NRR: grad school--ithaca, nashville, or pennslyvania?

Vladimir Nabokov(teacher), Thomas Pynchon(student), Kurt Vonnegut(student), James McConkey(teacher), E.B. White(student), Toni Morrison(student) are all somehow connected to Cornell in academic ways.

'nuff said

Onus march,

I'm a professor of English at a Big 12 school; my field is basically American literature after 1900. I completed my PhD in 2004 at UC Irvine. This doesn't mean I'm going to proofread my post. Don't count off for grammar or spellin'. And before I offer my response to your question, Onus march, let me say that you should probably pay special attention to the poster "Alain Badiou". In literary theory, that's a hefty identity to assume these days. To play at being Badiou at letsrun.com is like announcing you're Haile G. to a blog at the Chronicle of Higher Education.

Cornell is the most competitive and accomplished school on your list. The program admits a very small number of students each year for the MA/PhD. They almost certainly fund everyone they admit, though admission packages may have different mixes of fellowships and teaching assignments. The people I work with who earned PhDs at Cornell are delighted with their educations.

I'm pretty confident Cornell doesn't run the kind of unconscionable, expensive terminal MA you can find at some institutions. Another poster mentioned those programs, and s/he is right to suggest you attend grad school in literature only if you have fellowship or ta-ship support. To be expected to pay for an MA in English with money rather than teaching labor is not really to be admitted into preparation for an academic career. If you're paying tuition for an MA while other students teach composition or enjoy fellowships, then you're there to subsidize others.

Penn State has a great English Dept. Many of us working in literary studies recognize that PSU's omission from the US News Top 25 is evidence that the list is flawed and maybe laughable. A more meaningful measure of a program's success is its placement record. Penn State is, I'm sure, doing better than most PhD programs in terms of securing dignified, even tenure-track work for a sizable percentage of its graduates. The same is true for Rutgers, which does appear on the top 25 list.

Hint: you need to apply to more than three schools. The poster who warned about how small a percentage of applicants get in is spot on. My best undergraduate student last year applied to at least 10. He starts at The Ohio State this fall; it is a fabulous program. He begins with a promise of two years of fellowship (no teaching) and at least four additional years of teaching provided he is making good progress toward the degree.

Vanderbilt has a reputable program. Overall it ranks third on your list, though in tough economic times the prospect of fellowship support rather than teaching support is much better at a private school. After intellect, work ethic, strong advisors, and a real question that wants an answer, the most important resource for a dissertation is time without teaching responsibilities. Private schools as good as Vanderbilt or better will give you time to work; they'll also admit very small cohorts. (Don't get me wrong. I love teaching, but winning and keeping jobs comes mainly from luck and thoughtful, persuasive writing.)

There may be particular fields within English that are stronger at Vandy than PSU, but I don't know what they are. I'd guess Southern Literature, but the fact that I'm guessing is telling. If I were on the hiring committee for my department, I'd have to ask other members of the committee whether Vanderbilt has a proven record of preparing scholars in whatever field of expertise we're looking for. For your other two schools, I can tell you about some of the strengths and names some faculty members. (PSU: Berube, Nielson; Cornell: Culler, Chase. Apologies to Houston Baker, who recently moved to Vanderbilt from Duke.)

You should know going into grad work that the Modern Language Association typically reports that only 43 per cent of job-seekers with new (or nearly new) PhDs secure tenure-track or comparable positions each year. The numbers were worse last year, and they are certain to be worse again this year. Many universities have announced hiring-freezes; my department doesn't expect to hire anyone new for at least two years. Sorry to be discouraging, but it would be bad faith to share advice on admissions without including this caveat.

There's a professor at UConn, Gregory Semenza, who published -Guide to Graduate Study in the 21st Century- (or something like that). He also maintains a page of grad application advice on his faculty website. If you read his advice page and still want to apply, then you'll want to read his book. Semenza, btw, graduated from Penn State. His field is Early Modern (Shakespeare), and his landing a gig at UConn also recommends him. Disclaimer: I don't know Semenza, but I've read his book. I wish I'd had it when I started grad school, and I send every student who asks about grad school to his website.

Best of luck.

8/10... who's "deciding on grad school" in the middle of September? This doesn't make any sense, but you get points for all the responses you got.

I'm also a grad student at Cornell and Ithaca is great. I hope you don't judge my maturity based on calling out the troll, that's just how we do on letsrun, right? Do you other Cornell guys want to run sometime?

Listen to zeig. Irvine is outstanding, especially for theory. I am currently working with a professor who graduated from the comp. lit. department at Irvine around 2004 as well, and the breadth of his knowledge is striking. I suppose it stands to reason when you study with Derrida, J. Hillis Miller, Spivak, etc..

I did not know Houston Baker had moved to Vanderbilt, but that alone would dissuade me from applying there. His bizarre actions during the Duke lacrosse scandal and his general social maladjustment reflect poorly on my admittedly inchoate perception of the Vanderbilt English department.

alain badiou wrote:

Listen to zeig. Irvine is outstanding, especially for theory. I am currently working with a professor who graduated from the comp. lit. department at Irvine around 2004 as well, and the breadth of his knowledge is striking. I suppose it stands to reason when you study with Derrida, J. Hillis Miller, Spivak, etc..

