideration going on based on other things than big names, as my post should also suggest), but I'm happy to be the poster-girl for your point because I threw in the words "you know" here for some light-heartedness.

let that to be a lesson to y'all

Edited September 9, 2012 by Phil Sparrow

[ophelia9]

Just FYI, I believe Pericles (one of my earliest and most intense prof. crushes, btw) has left New Haven at least temporarily to head up the new Yale-NUS College in Singapore.

Edited October 11, 2012 by ophelia9

[Timshel]

Have you looked at WUSTL? There are a lot of people who do British modernism, and there is a lot of interdisciplinary courses that deal with art and visual culture. I would recommend looking at the program and the courses that were taught the last couple of semester, including the current one.

[Imogene]

Just FYI, I believe Pericles (one of my earliest and most intense prof. crushes, btw) has left New Haven at least temporarily to head up the new Yale-NUS College in Singapore.

I know! I saw this after I posted. I'm re-assessing applying there.