FALL 2013 APPLICANTS!

[kunstgeschichtedude]

Ugh, I just produced my magnum opus on here, and then accidentally backspaced.... Whelp, never mind I suppose. 

[apotheosis]

Why can't we all just be like this?

 

 

Let's get some positive vibe back into this thread.

[runaway]

Edit: You know what. Forget it. I just want to move on. Hal, if you want to DM me, feel free to do so. If you didn't read the original post already, and you want to, I saved it.

 

Otherwise, who's got a gif of that trust fall scene from Mean Girls?

Edited January 29, 2013 by runaway

[auvers-sur-oise]

[fullofpink]

Yeah, I don't get it either, Hal

[runaway]

auvers wins everything.

[anonymousbequest]

@bearcat, jk about the paranoia.  I was riffing off of earlier posts regarding "Hal Foster" and the sometimes discussed topic of whether any faculty members read gradcafe.  Few probably know of it, for those that do it could be like a great reality tv show, new season every fall.

[fullofpink]

Seriously?

Yeah, I just find it a waste of time. The only time I get up in arms is if someone is blatantly rude. I thought the whole discussion was civil enough. 

 

I mean, I had one chick tell me on here that I was a waste of an applicant because I'd get into a PhD program and start popping out babies and leave the program simply because I mentioned that PhD students have other options if academia doesn't float their boat. 

Edited January 29, 2013 by fullofpink

[oh_la_la]

Lurker here who is three years out of an art history PhD program: you should be nicer to each other!  Also, if you think that waiting to hear about admissions makes you hypersensitive, just wait until you get on the job market for academic jobs.  Collegiality matters.  BTW, I did not think that Hal was being rude, just typically academic.  Good luck everybody; I hope you all gain (fully funded) admission into a fantastic program.  I'll look forward to reading your scholarship eventually!  

[Lamantin]

I think Auvers has a strong point. This forum is in desperate need of pick-me-up animal photos. We're all trudging through the same crap, waiting for offers, thinking about offers, etc and could use a distraction.

That said, I don't post often on here, reading the thread is as interesting as posting for me, but, Hal, your posts are on the pedantic side. It might help  not to treat your posts as short essays. It might help not to talk to us as though we don't know anything about the field. Certainly posting long diatribes about how you've been egregiously wronged isn't helping your case. Please, let it go. 

[anonymousbequest]

Lurker here who is three years out of an art history PhD program: you should be nicer to each other!  Also, if you think that waiting to hear about admissions makes you hypersensitive, just wait until you get on the job market for academic jobs.  Collegiality matters.   

 

Yep, if you want to see how the other half lives: http://academicjobs.wikia.com/wiki/Art_History_2012-2013

 

It heats up right around CAA.

[Hedgie357]

Its such a stressful time! But here is a - hopefully - helpful distraction:

 

http://www.buzzfeed.com/angelameiquan/xx-hedgehogs-trying-to-escape-their-identity-70fn

[auvers-sur-oise]

"Yes, this all looks great. But how's your German?"

 

[condivi]

OK, so why is everyone taking what "Hal Foster" says so personally? The tone is a little strange, I admit, but that's no reason to get angry about it and jump down his throat. There were no personal attacks, though he did get some in return (calling someone an asshole is not very collegial, by the way). Take it from someone who's been in a PhD program for four years now, you can't get so offended, so defensive, if someone says something you don't like. And I hate to say this to everyone who is so on edge about admissions decisions, but getting in to a PhD program is the easy part: if you're qualified you will get into a good number of programs; if you don't get in anywhere you probably aren't qualified. It's simple, and probably the fairest shake you'll get in grad school (think about this: when you apply for fellowships, all the committee will see is a short project proposal and your letters of recommendation--in most cases, no transcripts, no writing samples, very little about your previous work, no matter how good). So don't stress so much. Be generous about what people say. Give them the benefit of the doubt. Let people share their interests, and get excited about what you're about to do. You shouldn't be applying to grad school if the biggest pleasure it gives you is to indulge your neuroses and anxieties (though that is part of the fun).

[fullofpink]

OK, so why is everyone taking what "Hal Foster" says so personally? The tone is a little strange, I admit, but that's no reason to get angry about it and jump down his throat. There were no personal attacks, though he did get some in return (calling someone an asshole is not very collegial, by the way). Take it from someone who's been in a PhD program for four years now, you can't get so offended, so defensive, if someone says something you don't like. And I hate to say this to everyone who is so on edge about admissions decisions, but getting in to a PhD program is the easy part: if you're qualified you will get into a good number of programs; if you don't get in anywhere you probably aren't qualified. It's simple, and probably the fairest shake you'll get in grad school (think about this: when you apply for fellowships, all the committee will see is a short project proposal and your letters of recommendation--in most cases, no transcripts, no writing samples, very little about your previous work, no matter how good). So don't stress so much. Be generous about what people say. Give them the benefit of the doubt. Let people share their interests, and get excited about what you're about to do. You shouldn't be applying to grad school if the biggest pleasure it gives you is to indulge your neuroses and anxieties (though that is part of the fun).

 

THIS is well said. 

[condivi]

THIS is well said. 

Thank you

[BuddingScholar]

I get the feeling that we will start to hear from Princeton in a week or two the most.  Just a feeling!

[apotheosis]

Statistically speaking, we might be hearing from UChicago in the next week as well!

[fullofpink]

Berkeley too. 

 

Yale and Columbia after then! 

[BuddingScholar]

Let the drums roll!!!

[HannahPie]

Let the nausea set in! 

