Posting your personal statement?

[curufinwe]

I'm not suggesting that this approach will kill or hurt your statement at all. I just don't think that this approach adds much, which can be important when space is limited.

When there is a 500-word limit, yeah, the personal life details are the first to sacrifice since their marginal utility can be the lowest. But if they let you write over 1000, I think writing short such as mine would in fact hurt your chances. That is of course only my opinion.

[APGradApplicant]

I'm not suggesting that this approach will kill or hurt your statement at all. I just don't think that this approach adds much, which can be important when space is limited.

Totally understood. As you probably see in my post above, I specifically mention that I thought you were very respectful in your feedback and that none of what I was saying referred to you. You weren't the one who in so many words said it was "unprofessional" to do what I, curiousgeorge, SuddenlyParanoid, and applying12010 decided to do.

[curiousgeorge84]

Totally understood. As you probably see in my post above, I specifically mention that I thought you were very respectful in your feedback and that none of what I was saying referred to you. You weren't the one who in so many words said it was "unprofessional" to do what I, curiousgeorge, SuddenlyParanoid, and applying12010 decided to do.

I think that either approach will work. It really depends on the school, the person who is reading it, the mood of the person who is reading it on that particular day etc. I just suggest writing in a way that you don't have regrets. I decided that if I share something personal and they don't like me for it then I don't want to be at the school anyway because then they don't like me. It's just as important that you like the school as it is for them to like you. If you can't come up with something interesting and personal to say or you think the program really doesn't care then don't write personal. There is a reason why Columbia only allows 500 words. However, I believe (and I'm not an expert) that when the essay is 1,000 words or more, they want a bit more personality, a bit more about you, and what makes you different (along with your academic focus etc.).

[bsquar]

Here is mine. It was structurally somewhat different from what some others have posted, so I thought I would post.

------------------

Objectives: I plan to pursue a Ph. D. in Political Science with American Politics asa primary subfield and Quantitative Methods as a secondary subfield. My research interests are in X,particularly their application to “my specific interests”. My ultimate goal is to become aprofessor at a research university where I can continue my studies of “myspecific interests”.

ResearchGoals and Impacts:In addition to completing my research on the “topic of independent researchproject 1”, and completing my research investigating “independent researchproject 2”, I plan to pursue a vigorous research agenda. Chief among theprojects I wish to pursue is “planned research project 1”, “planned researchproject 2” and the application of “method to planned research project 3”. Additionally, I am interested indeveloping “new method”, investigating “planned research project 3”. As aresult of my research interests, I am particularly interested in X Universityto work with Professors “A and B”. I hope to learn much from Professor A’sexpertise both in “common interest area A” and from his more recentinvestigations into “common research interest area B”. In a similar vein,Professor B’s work developing new applications of “X methodology” also appealsto me.

Preparation: In order to prepare for my graduateeducation, I have made extraordinary efforts to enhance my knowledge and skill.While most of these efforts have been engaging in research, I would be remissto not mention the academic steps I have also taken. In addition to independentreading on a wide range of topics within and outside “my research interest”, Ihave attempted to supplement my undergraduate education wherever possible, includingobtaining permission to enroll in graduate level courses. Thus, in my senioryear I will complete a graduate seminar on “my primary focus area” and twosemesters of graduate quantitative methods. This will allow me to learn the advanced methods necessaryto conduct my research early in my graduate career. Having this methodstraining early will allow me to begin producing publishable research almostimmediately upon entering graduate school. I plan to pursue a strong secondaryconcentration in quantitative methods, hopefully including participation insummer training programs such as the Inter-University Consortium for Politicaland Social Research’s Summer Program in Quantitative Methods.

Research Experience: Thanks to my mentor, “Undergrad Advisor”, I have had theopportunity to engage in substantive research presented to few undergraduates. Ihave engaged in a variety research activities – both on my own and as aresearch assistant. Theseexperiences have taught me what it means to be a researcher and a scholar.

Independent Research:

4/2008-Present:“Independent Research Project A”:My first independent research project (which serves as my writing sample) was aninvestigation into the process of “X”. This project was also my introduction toarchival research. In order to gather my data I took several trips to theprivate papers of “primary sources”, photographing and coding over 14,000 pagesof primary source documents. This past April, I presented my preliminaryfindings at the Midwest Political Science Association’s (MPSA) annual meeting.