I did not know Houston Baker had moved to Vanderbilt, but that alone would dissuade me from applying there. His bizarre actions during the Duke lacrosse scandal and his general social maladjustment reflect poorly on my admittedly inchoate perception of the Vanderbilt English department.

I just googled the name 'Houston Baker' and read a few accounts of his and many other faculty members Orwellian behavior during that case. Duke appears to be under the control of insane ideologues. Freaked me out.

thanks for the responses guys; this was a whole lot more than i was expecting. let me be a bit more clear on my position:

i graduated from a mid-sized but reputable private college in the south in may with my BA in english. i wasn't sure whether or not i wanted to continue studying literature on the post-grad level (i was considering making the switch to anthropology or communications or comparative religions for a while) so the initial plan was to take a year off before deciding.

at the last minute, i realized was going to miss school/academia too much, and i applied for and was accepted to an MA program at a mid-sized unremarkable midwestern university (location was more important than reputation at the time, because i wasn't sure what my plans were). i expected to take a couple of classes on the side while i got another job and tried to decide about future grad work.

now that the semester has started, i've realized two things: the students in this program are mostly idiots, and i really want to spend the rest of my life studying and teaching literature. and the program i'm in right now is not going to prepare me for that.

so here's my dilemma: do i finish my MA work here and then try to get into a phd program somewhere else, or do i transfer into a stronger program right now? or am i already screwed by associating myself with a weak program?

right now, my thought process has been to apply to a few programs for admission next fall, and if i get in, great, but if not, then i'll just finish up my MA and apply on to broader range again in a year. my selection of cornell, penn, and vandy was more or less random: my grandfather went to cornell and knows a few people there, vandy is in a great location close to home, and i had a couple of professors in undergrad who went to penn st. i know they're all good schools, so that was pretty much that.

i've done a little bit of work that might strengthen my application--i've presented a couple of papers at a couple of philology/linguistics conferences, and i have recently rewritten one of those papers into an article that i'm trying to get published.

as far as what i'm interested in studying: there are several areas that are pulling my attention. modern american novel, comparative mythology, and english renaissance lit are the three interests that are strongest right now, but i'm still not married to anything.

anyway. thanks for the input. it's nice to see letsrun acting like a community of mature adults on occasion.

Onus march,

There's probably no harm in applying this fall with completing the MA at "Midwest U" next year as a fall back. The only risk I can imagine is the possible response from faculty at your current school. They may resist the idea that completing the MA is worse for your profile than leaving after two terms. And that response may inform how they write letters for you this year and/or next. Would you be able to apply this year with letters from just your undergraduate faculty? If not, my advice is still that you be very discreet about applying a year early. Talk to select faculty you trust. Your peers in the MA program may sense your contempt, and that's definitely not a stigma you want. It'll prevent faculty from boasting of your collegiality.

With that said, let me also suggest that you worry more about how to prepare the best application and less about whether your current school stigamtizes you in some way. If you nail the standard tests, secure glowing recs, and write a brilliant personal statement, many great programs will then take the time to consider carefully your writing sample. Once your application is getting that kind of attention, the letterhead on your letters of rec starts to matter less. (It never stops mattering entirely, however.)

Writing applications is hard work and takes time, especially if you tweak each personal statement so that it addresses the particular appeal of each program. Will taking that time this fall impede your performance in your current courses? The job market has been awful for a long time. Probably, the faculty at "Midwest U" went to great schools and studied with impressive scholars. So, rather than apply this year (and then again next year if you have to), you might concentrate on acing every course in the MA, identifying the two or three faculty most able to help you with PhD admissions, and publishing that conference paper. Letters from faculty at a middling school that boast you were a revelation for their ho-hum MA program may be quite compelling. And a standout application will encourage an admissions committee to imagine that you must have been at "Midwest U." for personal reasons that no longer prohibit your moving to Ithaca, State College, Austin, New Brunswick, Columbus, Philly, Seattle, San Diego, etc. (Yes, I'm suggesting again you at least triple the length of your initial list, though I realize applications can be expensive. Maybe that's another reason to plan for next year?)

Let me also say that since you'll be applying with some grad work, you should refine how you understand your prospective field of study. Allow me to make an unfair observation; no doubt in conversation you'd elaborate in detail on each of the three interests you identify. But your list of "modern American novel, comparative mythology, and English renaissance lit" is too divergent and general. In lit studies, comparative myth isn't a field. An applicant to lit programs who mentions it might be suspected of respecting Jung. I can't think of a competitive program in lit and cultural studies where Jung isn't a joke or an offense. (I think he's an offensive joke.) My guess is that whatever comparative myth is these days it now lives in anthropology, religion, and classics departments. Jung may be considered in the first two but probably only as a significant event in the past, like that 1918 flu or Houdini's last escape.

