Misconstrued Apathy...

[Guest]

I graduated with my BA from SFSU last December 2014 in Anthropology and a minor in Philosophy. I had previously always intended on going to grad school, but my last year-year and a half of school really had me disillusioned. The professors I had were crackpots espousing modern theory in anth and I hated it. Further, none of my work ever seemed good enough- I'd get the As, sure, but not without tons of red throughout the whole work. I needed some time off.

I got a job working at a oh-so-trendy tech start up and slowly realized how unhappy I was, being out of school. I missed delving in to literature explaining behaviors through culture, biology, etc etc. I worked in a hostile environment that diffused any creativity or learning. So I decided in mid June that I was going to attend grad school, and I wanted to matriculate Fall 2016, so I started studying for the GRE so I could apply this fall. People recommended studying for three months, so I decided to do this and see how comfortable I felt at the end of it before registering for a test date. I wish people told you how quickly seats sell out, because the only date I could find was 2 weeks later. I registered because I was scared, but ended up changing it to a riskier date (November 6th, in two days) so I could really use the month of September and October to study. Long story short, here I am, and I'm nowhere near where I should be in my percentiles. I'm scoring 80th for verbal and 40th for math. I'm nervous because my GPA is a sickly 3.6 and I've got one crappy internship under my belt. 

My main concerns are these, though; I'm applying to UCB, UCLA, UCSD, Northwestern, Notre Dame, Duke (this is my throwaway long-shot), and maybe UW. The point is, I'm not really invested in any of these schools; I've done a bit of research for all of them and their staff, and I'm only applying because I'm interested in their work and I think it could help my own, but I'm not obsessed like so many on this forum seem to be; everyone's got these super detailed research topics, and I've only got the vaguest idea. I'm hoping to develop my research in school, and that's why I'm not super keen on any one of them. Am I not ready for grad school? Why can't I just have a set purpose in mind, attend a school with like-minded faculty, and figure out the rest as I go? 

I certainly don't even think I'll get into any of these schools with my stats. What should I be expecting? At this point, I don't want to go to grad school for the sake of getting a PhD; that is, I don't want to go to a lower-tier state school and just humbug along with an insignificant PhD. I want to go to a great school and have a PhD that holds some weight with it. But, maybe I'm nowhere near qualified to be so picky. 

Anyone else feel this way? 

[rising_star]

2 hours ago, olivialucilec said:

I graduated with my BA from SFSU last December 2014 in Anthropology and a minor in Philosophy. I had previously always intended on going to grad school, but my last year-year and a half of school really had me disillusioned. The professors I had were crackpots espousing modern theory in anth and I hated it. Further, none of my work ever seemed good enough- I'd get the As, sure, but not without tons of red throughout the whole work. I needed some time off.

This is going to sound harsh but hear me out. If this is your attitude toward your undergraduate anthropology courses, you're not going to like grad school in anthropology, especially at a top program. If you aren't interested in modern, postmodern, postcolonial, and poststructuralist approaches, then you need to stick to bioanth at best, or no anth at all more realistically since the intro courses will force you to engage with that stuff.

Calling your professors crackpots makes you seem completely unprofessional and unprepared for graduate school. In fact, that sounds like something a pissed off, petulant sophomore in college might say, not someone applying to do graduate work at some of the best anthropology graduate programs in the country.

And, if you aren't prepared to get back work with tons of red on it, then you aren't prepared to do a PhD. I hope you figure that out before you go to grad school, rather than once you're there.

[Guest]

15 hours ago, rising_star said:

This is going to sound harsh but hear me out. If this is your attitude toward your undergraduate anthropology courses, you're not going to like grad school in anthropology, especially at a top program. If you aren't interested in modern, postmodern, postcolonial, and poststructuralist approaches, then you need to stick to bioanth at best, or no anth at all more realistically since the intro courses will force you to engage with that stuff.

Calling your professors crackpots makes you seem completely unprofessional and unprepared for graduate school. In fact, that sounds like something a pissed off, petulant sophomore in college might say, not someone applying to do graduate work at some of the best anthropology graduate programs in the country.

And, if you aren't prepared to get back work with tons of red on it, then you aren't prepared to do a PhD. I hope you figure that out before you go to grad school, rather than once you're there.