Thisresearch continues to teach me valuable lessons. Paramount among them is theimportance of a strong command of empirical methods. Recognizing the complexityof the methods I need to test my hypotheses prompted me to enroll in graduatelevel methods courses. Presenting at the MPSA conference and observing moreexperienced scholars present their research taught me how to communicate myfindings in a cogent and interesting manner. Finally, the false starts of thisproject have been the best teachers of the creativity, savvy, and patiencenecessary to overcome obstacles encountered during research.

6/2009-Present: “IndependentResearch Project B”: Inthis project I argue “…” I am currently conducting a literature review andgathering data from the last decade utilizing diverse sources including pollingdata, major newspapers, and television ads. I am also collectingand analyzing direct data.

7/2009-Present:“Independent Research Project C”: I work with “ProfessorC of Not My University” in this project to explain the conditions under which …“description of the project”. Iwill present our initial findings at the MPSA annual meeting this April.

I also have extensiveresearch experience as a research assistant. For the past two years I haveworked predominately with “Undergraduate Advisor” and his graduate students onseveral major projects.

Conclusion:Nobel Prize-winningphysiologist Albert Szent-Györgyi wrote, “Research is to see what everyone elsehas seen and to think what nobody else has thought.” The margins of my bookstell me that he may be right. Indeed, they are filled with writing: “How can this coding scheme bechanged to analyze...” “The authors stop short of demonstrating...How can Ianswer this question?” Ultimately, Szent-Györgyi’s words describe what will bymy greatest contribution to political science: my ability to both utilize thelessons of previous research and see beyond them to implement my own ideas ininnovative ways to answer the lingering questions in the discipline. It is notenough to say that my ultimate career goal is to be a professor at a researchuniversity, though it is. Being a professor not only gives me the ability toaffect the lives of my students through teaching and mentorship, but it givesme the ability to pursue research on “my area of interest”, therebystrengthening the legitimacy and uncovering the institutional intricacies ofour least understood but perhaps most powerful branch of government.

[APGradApplicant]

Here is mine. It was structurally somewhat different from what some others have posted, so I thought I would post.

Conclusion:Nobel Prize-winningphysiologist Albert Szent-Györgyi wrote, “Research is to see what everyone elsehas seen and to think what nobody else has thought.” The margins of my bookstell me that he may be right. Indeed, they are filled with writing: “How can this coding scheme bechanged to analyze...” “The authors stop short of demonstrating...How can Ianswer this question?” Ultimately, Szent-Györgyi’s words describe what will bymy greatest contribution to political science: my ability to both utilize thelessons of previous research and see beyond them to implement my own ideas ininnovative ways to answer the lingering questions in the discipline. It is notenough to say that my ultimate career goal is to be a professor at a researchuniversity, though it is. Being a professor not only gives me the ability toaffect the lives of my students through teaching and mentorship, but it givesme the ability to pursue research on “my area of interest”, therebystrengthening the legitimacy and uncovering the institutional intricacies ofour least understood but perhaps most powerful branch of government.

Thanks, bsquar. Didn't want to quote the whole thing, but I think that's very helpful to current and future applicants to see that there is more than one way to go about the "Statement of purpose" or "statement of goals". I actually had a friend who went this route and got into OSU and Rochester using it (this was in a previous admissions cycle).

[poli90]

I think Suddenly Paranoid's SoP is a good lesson in a key point to remember: programs are looking for interesting researchers, not interesting people (I'm sure you are an interesting person, SP, but you really do put your research front and centre). If you are going to use an anecdote, make sure it ties in strongly and creativly to your research, and is not just a story about why you want to study politics in grad school (the only really good reason is because you want to do research etc) or how you first got interested in politics.

[ladedodaday]

I think Suddenly Paranoid's SoP is a good lesson in a key point to remember: programs are looking for interesting researchers, not interesting people (I'm sure you are an interesting person, SP, but you really do put your research front and centre). If you are going to use an anecdote, make sure it ties in strongly and creativly to your research, and is not just a story about why you want to study politics in grad school (the only really good reason is because you want to do research etc) or how you first got interested in politics.

If a couple more people post their essays (I'll get around to it eventually) I think this will be the most enlightening thread on the board. It has been fascinating to read the ones already up and to see how different approaches still lead to favorable admissions outcomes. They have definitely widened my own perception of what a personal statement should look like!

[applying12010]

^ The way you start your PS is really nice! It is an elegant piece of writing.

[polecon09]

Here's mine - feedback is welcome.

