Yes, another SOP question

[BlackBear50]

I've scoured around a bit at SOP threads but couldn't find the answer to a somewhat specific question (also, I might have missed it...): Is it wise to reference the extant historiography in your SOP either directly or indirectly. I originally found myself falling into more of an historiographic essay than a directed SOP, I think I've mostly fixed that problem but still am unsure about this. To make the question clearer, I'll include two sentences similar, but not identical, to my SOP-

"A desire to study the "Lower Sorts," or those who "Scraped By."

"Which would likewise necessitate an understanding of the radical elements, that "Many-Headed Hydra."

 

In quotation marks are references that would be obvious, though slightly indirect on my part, to major monographs in my subfield.

Good idea? Bad idea?

 

Thanks and i apologize if this is a redundant thread.

[mvlchicago]

Having several major monographs in your SoP that influence you is definitely important. Instead of making a historiographic essay, think about it as incorporating these books into your intellectual narrative: what about Marcus Rediker's work compels you to pursue similar studies? How is Billy Smith's methodology making you think about things you want to do? I think it's totally fine to be explicit on these fronts. What you want to avoid is taking the footnotes of your writing sample and dumping them into your SoP: The SoP should still fundamentally be about you and what you want to do, the monographs are simply framing the picture. 

[dr. t]

If you're at all in doubt about the appropriateness of 'joking' language, remove it. 

Broadly speaking, your SOP has three parts: where you are, how you got there, where you're going. You should only reference literature that moves this narrative forward. Don't add stuff that serves no other purpose than to make you look clever.

FWIW, the only explicit references to secondary lit in my SOP came in the final paragraph, in the form of "I want to study history at X because of professors Y and Z. Professor Y's History of Underwater Basket Weaving" and Professor Z's article "Underwater Baskets: Their Purpose and Function" were both formative to the development of my work on the history of the basket under water. Furthermore, the department at X has many professors who have written on various types of weaving that go on, both under and above the water, and the variety of perspectives they offer will be useful to my future work."

Edited October 10, 2015 by telkanuru