What programs am I missing? (Human-animal relationships)

[Ilikekitties]

I'm interested in edibility and pet-keeping and how cultures may place animals into categories, like “food.” I'm drawing from Mary Douglas, Donna Haraway, Pierre Bourdieu, Thorstein Veblen, and Foucault (I'm not an expert on any of these people, but I'd be interested in reading more of them in grad school if I ever get in). I took one cultural anthro theory class in college and did well in it...then I TA-d it...but honestly I need more than one semester of college-level theory. You just read so much so quickly. I'm not well-versed ATM, but I do like discussing it with people.

In 2015/16, I applied to the New School, Cornell, Columbia, Maryland, UIUC, Santa Cruz, Santa Barbara, Davis, Toronto, McGill, and Notre Dame. All of these were anthro.

In 2016/17, I applied to MSU (sociology/animal studies), Exeter (anthrozoology), Toronto, McGill, Washington, and Notre Dame.

For 2017/18, I think that I will apply to Notre Dame again (mainly because I was a top applicant)....not sure if I'd want to apply to anywhere else for a 2nd or 3rd time

Any thoughts? Mainly I'm just looking at human-animal relationships, multi-species ethnography, edibility/nutrition, and human-environment interaction. In my internet searches, the vast majority of these people are in archeology, which I have little interest in. I'm kind of also interested in cultural perspectives of health and wellness...but I haven't done any research on that...it's just more of an interest that I haven't pursued academically.

As for geographical interests...hell if I know. China is an interesting place to be (I've been here for the past year and will be here for one more) but I don't speak Mandarin. I do speak Spanish and French and in college I studied abroad in Costa Rica.

Also, most of the programs that I applied to before were PhD programs...not sure if I'm ready to jump into that. Mainly I have a hard time finding people who share my interests.

Edited September 14, 2017 by Peanut

[hj2012]

It seems like you have some idea of the theory you'd like to use and the abstract questions you'd like to ask. However, from what you've posted, I don't get the sense that you know what your field site(s) might be, and that doesn't give confidence that you'd be able to successfully conduct an ethnographic  research project. Do you have experience conducting fieldwork, perhaps for a senior thesis or through a field school?

Check out these sample SOPs from Duke Cultural Anthropology: https://culturalanthropology.duke.edu/sites/culturalanthropology.duke.edu/files/file-attachments/2011-2012GradStmts_0.doc You'll notice that they all are able to articulate their interests within the context of a specific location or geographic site, and they are able to explain how their past training (language, study abroad, etc) and experiences might help them successfully carry out dissertation research. The growth of pet-keeping in Shanghai (which might deal with  consumption, class, urban space, etc) will be very different from the politics of iguana consumption in Nicaragua (which might deal with environmental law, post-socialism, land tenure, etc). Both of these projects might let you approach some of the themes that interest you -- but explaining your interests through a specific problem or phenomenon will make you a more convincing candidate. 

If you are unable to explain your project contextually, then I would say that an MA would probably be best.

 

[Ilikekitties]

I did a field school in Jamaica and I conducted research in Costa Rica and the US. I talked about my study abroad experiences and my current experience in China in my SOPs.

I can't decide on any one location, but yeah of course location affects everything. I think I know the most about China because I've lived here the longest and I'm constantly talking to people here and learning a lot. But I don't wanna be like BAM I'm a China scholar.

Edited September 14, 2017 by Peanut

[hats]

Let's say that third applications, besides Notre Dame, are right out. Good-bye! I am sure another poster could make a case that one of your other third-rounders is a good enough fit to argue for an exception, but I can see the psychological weight of that and agree that that factor is not to be lightly dismissed. But surely your applications are quite different than they were in 2015, and even 2016, such that doing a few second applications might be worthwhile? Eyeballing your list, I would say you've done a good enough job identifying animal studies programs that throwing all second applications out is going to be throwing too much of a roadblock into your own path. If you brought back, say, two of the schools from 2015 and MSU, that would be a good start to your list.

What are your thoughts on trying to find a well-funded master's program, especially an area studies and/or language-learning one (if you want to do work in a language you don't yet know extremely well)? I've heard of master's programs in, say, Hong Kong and Taiwan, where my impression is that you could study in English while taking Chinese. Doing a master's somewhere would give you a chance to work on finding a field continent and identifying a potential project for yourself.

[Ilikekitties]

I'd apply to Washington again because that's the place where I got waitlisted, but they accept sociocultural people for odd years. MSU soc straight up told me that I was not a good fit for their program (I was confused because their department deals a lot with human-environment issues, but whatever), and Exeter's PhD program rejected me because I didn't fulfill the prerequisites (their website never stated that a MA was REQUIRED, only that most of the people they accept have MA's). I was admitted to the New School MA program in 2016, but I only got partial funding.

Attending a well-funded MA program for area studies/language is something that I've never considered. That's an intriguing idea. Would programs in HK allow me to learn Mandarin? I guess it would depend. I've never taken a Mandarin class...I literally just know some food words.

This also means that I'd have to pick an area to study....so hard. Why do some profs get to study multiple areas, like say India, Mexico, and England?

Edited September 15, 2017 by Peanut

[hats]

39 minutes ago, Peanut said:

Why do some profs get to study multiple areas, like say India, Mexico, and England?

1) They're senior enough that they can just do what they want.

2) They have personal connections that might make those three areas easier to handle: imagine a professor from a Spanish-speaking family whose father (or parents) were in the US military and so grew up mostly in Germany. Imagine this professor now studying the US, Mexico, and Germany.