On reading the back of a protestor’s t-shirt at the Battle in Seattle that said, “Aims of the WTO: Increase Profit, Decrease Democracy,” I had an overwhelming sense that my generation has little faith in international organizations’ capacity to regulate global commerce. International organizations depend on their members to make up rules and the means to enforce those rules. Member states, however, have varied political and economic standing, and allegiances to interest groups and voters. I am fascinated by the process of cooperation in international rulemaking and enforcement, especially as the rules extend to cover agriculture and the environment. To earn my PhD, I intend to conduct empirical research on the impact and effectiveness of international institutions’ regulations.

My commitment to international political economy, demonstrated by my previous research, makes me uniquely qualified to pursue graduate studies in the Political Economy program in the Department of Political Science at XXX. My initial foray into research at UC Berkeley explored the role of agricultural trade in Mexico and Brazil’s economic development. As agriculture came under WTO rulemaking in the 1990’s, developing nations demanded a bigger voice in negotiations and fervently protested American and European agricultural protectionism. In my development theory classes I learned to approach development as both the evolution of capitalism as an uneven process, and as the concerted effort by the First World to intervene in the Third World. Under the guidance of Professor XXX, my honor’s thesis accordingly explored how agricultural trade caused inequality in Mexico and Brazil and stunted their economic growth. Agreements to deregulate agriculture in the WTO Uruguay Round have been less than successful. As a result, I found that American agricultural price subsidies continue to create economic losses for net food exporters, such as Brazil. What negotiations have accomplished, interestingly, is that the US has now made itself vulnerable to legal complaints over its agricultural protection. For example, Brazil may threaten to renege on its intellectual property rights agreement in order to pressure the US to conform to its agricultural commitments. I suspect that future research could show that the legal forum has important implications vis-à-vis negotiations in restricting who benefits and who is likely to be liable, and therefore has an incentive to comply.

In my work at XXX, I research a variety of policies and legal matters. I have the opportunity to construct arguments based on empirical evidence on the economic effects of environmental regulation, patent infringement, and race and gender discrimination. I recently co-authored a paper with Professors XXX and XXX that is in its second round of review with the Journal of Law and Economics. I elected to use an instrument to obtain consistent estimates for the effect of federal critical habitat designation on land prices despite potential endogeneity. Using instrumental variables regression we show that the effect of critical habitat is still significant and larger in magnitude than without. Coming from a background in Agricultural and Resource Economics, I am motivated to find quantifiable evidence for non-market goods. For example, economists can estimate the benefit of clean air by analyzing indirect market evidence or conducting contingent valuation studies. In my future research, I hope to incorporate politics into economic analysis, explicitly by quantifying the effect of political “goods,” such as standing or reputation, and indirectly, by incorporating political ideas into an economic framework.

My proposed research for the NSF Graduate Research Fellowship examines the effects of WTO accession on food prices and food price volatility in developing countries. In light of the global food crisis, I question if it is in developing countries’ best interests to be in the WTO given that WTO membership will preclude them from shielding themselves from external shocks through protectionist measures. Although research on WTO effects on trade has been conducted, an ex post comprehensive study on the effect of WTO membership on prices is absent from the current body of knowledge. This research will draw upon my knowledge of economic theory and statistical methods as they apply to the world food economy, which I gained by taking a doctoral econometrics sequence during my Masters program at UC Davis. I would like to further contribute to studying the effect of WTO membership on commodity prices, by examining how countries build support for agricultural trade liberalization and food security strategies. For instance, one proposal for a developing country insurance strategy is the formation of a regional food reserve. Cooperation can prove challenging, however, between hostile nations or when food prices are low.

My primary field of interest is international political economy. At this point, I am drawn to the sub-disciplines of international trade, economic development and global governance. I recently read Dani Rodrik’s statement that, “What we need is a vision of globalization that is fully cognizant of its limits.” Indeed, if not “maximum openness” then what are the objectives of international economic policies? Large bodies of literature show that trade openness stimulates growth, which may be cause enough to promote openness. Yet, growth has not occurred evenly geographically or temporally. I would like to examine why certain countries have maximized the benefits of global commerce to propel their growth, while other countries have not. I wonder what the limits to globalization are and whether the limits to globalization could hamper growth: for example, is growth limited by international organizations’ incomplete enforcement? In fact, in the face of maximum openness nations could be exposed to potentially volatile market forces if corporations, goods, and money are not judiciously regulated. I would like to study the relationship between trade policy, environmental and labor regulation, and consumer protection. In the decades to come, nations may need to incorporate more stringent protections in international policy. It remains to be seen how far non-state actors will influence international organizations’ negotiations. I suspect that non-state actors, such as non-governmental organizations and corporations, have filled in the gap left by international organizations’ limited enforcement ability.