I can understand being interested in both the modern American novel and Early Modern lit(the more common name for Renaissance these days), but you don't want an application that indicates you might do one or the other. (No one does both. Actually a prof named Robert Kaufman at Berkeley does, but he's uncanny.) That would read like ambivalence or naivete. So, if you really can't decide, write unabashed modern American novel applications for the programs that are good at that, and then write equally ambitious applications for Early Modern at schools that do that well. In short, marry yourself to something in your applications; you'll be able to change fields once you're in.

For either category, you'll want to be more specific. And your enrollment in an MA program may mean PhD programs will want to see that you've begun to advance on the kind of interests that could become exam questions and a diss topic. Give the committees a sense of what questions you want to investigate and what literature you have to read to address those questions. I took a fantastic grad seminar on the "Renaissance Lyric," which concentrated on how different types of lyrics (e.g. love sonnets, pastoral verse) treated questions of sovereignty. Just how does one write a sonnet that honors Queen Elizabeth when by convention sonnets are erotic -and-hitting on the Queen is a serious no-no that could see one involved in the very wrong kind of bondage? Now, that's not the way to put the question in an application, but I'm serious that writing lyric well was a bona fide means to power in the Elizabethan Age. Just check out P. Sidney's resume.

The work you do to come up with convincing and fairly narrow fields of interest may also help you decide where to apply. The class I just mentioned was taught by Victoria Silver. If you read and dig her work, then Irvine would be a good addition to your list. And your application would let them know that you know the kind of work the program supports. Of course, singling out a faculty member in an app can be problematic. Don't suck up in your personal statement. A smart explanation of your particular interest in Early Modern should be enough to show you know how to talk to the faculty in that area.

Again, best of luck.

I would strongly reconsider applying this year; you've just begun your MA program, no? It shows a lack of commitment on your part if you are already hoping to leave a program that you've just started at, and if schools are going to commit to funding you for ~6-8 years they want to make sure they don't get a dilettante or a flake. Also, your interests are much too broad as Zeig already explained. I also feel an incumbency to point out that everyone and their mother wants to study the modern American novel, and programs are looking for a diverse mix of foci among their students. Regarding comparative mythology, I think you could make this work if you emphasize the work of structuralists like Levi-Strauss or Northrop Frye as an antidote to Jungian obscurantism. I am a Lacanian, and mentioning Jung in anything other than a pejorative sense will get you laughed at.

Really though, now is the time for you to put your nose to the grindstone and shine. Become fluent in whatever language you are most familiar with and read tons of theory. Go to your professors' office hours and ask them questions about articles they've published. Apply for summer travel grants, if available, or any other awards/fellowships that may be offered. You have two years to make your resume spectacular so that you will be competitive at better programs. Also, if you haven't taken the Literature GRE yet, it is a test that you really need to prepare for. Schools aren't looking for a perfect score, but anything under 650 is a red flag. And, unless you are an expert of everything from Restoration Comedy to the oeuvre of Cleanth Brooks, you will find the exam difficult.

I can't find any info on this phd...where can it be found online?

Alain Badiou,

You certainly know your stuff. I'll let you have the last word of advice for Onus march.

But learning that you are a Lacanian who studies with an Irvine Comp Lit grad (from around '04) makes me think you may be at one of the several strong programs in up state NY? Maybe your Irvine faculty member also works on Lacan and questions of law in folks like Augustine, Kant, and Derrida? If so, I remember him well from grad school. We knew each other a little bit, and I've got to say that the guy is brilliant. When he talked in seminar, everybody listened. You're in good company.

thanks again guys. i appreciate the advice and insight; this has all been quite helpful.

To the original OP. I'm surprised no one on here has mentioned the economic reality of an English Ph.D. Maybe because that's not what you asked for. Regardless, I think that's an obligation of people in the field. The numbers are discouraging. From other posts above, I get the impression that jobs are attained by where you went to school instead of the quality of the work that you've produced. That's not a good sign of a healthy field. It's also not a good sign when Ph.D.'s from "top" departments spend 10 years getting the degree and the next 20 teaching English Comp at Strip Mall colleges and using their car as an office. And the reality of university economics suggests this will become more common. The beauty of the US system is that everyone can follow their dream and then change, mid-life, to pursue something else if the dream doesn't pan out. So I don't want to discourage you from pursuing the life of an academic in an English department. It can be a glam life.

Here is an excerpt from a recent article in the field (granted, its published in a conservative rag):

http://www.theamericanscholar.org/the-decline-of-the-english-department/

"Meanwhile, undergraduates have become aware of this turmoil surrounding them in classrooms, hallways, and coffee lounges. They see what is happening to students only a few years older than themselves—the graduate students they encounter as teaching assistants, freshman instructors, or “acting assistant professors.” These older students reveal to them a desolate scene of high career hopes soon withered, much study, little money, and heavy indebtedness. In English, the average number of years spent earning a doctoral degree is almost 11. After passing that milestone, only half of new Ph.D.’s find teaching jobs, the number of new positions having declined over the last year by more than 20 percent; many of those jobs are part-time or come with no possibility of tenure. News like that, moving through student networks, can be matched against, at least until recently, the reputed earning power of recent graduates of business schools, law schools, and medical schools. The comparison is akin to what young people growing up in Rust Belt cities are forced to see: the work isn’t here anymore; our technology is obsolete."