 

Granted, I can't tell if it's from general nervousness or refreshing my email every three and a half seconds.

[BuddingScholar]

I'll be in Paris and London soon and am looking forward to Angel of the Odd as well.  Although curators there can have a tough time with layout due to space, crowds, and budget constraints, so we'll see how it looks. The Aesthetic Movement exhibition last year had great objects but the presentation took away from them. Not my favorite museum, but it was probably a glorious train station.  At the Louvre there is a little exhibition of American genre painting including something by Bingham of the famous "bearcat".  I'm also excited to see the new Islamic wing, which is one of outgoing director Henri Loyrette's great accomplishments.  And thanks to whoever mentioned Manet at the RA, I wasn't aware of that one but I'll put it on my agenda.

 

I find that when people learn something for the first time they can be very eager to take ownership of that new knowledge by explaining it in a pedantic way.  It's new to them, so could be new to you.  As much as they read as patronizing, Hal's comments probably came from the right place.  And what a small world, he's just been in touch with me about a student.  Maybe people should be paranoid on grad cafe.

 

You bring up some interesting points here regarding layout, space, crowd (logistics), etc at d'Orsay.  If you don't mind, I would like to take the topic a bit further towards the idea of "museum experience" in a more broader sense.  At the expense of sounding elitist, and perhaps even conceited, I wonder if you [all] feel the same way I do about "mainstream" museums and tourists in general.

 

Both as an artist and art historian, I find extremely annoying that a large amount of people go to museums for the "sightseeing," picture-taking, been-there-done-that-bragging-rights sort of reasons.  Unfortunately, most don't even know why they are there, or even care to be there, much less have any interest in the art on the wall [or ground, ceilings, etc].  On top of that, and perhaps even because of it, these people have little to no respect to the works on display.  Last year, for example, I saw a lady sticking her hand on a Cezanne at d'Orsay, and another one stepping onto the Nike of Samothrace in the Louvre to take a photograph.  After a while, I noticed that I stopping enjoying the artworks, and began watching people to make sure no one would do anything stupid like that again.  This kind of experience has kept me [to the extent possible] away from these places.  By now, I have lost count of the numerous times I went to Paris and did not get anywhere near the Louvre, or was in NYC and did not visit the MET. 

 

Another side of me, however, is happy to see people going to Museums, even if not for the right reasons.  I guess I am hoping that some of these people will have a transformative experience, become genuinelly intrigued by what they see, and ultimately fall in love with the visual arts; at least enough to learn about it.  Although I "generally" agree with the idea of democratizatizing art, and certainly understand the need for these institutions (museums) to stay afloat financially, I wonder if access to these places should be somehow mediated, let's say, by a docent.  Deep inside I know this is not the solution, but I must confess that I struggle to reconcile my desire to see more people accessing the arts with my "more selfish" tendency to limit access to those who are there for the right reasons.  But again, what are the right reasons?

 

Does anyone feel the same way about it?

[navama]

You bring up some interesting points here regarding layout, space, crowd (logistics), etc at d'Orsay.  If you don't mind, I would like to take the topic a bit further towards the idea of "museum experience" in a more broader sense.  At the expense of sounding elitist, and perhaps even conceited, I wonder if you [all] feel the same way I do about "mainstream" museums and tourists in general.

 

Both as an artist and art historian, I find extremely annoying that a large amount of people go to museums for the "sightseeing," picture-taking, been-there-done-that-bragging-rights sort of reasons.  Unfortunately, most don't even know why they are there, or even care to be there, much less have any interest in the art on the wall [or ground, ceilings, etc].  On top of that, and perhaps even because of it, these people have little to no respect to the works on display.  Last year, for example, I saw a lady sticking her hand on a Cezanne at d'Orsay, and another one stepping onto the Nike of Samothrace in the Louvre to take a photograph.  After a while, I noticed that I stopping enjoying the artworks, and began watching people to make sure no one would do anything stupid like that again.  This kind of experience has kept me [to the extent possible] away from these places.  By now, I have lost count of the numerous times I went to Paris and did not get anywhere near the Louvre, or was in NYC and did not visit the MET. 

 

Another side of me, however, is happy to see people going to Museums, even if not for the right reasons.  I guess I am hoping that some of these people will have a transformative experience, become genuinelly intrigued by what they see, and ultimately fall in love with the visual arts; at least enough to learn about it.  Although I "generally" agree with the idea of democratizatizing art, and certainly understand the need for these institutions (museums) to stay afloat financially, I wonder if access to these places should be somehow mediated, let's say, by a docent.  Deep inside I know this is not the solution, but I must confess that I struggle to reconcile my desire to see more people accessing the arts with my "more selfish" tendency to limit access to those who are there for the right reasons.  But again, what are the right reasons?

 

Does anyone feel the same way about it?

 

It's an interesting point you make here...

I have a different experience regarding "El Prado" in Madrid...

 

There were a lot of people, taking pictures of themselves in front of the paintings of Goya or Velazquez, Greco and Bosch...

but also a lot of people where talking about the paintings, really engaging in discussions, from teenagers to couples,

to families... it was really a nice experience, because after going to "Reina Sofia" full of people taking weird photos

of themselves in front of the Guernica, seeing the overall behavior of the visitants of "El Prado" was so refreshing...

 

I attributed to the curatorial approach of "El Prado" and the strong teaching emphasis of the Museum, but I've never been

in Paris, so I can't really compare it..

 

(I just got my first acceptance... yay!)

[mrb1145]

Congrats, navama! Which school? Are you the UMinn admit?

[kaykay12]

Congrats to the UPenn admit!