I am drawn to understanding the formation and transformation of the global power structure. My career aspiration is to conduct research and teach international political economy at a research university. I am applying to XXX program because of its faculty’s expertise in international economic policy, governance and methods. Specifically, I would like to study with X, X and X. X has many resources for international studies which I feel I would be a good fit for, including its Center for XX and the XX. With a PhD from XX, I am confident I will be able to shape the policy debate on critical issues in the world economy.

[Ziz]

I was just about to press submit then panicked. I'm still waiting to hear from 4 programs, so I will post when I get those decisions .

Edited February 24, 2010 by Ziz

[poli90]

^ The way you start your PS is really nice! It is an elegant piece of writing.

Thanks! I quite liked yours as well. You have probably had this discussion elsewhere, but where are you leaning towards?

[applying12010]

Thanks! I quite liked yours as well. You have probably had this discussion elsewhere, but where are you leaning towards?

Thanks! Hmm I am leaning towards Princeton now, but I think I will have to visit Harvard before making up my mind. Both schools are pretty good for my subfield!

By the way, it is quite funny the number of people who uses the "when I was a kid" approach to start their PS. I guess studying political science is in all of our nature.

[SansSociety]

The recent financial crisis and subsequent global policy response has demonstrated that

the relevant interests of Political Science and Economics will continue to merge. Within this

academic intersection, I wish to study the politics of economic development, focusing on the role

of the state during the process of economic change. I examined this topic in my senior thesis

(chapters of which are attached to my application). It was a case study on the state’s role in

economic development in Vietnam. This project represents the culmination of an intellectual

interest that stems from my early experiences as a child in Vietnam. Consequently, with this

personal narrative in mind, my academic background (which includes postgraduate studies at the

London School of Economics) and future research interests indicate that I have both the resolve

and competence to pursue a PhD in Government at Cornell.

Having spent part of my early life in Vietnam (a poor country only now undergoing

economic transition), I developed an interest in understanding how politics shaped economic

outcomes. Seeing the sharp material differences between the United States and Vietnam led to an

intrinsic sense that more was at play than sheer chance. It was upon studying comparative

politics (especially the political economy of East Asia) that I realized the importance of the state

and government policymaking in facilitating growth and development.

Personal experiences and coursework persuaded me to undertake a funded honors thesis

that analyzed the capacity of the Vietnamese government to act as a “developmental state,” a

lens of study borrowed from Chalmers Johnson, Ezra Vogel and Atul Kohli. I concluded that it

did not act as one, even though the government claimed to provide a middle ground between

capitalism and socialism. This project provided an important initial glimpse of the thrills of

academic research and influenced my decision to pursue my intellectual curiosities further. I am

now undertaking an MSc in the Political Economy of Late Development at the London School of

Economics (LSE). The program is allowing me to deepen my understanding of the economic

history and politics of development. In the development institute, I am fortunate to be studying

under Robert Wade, who has provided me with a nuanced picture of the contemporary debates

surrounding development. LSE has helped sharpen my understanding of the myriad of

alternatives for growth and development – strengthening my resolve to pursue a PhD.

Building upon theories encountered in prior research and courses, I want to be a part of

the fascinating debate between neo-classical economics and state-led economic growth theories.

I believe there is room for a middle ground that engages both sides. The examples of beneficial

state-interventions in Japan, Taiwan and South Korea – where industrial policies also

incorporated economic performance benchmarks – support a positive role for the state, while the

recent demand for privatization in these countries demonstrates the salience of liberal economics.

The space for academic inquiry comes from understanding the political incentives and conditions

that support benevolent state developmentalism, as well as the sequencing of reforms in this

process of economic transition.

Regionally, I want to focus on the contemporary politics of development in Southeast

Asia because it represents a terrific test-bed for research – it is a region with countries on the

verge of rich-nation status, and I already have working linguistic and political knowledge of one

rising country in the region. However, as my thesis also included comparisons with other

countries, these interests could evolve into cross-national comparative studies that include Africa

and Latin America, in addition to Southeast Asia.

