Mention secondary field in PhD SOP?

[Notker the Stammerer]

When writing my statement of purpose, should I stick to my primary research interests, or can I also discuss my secondary field?

I'm considering adding a paragraph on my secondary field because it's what my master's thesis was about, and only tangentially related to my primary field.

[CageFree]

I think that a mention of how you went from that field to your current interests would be a good idea... how did you evolve from place A to place B? I wouldn't spend more time than that. Just something along the lines of, "although I'm still interested in A and am considering it as a minor field, I want to pursue B because..."

[Sparky]

I like CageFree's suggestions of mentioning it as part of your intellectual evolution. Otherwise, only discuss it if you can show how having experience in that area strengthens your ability to work in your primary subfield. Of course people's interests shift around during and after the PhD, but for purposes of applying it's about showing how you can be focused on and committed to a fairly narrow strand of scholarship/history.

[TMP]

I agree. Make sure that you can show how it's related to your primary interest. You never know how your faculty readers will respond- there will be a good number of them who expect their students to be committed to their fields if they wish to have a fruitful, productive relationship with them.

[remenis]

Also - how unrelated are the two interests? Are they something that would go together logically or wildly different?

[Riotbeard]

I would say if you do more than a sentence it depends on where you are applying and if they look for people involved in that secondary field. For example, if you were a U.S. historian, second field: Atlantic World applying to NYU or Johns Hopkins who have large Atlantic World contingents, it would make a lot of sence to go into at least a little depth (But the whole thing is short) on why Atlantic world, because it situates you within the culture of their department. The same could be said if you wanted a second field in say borderlands history at UT Austin; however, there might be second field that aren't that relevant to spend considerable time on in your SOP. That is my 2 cents. At the end of the day no matter you will be limited because the nature of the SOP is limited.

[Notker the Stammerer]

Also - how unrelated are the two interests? Are they something that would go together logically or wildly different?

They're fairly unrelated: different time period, different nation, same general cultural phenomenon.

You never know how your faculty readers will respond- there will be a good number of them who expect their students to be committed to their fields if they wish to have a fruitful, productive relationship with them.

You're no doubt correct, but I'm irritated by the attitude that interests outside of your primary field automatically signifies being uncommitted. The atomization of history is something that I disagree with in a larger sense. I'm not convinced the future of the field is best served by professors whose only interest is labor relations between Episcopalian mill workers and their Scottish employers in New Haven from 1747-1751.

Edited November 9, 2012 by Notker the Stammerer

[Sparky]

You're no doubt correct, but I'm irritated by the attitude that interests outside of your primary field automatically signifies being uncommitted. The atomization of history is something that I disagree with in a larger sense. I'm not convinced the future of the field is best served by professors whose only interest is labor relations between Episcopalian mill workers and their Scottish employers in New Haven from 1747-1751.

Of course it's not--and demonstrating a commitment to a single topic in your SOP doesn't mean you're not interested in other stuff, nor that professors don't expect or want you to be interested in other things. (One of the questions multiple profs asked when I interviewed at the program I'm currently in was, "What else?") BUT. The point of the SOP is that you can demonstrate a commitment to a single field. After all, your dissertation DOES have to be on a very focused topic, and being enough in love with a single thing to pursue it through dissertation frustration is not that common. THAT'S what the faculty are looking for. Commitment, and the ability to formulate (still pretty vague) historical research questions that it is possible to answer.

Give the faculty a little credit.

Edited November 9, 2012 by Sparky