Thanks for the criticism. I'm not a petulant sophomore and frankly, it's not "harsh", it's actually off-putting and rude. I didn't intend to come across as unprofessional or immature- I thought the openness of the forum allowed leniency, but that's my mistake for the assumption. I was hoping for constructive criticism, not unnecessary lambasting. Further, I was hoping someone would address the main issue I have presented, which is that I don't feel like I'm as obsessed with grad school like many on this forum seem to be, and I'm wondering if this is indicative of whether or not I am a good candidate. 

 I don't mind the "tons of red" I'd get back on papers- I'm just saying that my opinions are not ones shared by many modern anthropologists. This is the trouble I'm facing, and if your advice to this is basically "better agree with the zeitgeist or pursue something else", I appreciate the time you took to give the advice, but ultimately it's no help. 

Thanks for the response! 

Edited November 5, 2015 by olivialucilec
strengthening my argument

[knp]

Perhaps it would help if you explained your relationship to these "crackpots espousing modern theory." Did you just mean to express your frustration that you felt that one or two professors carried their branch of theory to an unhelpful extreme? The word choice was unfortunate at best, not merely informal—"crackpot" will always make academics associate your sentiment with the American anti-intellectual extreme ('why don't we just not fund anything that enhances human knowledge? all we really need are small business owners, engineers, and homemakers')—but if you've read and liked a lot of anthropology and just didn't like the approach of a minority of professors in your department, that could be okay, as long as you stop saying anything that makes it sound like you disdain the entire field.

On the other hand, your comment about the zeitgeist makes me feel like my charitable interpretation might not be right. Does the fact of using one of the ten or so most popular current theoretical approaches automatically make someone a crackpot? If so, I don't understand what part of anthropology you do want to do. Can you explain? This field uses theory! I am not passionate about every theory that's out there—I'm glad that this field interrogates gender, e.g., but it isn't the focus of my work. (I do technical stuff with ritual performance.) If you hate so much of modern theory, what part of anthropology do you like?

[Guest]

Wow, I didn't realize how strongly people would react. I use that word because a handful of my professors focused on theory that saw oppression and suffering everywhere. It seemed less about understanding cultures and the ways in which we can do so, being an other culture ourselves, and more about saving the world from neoliberalism and capitalism. I understand those things need to be discussed and they have their place. But anthropology, for me, has always been a means of seeing the world for what it is- being able to penetrate misunderstanding and world-views different than our own. 

 

Of course I'm interested in theory! I want to go to graduate school for anthropology because I truly feel like it's the only thing that makes sense of the world for me. I can apply an anthropological lens to anything and better understand it. I am interested in legitimizing western culture, which is something my professors have always raged against. I have had so many professors who've said that western society lacks the same kind of culture that other societies, and I feel this is unfair. I want to study western culture and try to make sense of what culture means when so many parts of our interactions and biologies are changing. 

To all- forgive my use of "crackpot", it was merely to express frustration at the lack of diversity at insulated schools like San Francisco State, where classrooms are intellectual echo chambers for the popular views held by people in that city. 

[gughok]

18 hours ago, olivialucilec said:

The point is, I'm not really invested in any of these schools; I've done a bit of research for all of them and their staff, and I'm only applying because I'm interested in their work and I think it could help my own, but I'm not obsessed like so many on this forum seem to be; everyone's got these super detailed research topics, and I've only got the vaguest idea. I'm hoping to develop my research in school, and that's why I'm not super keen on any one of them. Am I not ready for grad school? Why can't I just have a set purpose in mind, attend a school with like-minded faculty, and figure out the rest as I go? 

I think this paragraph in particular is very telling, pending some clarification: when you say you're "not really invested in any of these schools", what exactly do you mean? Do you mean that you'd be alright not going to these grad schools, that you wouldn't be particularly upset if they didn't work out? Or do you mean that you really don't care about their departments at all and figure "I want to try studying anthropology there maybe". The former is a lot more conducive to a successful graduate school experience than the latter.

You needn't have some specific and focused research idea at this stage. That's definitely not a requirement. What you need is a sufficiently vested interest in the field itself and the passion to support years of intensive study - and crucial to this is feeling comfortable with the idea of spending half a decade at a particular institution. So ask yourself this: are you obsessed at least with the study of anthropology, modulo what specifically you'd want to study, are you obsessed enough that you'd be willing to dedicate an insubstantial period of your life to intense engagement with that study, and moreover can you picture yourself active in this study at the institutions you've listed? If yes, yes, and yes, then at the very least you meet the basic criteria for readiness (in my opinion). If you're unsure of how dedicated you can be, or ambivalent regarding the universities, you might want to think more carefully.