I wish to measure why states choose to guide the process of economic development,

focusing on the international and political variables that induce policy and/or institutional

reform, using the developmental state theorem as an analytical lens. Some states choose to be

predatory or allow themselves to be captured by multinational interests; I want to understand

how domestic and international political variables influence some governments to be growth-

oriented, while dissuading others. Regarding policies, I want to decipher the causality and proper

sequencing of reforms: Does liberalization coincide with development? Or does development

lead to demands for liberalization? Patterns of interest group formation (consumer or business-

oriented) could serve as indicators for understanding this process. To sum up, I want to pursue

research concerning two possible relationships. In the first, my independent variables are

international and political factors, with my dependent variable being the outcome of state

developmentalism. In the second, patterns of interest group formation serve as the independent

variable, with the dependent variable being economic liberalization. On top of coursework I will

take at your department, I have taken courses in economics, statistics and social science research

methods, which provide a good starting point to answer these possible research questions.

The strengths of the department of Government in the fields of comparative political

economy, Southeast Asian politics as well as the opportunities for interdisciplinary studies

available through the university influenced my decision to apply to Cornell. These aspects,

combined with the top-notch research training I will receive will allow me to become a strong

scholar and university professor. The faculty also has scholars interested in Southeast Asian

political economy (in particular, Thomas Pepinsky) and others who are interested in

development and comparative political economy. Their expertise will allow me to accomplish

my research agenda. Additionally, I am drawn to the opportunities provided through

interdisciplinary studies at Cornell. The Southeast Asian program will allow me to utilize

resources from the university that will add depth to my research. My academic narrative and

prior research experiences should indicate that I have the competence and drive to succeed in

your program. I hope to be able to join the vibrant academic community at Cornell. Thank you

for the consideration.

Hope this helps.

LOL, SuddenlyParanoid, your SOP will be canonized as THE SOP by which all others are judged, given this year.

[GopherGrad]

Thanks to everyone that posted. I, for one, am finding this tremendously helpful reading.

[tskinner]

BUMP.

[UnlikelyGrad]

Here's the link to mine, which got me into four schools.

http://unlikelygrad.wordpress.com/2009/12/31/a-winning-sop/

[applying12010]

For applicants this year, some (hopefully helpful) advice on writing PS:

1) Maybe I am worrying too much, but don't try to "copy" the application essays on this thread. Use them to give you a general idea of what to expect, but nothing more. Be creative and don't feel restricted by what is posted here!

I have a friend (I know, it's a sample size of one...) who tried to "copy" a grad application essay (same structure etc.) that got someone into the best grad schools, didn't really help him/ her (rejected from every single school).

2) Make sure that you start writing early and ask for feedbacks from your professors or TAs (if you know them well enough). They know what professors like to read!

3) When I was writing my PS, a professor told me that two things in the PS will get someone into a good school: a) demonstration of general brilliance; fit. I think it's a good thing to keep in mind when I write your PS.

I hope this is useful. Good luck, and don't stress out too much!

[balderdash]

2) Make sure that you start writing early and ask for feedbacks from your professors or TAs (if you know them well enough). They know what professors like to read!

Although I'm currently going through the process, not reflecting back with oodles of wisdom to pass on, I can add to this a little.

One of the best reviewers has been a person in academic advising at my school who helps students for scholarships (Marshall, Truman, Rhodes). He spends a lot of time reading personal statements and seeing how well they fit the program and the student. Granted, he's a particularly awesome individual, but I think that most people who are applying should see if their school's advising office has such a person.

[mrmirv]

Although I'm currently going through the process, not reflecting back with oodles of wisdom to pass on, I can add to this a little.

One of the best reviewers has been a person in academic advising at my school who helps students for scholarships (Marshall, Truman, Rhodes). He spends a lot of time reading personal statements and seeing how well they fit the program and the student. Granted, he's a particularly awesome individual, but I think that most people who are applying should see if their school's advising office has such a person.

Balderdash...you are applying to the who's who of schools..wow...what are your stats?

[tskinner]

Although I'm currently going through the process, not reflecting back with oodles of wisdom to pass on, I can add to this a little.

One of the best reviewers has been a person in academic advising at my school who helps students for scholarships (Marshall, Truman, Rhodes). He spends a lot of time reading personal statements and seeing how well they fit the program and the student. Granted, he's a particularly awesome individual, but I think that most people who are applying should see if their school's advising office has such a person.

I would like to echo this too. My school's fellowship coordinator was one of the best reviewer's I had, because she had read thousands before and had no problem hurting my feelings with honest criticism.

[balderdash]

I would like to echo this too. My school's fellowship coordinator was one of the best reviewer's I had, because she had read thousands before and had no problem hurting my feelings with honest criticism.

Yeah, just to give some examples of the negatives I've heard back from 3 different sources:

"I do not like your last paragraph."