3) They find a more specific group and then follow it around: after doing a dissertation on China, for example, you, Peanut, specifically, might be able to do a follow-up project on Chinese migrants in Latin America and an ensuing conflict about which animals are coded "edible" for the migrants vs. for the Spanish-speaking population the next neighborhood over. 

4) Many anthropologists will do their late(r)-career work in their home country, even if they cut their teeth working somewhere else. (This usually involves people whose home country(ies) include an Anglophone country, but hopefully that dynamic will lessen over time.)

People do do "multi-site ethnographies" now, but that's awfully hard to pull off a) across very different cultures/regions and b ) for your dissertation, unless you've got some of 2 and/or 3 going on.

I have no idea about the Hong Kong programs: I couldn't even commit to knowing they exist! I hope I remembered right and that that might be an option for you, though.

[Ilikekitties]

Thanks! I guess my fear is that I'd be boxed into a zone if I choose one place. Like I'd be "a China person" or whatever and that's a big commitment.

Edited September 15, 2017 by Peanut

[hj2012]

13 hours ago, Peanut said:

Thanks! I guess my fear is that I'd be boxed into a zone if I choose one place. Like I'd be "a China person" or whatever and that's a big commitment.

Grad school is all about the process of specialization. In fact, the whole point of PhD training is to become "a X person" with a deep, rigorous knowledge of a particular place, community, group, or way of life. You need to indicate in your SOP the rough outlines of a project that will entail site-specific fieldwork, and once you get in, you will need to build expertise in the area in which you will conduct fieldwork (through language, courses, etc) and prove it through qualifying exams. Most PhD programs will require you to do 3-4 fields in somewhat recognizable categories, one of which will likely be an area-focused list such as "Anthropology of China" or an outside list such as "History of Latin America & the Caribbean." If you can't commit to this process or you don't like the idea of specialization, an anthropology PhD is probably not right for you.

Also, I wouldn't base your SOP on the cumulative work of senior scholars, because it's comparing apples to oranges. You'd be hard-pressed to find an anthropologist whose dissertation research was about India, Mexico, and England, though their career might later encompass multiple places. Think about it this way: you are learning a method (which includes specialization and a commitment to local knowledge) that you can later apply to other sites you may wish to study. But you will never be admitted to a PhD program without demonstrating commitment to a first project -- the dissertation is difficult enough to complete, even for those with single-minded focus!

FYI -- multi-sited ethnographies are not usually comparative in nature. Building on @hats, they might compare the trajectory of a single group of migrants across multiple locales, track the production of commodity X, or explore the imagination and implementation of international governance code Y. 

 

Edited September 15, 2017 by hj2012

[Ilikekitties]

8 hours ago, hj2012 said:

Grad school is all about the process of specialization. In fact, the whole point of PhD training is to become "a X person" with a deep, rigorous knowledge of a particular place, community, group, or way of life. You need to indicate in your SOP the rough outlines of a project that will entail site-specific fieldwork, and once you get in, you will need to build expertise in the area in which you will conduct fieldwork (through language, courses, etc) and prove it through qualifying exams. Most PhD programs will require you to do 3-4 fields in somewhat recognizable categories, one of which will likely be an area-focused list such as "Anthropology of China" or an outside list such as "History of Latin America & the Caribbean." If you can't commit to this process or you don't like the idea of specialization, an anthropology PhD is probably not right for you.

Also, I wouldn't base your SOP on the cumulative work of senior scholars, because it's comparing apples to oranges. You'd be hard-pressed to find an anthropologist whose dissertation research was about India, Mexico, and England, though their career might later encompass multiple places. Think about it this way: you are learning a method (which includes specialization and a commitment to local knowledge) that you can later apply to other sites you may wish to study. But you will never be admitted to a PhD program without demonstrating commitment to a first project -- the dissertation is difficult enough to complete, even for those with single-minded focus!

FYI -- multi-sited ethnographies are not usually comparative in nature. Building on @hats, they might compare the trajectory of a single group of migrants across multiple locales, track the production of commodity X, or explore the imagination and implementation of international governance code Y. 

 

I understand that the point of a PhD is to become a specialist, but maybe I'm not ready for that commitment and right now.

In my SOPs of the past I never really defined a field site, I just mentioned some places where I had done work in the past. I think for some in 2015 I even wrote that I was open to any geographical area.

The India/Mexico/England thing was just an example and I didn't imitate this in my SOPs. I have seen that some people are interested in multiple regions of the world, not that they're specialists in multiple areas. Maybe they've only published about one or two places recently. I'm also referring to the fact that professors have career changes. I know some professors who are studying vastly different things from their PhD dissertation. I even know of person who started out in physical anthro, switched to cultural in the same program, and still graduated in a timely matter. I just think that sticking to one topic for the rest of my life is kinda silly if there are other things that I'd want to explore too. But yeah, I totally get that this is way in the future, way after the dissertation.

 

 

Edited September 16, 2017 by Peanut

[GreenEyedTrombonist]

@Peanut I see your point about not wanting to commit yourself and pigeon-hole (basically) yourself to one area. However, instead of thinking of it as this research topic will define your entire future research, think of it as, "What can you research now that will potentially lead to those expanded opportunities in the future?"

I have friends who had the same mindset and stressed over what to do for their project specifically because they didn't want to put themselves in a corner. As soon as our profs explained that this research project does not need to dictate their entire professional future it took a weight off and allowed them to choose a project that they're happy with.

[EvelynD]

I've send you a PM!