"This sentence is gratuitous editorializing. "

"As for the Personal Statement... it is not winning."

"Above all be more humble and less preachy."

And my personal favorite:

"You sound like you already understand and condemn current policy and aim to redo it single handedly. If so, you are wasting your time at School X... just proceed to reform the world in terms of your superior views and moral judgements."

Well, academia requires a thick skin, so we have to get started somewhere.

[applying12010]

bump for the applicants this year!

[Ph.D. IR]

Wow, all of these essays are beautifully written.

Question. I see that none of you have mentioned your thesis title in your SOP. Is it not okay to bring up your thesis title in your SOP?

Also, is it okay to indicate that I want to be a professor following my Ph.D.?

Edited October 25, 2010 by Ph.D. IR

[YAGSA]

Okay, I'll post this draft as it was the last one I made and also, I think, the funniest one. Keep in mind that it wasn't successful at Brown, although it was so elsewhere (for which I changed references to POIs, of course, but everything else was exactly the same).

PERSONAL STATEMENT

When deciding my undergraduate major, I remembered that one of my favorite law courses in El Salvador had been Public International Law.[1] International Relations (IR) seemed to be a natural continuation of my legal studies, and I planned to combine both in a diplomatic career.[2] This plan dissipated quickly after taking an Introduction to IR class. There I engaged—lucidly for the first time—in the seductive world of theory. In particular, I was swayed by the rugged, masculine style with which realism assesses and explains (or narrates/fabricates, as I would say now) international reality. The research paper I wrote for that introductory class, dealing with Chinese human rights as a U.S. foreign policy challenge, was strongly inspired by the realist tradition.[3]

That paper’s topic reflected my interest in Chinese international affairs, which was an outgrowth of what I perceived as China’s growing global significance. Later, as I took history and political science courses centered on East Asia, I consolidated my interests in the region, both for its own sake and for the generalizable lessons to other postcolonial areas, such as Latin America, that can be derived from East Asian recorded experiences and narratives.

Through further courses and independent readings in IR theory and political thought (two fields that I wish to marry, harmoniously or not, in my academic future) I became increasingly frustrated with realist frameworks, finding only temporary refuge in the two mainstream alternatives of liberalism and (Wendtian) constructivism commonly offered at the undergraduate level.[4] I could not quite put my finger on what it was about these ways of thinking and speaking of the world that caused me intellectual dissatisfaction. Then I discovered Nietzsche, Arendt, Foucault, and Derrida, and, among our contemporaries, Richard Ashley, Michael Shapiro, R.B.J. Walker, James Der Derian, William Connolly, Mark Blyth, Charlotte Epstein, and Prasenjit Duara.[5] The writings of these and other authors have aided me to approach a more satisfactory articulation of what I find dissatisfying in our mainstream international theorizing.

Put briefly, the chief component of that dissatisfaction is the way in which those mainstream theories (or discourses) ontologize and bring into being a particular heterotopia of anarchy (to borrow Foucault’s term), which ‘naturally’ carries with it the (dangerous, I think) teleology expressed in such dichotomies as survival/hegemony and conflict/cooperation. Since those discourses are enabling discourses in the sense that they permit and justify certain operations in international praxis, my dissatisfaction reaches to the post-Westphalian global order.

Bearing this thought in mind, what I wish to do as a graduate student and beyond is to grapple this dissatisfaction through a genealogical or historicized problematization of the liberal global order and its ancillary discourses, employing qualitative and archival methods. Moreover, I want to unearth alternative orders of international relations, rendering salient the processes whereby these have been interred under the coercive expansion of a dominant order and discourse.

As I carry this genealogical problematization to the dissertational level, more specifically, I plan to approach it through the means of an illuminating and intriguing venue: the study of revolutionary states and movements, especially in the modern era. It has often been the case that revolutionary upheavals led to the allocation of deviant identities (or ‘unfriendly’, ‘rogue’, ‘terrorist’, and ‘revolutionary’ itself) to the states in which they occurred, as seen, for instance, in two cases on which I am currently conducting research for my honors thesis: China after Mao and Venezuela after Chavez. Other cases I plan to study as a graduate student under genealogical (which for me includes contextual and ecological aspects) and discursive lenses are Sandinista Nicaragua, Kim’s North Korea, and, to “go back home” in a slightly different track, El Salvador’s revolutionary guerilla movement during the country’s civil war within the larger context of the Cold War. Reflecting on how deviant labels have been inscribed on these and other groups and states of revolutionary breed pushes one to question the discourse that enjoys a strong monopoly on the allocation of deviant international identities, and how it seeks to violently (often in the physical sense) suppress the centrifugal forces, or loci of resistance and transgression,[6] symbolized by revolutionary agents.

More broadly, my intention is to approach politics from sociological, linguistic, and discursive/ideational/textual perspectives, from which the relevance of revolution becomes even more apparent. Revolutions (and calling them so already reveals the presence of a given ontologizing story or discourse, but the degree of violence in the story can vary) are situations that can be characterized by what Professor Mark Blyth has called Knightian uncertainty in Great Transformations: Economic Ideas and Institutional Change in the Twentieth Century. Acknowledging the importance of ideas (whether political, economic, religious, or of another sort), Professor Blyth’s theory of institutional change can be applied effectively to explain great political changes. After reading Great Transformations, however, I thought of how Professor Blyth’s theory of institutional supply, stability, and change opens up the analytically anterior problem of the need for a theory of ideational supply, stability, and change. My research project intends to take on that problem. The study of revolutions—moments of profound uncertainty where much is up for grabs in the rearticulation of agents’ stories of the world around them—provides a crucial opportunity to device generalizable answers to the issue of ideational or discursive genesis and contest.

A prevalent purpose in social theory is to discover regularities in social behavior, and my particular academic enterprise is to find regularities in the ways in which agents create, propose, and impose ideas—to which I most often refer as discourses, stories, or, to avoid epistemological presupposition and underscore their normative content, fables. I depart from the premise that people can know of and act in the world only because of the fables that they tell to themselves and to others, creating a self-contained and manageable world within our inscrutable universe (which might as well be just the product of a meta-fable).[7] In other words, agents author plots with a moral, just as Aesop did in his fables and academics do in their theories and policy recommendations. Of course, these fables are made true relationally; they are only meaningful when interpreted by others.

This sociological constitution of truth, however, is not unproblematic. Much of the process of social truth-making responds to power relations, and Foucault, inspired on Nietzsche, has done much to guide us in that direction. In fact, most of what I have mentioned has already been elaborated upon by others, especially in postmodern scholarship. Building on those elaborations, I hope to contribute to the literature through textual and literary analyses of the fables of international theory and policy.[8] This could be done, for example, in applying a theory of the novel to nationalist narratives in postcolonial states. At this stage I can mostly hypothesize, albeit rather confidently, that it is possible to find regularities in the manners in which agents craft their world-explaining stories. Among those regularities are the limits on story-writing represented by material factors and power relations.[9]

In addition, one can identify regularities in discursive phenomena and literary devices displayed and deployed in the making of fables, including those that pertain to international politics.[10] Producers, advertisers, and consumers of politically-relevant fables are constrained and enabled in the interpretation and actualization of their fables by the material, linguistic, and intertextual conditions framing their literary interactions—and these conditions are, in turn, objects of further narration. These constraining and enabling factors, especially in our contemporary globalized world, cut across diverse social groups (such as states), making comparison and generalization something possible and useful. Therefore, my goal is to disentangle patterns or regularities (that is, to come up with a poignant story) from complex processes of ideational generation and contestation in (inter)national settings.[11]

I began to discuss my intention of addressing a theory of ideational change by citing Professor Blyth’s scholarship. Aside from using it as a compositional device, I referenced his work to underscore my familiarity with and regard for a faculty member of the Brown’s Department of Political Science.[12] I would also like to highlight the crucial impact that Professor Der Derian’s work has had on my thinking. I became acquainted with Professor Der Derian through his editorship of International/Intertextual Relations: Postmodern Readings of World Politics, which provided me with an essential background in poststructural IR theory. Looking ahead, my research project could profit greatly from his insights on information and media studies, for these can account for the paramount ways in which fables are propagated within and across national borders, especially during moments of crisis (as seen recently with Twitter in Iran, to reference a well-known example). It would be a tremendous privilege and advantage to work with Professors Blyth and Der Derian, as well as with other members of the Department’s outstanding faculty, particularly those with regional expertise in East Asia and Latin America.

Overall, as a PhD student of the Department I am sure I would acquire a finer discursive acuity to better analyze (read) international experiences (as texts). This would be of great advantage, for, as Arendt illustrated in her reading of the United States Declaration of Independence and Barthes taught us in “The Death of the Author,” we, as readers of world texts/politics, can be more than passive onlookers, being instead active creators of alternative and unique meanings. This can allow us to directly engage in politics in the Arendtian sense, refiguring meanings and making something new.

My broad academic aspiration is to share such creational opportunities with my future colleagues and students, expressing and deliberating our intellectual dissatisfactions, inquiries, aporias, and passions. That is what I ultimately want to do—to devote my professional life to research and education. Discoveries of new politico-philosophical grounds in IR and brighter perspectives to elucidate them are to be the academic manifestations of my inner demons, which, as Weber suggested in “Science as a Vocation,” I am following under the adamant belief that to do so is of the highest meaning. Of course, I can only sustain the faith that this pursuit is meaningful if I am able to share it with those around me as colleagues, students, and cohorts in life. I took the first step toward this goal, inadvertently, when I took that International Public Law class a few years ago. At this point in time, applying to the Political Science PhD program at Brown University is to be the next, deliberate step.

<br clear="all"> [1] Law school in El Salvador is a five-year undergraduate program, of which I completed only nine semesters before moving to the United States for personal and academic reasons. I should mention that although the Law program’s curriculum is highly technical, it has been useful in combination with my liberal education in the U.S. as it has allowed me to identify fundamental connections between philosophy, law, and politics. Ceaselessly interpreting legal codes was also profitable as it forced me to hone my skills in hermeneutics.

[2] After my first year of undergraduate education in the U.S., it should be noted, I added an Economics major, of which I will not speak much here. To be frank, at first I chose to add this major because I am good at economics courses (at least at the undergraduate level) and they are very entertaining to me in a fashion similar to videogames, puzzles, and interactive novels. Nevertheless, being exposed to mainstream economic thought, especially as it is articulated at the undergraduate level, has been very informative, for it is a wonderful exemplar of much of what I find problematic in social science. It is one of my projects, perhaps to be developed in a future paper, to think of how conventional economic analyses can interact intellectually and discursively with postmodern, non-empiricist approaches in political science.

[3] This paper was published in the Fall 2009 issue of the Undergraduate Journal of International Studies of the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Other than its general topic, however, it is of little resemblance to my current research interests and intellectual approach.

[4] Currently, I am myself a proponent of what could be reasonably characterized as a (loosely-defined) constructivist framework, but in this point I refer to certain mainstream articulations of “constructivism” whose excessively empiricist compromise struck me as a sort of obdurate, Weberian “re-enchantment”.

[5] This list of names is meant to exemplify some of the most important intellectual influences behind my academic inquiry, but none of those names ought to be held (directly) responsible for the ideas that I express here or elsewhere.

[6] Yes, I am aware that phrases such as “loci of resistence” have been overused in the postmodern literature, and I might be hurting myself for using it here, but I believe that its overuse responds to good reasons, at least if one is thinking or theorizing in a dialectical manner, which I deem to be the “right” thing to do analytically.

[7] Why we do this is perhaps a question that should be left to the psychologist or, even better, to the neuroscientist. That is, of course, if in our stories we value natural science more highly, which we cannot do objectively unless we were to become omniscient gods. In any event, all stories must depart from a set of premises, and the generality of fable-making in human intersubjective interaction serves as the main premise for mine.

[8] The importance of the link between politics and story-making has been a recurrent theme in political philosophy since Plato, who referred to the latter activity as poesis in his Republic. Broadly considered, therefore, my approach is not strictly something new. I do believe, however, that there are plenty of opportunities for novel application of this theme in world politics.

[9] Our perception of materiality (including issues of biology, evolution, and others that we might include in our considerations of social behavior) is, given my premise, a product of a fable as well. However, from a pragmatic standpoint it is appropriate to treat certain aspects of materiality as “real” due to their widespread perception as such. For instance, uninvited physical pain, although it could be written/read and understood as a blessed portent of heavenly compensations (and many in our medieval stories narrated it in that way), is almost universally thought of as a real phenomenon, as something of little redeeming qualities and to be avoided, to the point that we can practically treat it in that way as given or a constant, especially in analyses of modern settings.

[10] An example is the phenomenon of discursive inertia, which I explore in a primitive manner in the writing sample that supplements my application to the Department’s PhD program.

[11] More specifically, given that life is usually not long enough to read and write about the whole world, I will focus on Latin American and East Asian regions.

[12] I actually had the opportunity to sit in several of Professor Blyth’s lectures of comparative politics during his last semester at Johns Hopkins University, which allowed me to appreciate what an excellent instructor he is. I would be delighted to have the chance to learn from him again.

[CooCooCachoo]

YAGSA, thank you very much for posting your SOP. I am just wondering whether it is common practice to include footnotes in such a statement?