next »

[frencrit11]

I'm working on my statement of purpose for admissions applications for French PhD programs.  I'm curious about the (dis)advantage of admitting weakness in the SOP. 

In my case, I am applying for French PhD's, but I have a more extensive experience with English literature.  My interests are not only in English Lit (otherwise, why in the world would I be apply to French programs?!?) but the courses I took at my undergrad institution which most directly relate to my research interests, the representation/ moment/ history of rape in lit, have predominately surfaced through my readings of English works.

Should I go out and read a few french novels and crit to be able to include more on French lit and rape, or should I confess this lack?

Thanks!  (These forums are quite wonderful for the anxious applicant!)

[zharkov]

I'm not in French Lit, but generally speaking, your statement should show some familiarity, while showing your areas as one in which you're able to grow into, as it were. 

That said, don't, whatever you do, go for a PhD in French Lit unless you are fully funded.  And investigate the job market very, very carefully.

[seniorscholar]

I'm not sure that specifying a theme or issue in your statement of purpose is a good idea in any literary field. Granted I'm in English, not French, but as graduate director all of the SoPs I saw that took that approach were unconvincing -- for exactly the reason you name: the person who does not have any graduate degree is not yet aware of the range, the resources, and the questions likely to produce a publishable dissertation. Since part of the reason for requiring a statement of purpose is to figure out which of the faculty members should be asked to be second reader of your application (because that person would be likely to direct your dissertation and we specifically ask "would you be eager to work with this appplicant?" on the rating form), and the rest of it is to see if you actually have any knowledge of the field or are proposing to write (as an applicant once did) on "the problem of evil in literature" or on "an issue that has not yet been studied . . . [and then naming one that's been the subject of five major books in the past 3 years]" it would be much more useful to, first, specify a genre and period (since that's generally how faculty are organized) and, sometimes, a critical/theoretical approach to apply to that genre and period and leave the specifics for later.

[polly_mer]

Don't admit weakness in a statement of purpose.  The point of the statement is to convince the committee to pick you for that fully funded slot in the area of your interest.  Therefore, you need to focus on making a very strong case for why you are the one who deserves that slot.

[dellaroux]

Also, you're presuming to know the degree of incidence of accounts of rape in French literature without having read enough in the field to even know if that's correct or not.

You might find enough references to pull a dissertation out of them, but then again, you might not.

What if there are only enough references for a reasonable conference paper and an article? What if French approaches to sexuality, gendered power and forced intimacy are so different as not to make sense of the topic as you expect from your background in English approaches?

Then you might have a good comparative lit study, but not one in French literature. (Not saying that's necessarily true, but it could be, and you wouldn't know, although the screening committee would, because they know French lit, and they'd know you didn't...perhaps.)

Mes deux centimes...

[frencrit11]

So much helpful info!  I have a tendency to work backwards... thank you all for calling attention to this error. 

I'm gathering that I need to focus on the specific literature/ time I want to write.  What if that is not something I know for sure?

I have strong interests in literary theory and am applying to programs with an emphasis on theory.  Is it acceptable to discuss the theories I want to work with?  For example:

"I am interested in the ramification of postmodernity on conceptions of “sex,” incest, and rape.  How does this reconfiguration of culture and society translate in the world of sexual behavior, more specifically sexually history in literature?"

I know people already talk about this--- so is it okay that I just want to join that conversation?  Should I add some new spin to it, or would it be enough to suggest a time period from which I want to consider the texts?

[dellaroux]

That sounds like you're getting somewhere. Inductive thinking is a valid mode of thinking, you just then have to pull the final sentence in any paragraph to the top for it to make sense for the deductive folks.

In fact you might then want to pick two historical periods--say--very randomly, early modern French and 19th c. French (which was at times also looking backwards at the middle ages--Hugo, for example) and trace differences between them to give some dynamic muscularity to your work. (also gives you a couple of teaching areas and some useful side-stuff if you're into visual sources, cultural history, etc.)

But you do need to do a lot of reading in and around your potential topics, and I'd suggest doing a lot of internet searching and maybe even try to do a couple of intense courses or campus visits/interviews at places where this kind of information can be considered and discussed seriously. (Middlebury comes to mind...)

And definitely make some connections with French speakers, libraries and food by going there...that's the whole purpose of doing anything with French, anyway, isn't it?  :--}

[litcrittr82]

OP, a small point from an English lit. grad student: you obviously want to be very careful with your language in the SoP, but I think you have to be extra careful with your language anytime you're writing anything about 'postmodern/ity/ism' and 'culture.'  You say you'll be applying to particularly theory-oriented programs (and most French and comp. lit. programs are heavily theoretical to begin with), so you should expect that most of the applicants you're competing with will be using these kinds of terms, some more lucidly than others.  These terms have lost a lot of their currency, even in theoretical crowds, since the days of Cixous and Baudrillard, so much so that it's not uncommon to find conference panels in literary fields dedicated to, for example, fleshing out the function of floating signifiers like 'culture.' 

With this in mind, when you use these terms in your SoP, make sure you're grounding them and specifying where possible.  For example, and I'm just making up silly examples, if you're talking about 'French culture,' maybe you're actually talking about the cultures of political upheaval in Paris '68, or literary culture, or cyberculture, etc.; or if you're talking about the ramifications of postmodernism, maybe you're really talking about the ramifications of late capitalism as described by Jameson, or of postmodern aesthetic shifts, etc.  IMHO, if you use the terms responsibly, you're more likely to stand out in the crowd and demonstrate that you're aware that a big part of doing theory is recognizing that the tools and the terms are almost always problematic.

[frencrit11]

Thank you both for your feedback. I am always weary of the using words like postmodern/ity/ism/ and played with it for only a second before writing it here. 
I'm planning to work my SoP draft with a few of the grad students at my undergrad institution and two supportive professors to catch these over simplifications/ generalizations.

I guess my big concern is sounding too specific, and then not getting into a school because my interests don't mesh with the research of the faculty/ are outdated/ overdone.  And to be honest, my interests are broad, and hopefully will be greatly shaped/ directed by whatever graduate program I attend.

I guess this goes back to the original question of this post--- is it better to clearly articulate what I know I want to do and then make sophisticated, if not the most committed, conjectures about the rest?  I.e. time periods and specific theories/ists I may study?

Is it more advantageous to devise a specific research project to present in the SoP?

[expatinuk]

I had a statement of puspose... but I got some cream for it and ended up with a purpose in life.

[frencrit11]

Now, I would be very interested in such a cream... Where exactly does one buy this life-granting product?
:)

[randomwalk]

I think it is ok if it makes you comfortable, but remember that it is more important to show your advantage when you apply. Unless there is specified requirement for personal weakness, you can skip it.

[pink_]

Don't admit weaknesses unless, as another poster has said, you are specifically asked to identify one in a prompt.  No one else is going to be pointing out their flaws, so don't shoot yourself in the foot by pointing out yours.

The one exception here would be if you had some kind of serious issue in your undergrad career that affected your GPA (a parent died or a serious illness or something) or if this experience led to a brilliant realization that has motivated you to earn the degree.  Even still, you're taking a risk.

[commcycle]

The one exception here would be if you had some kind of serious issue in your undergrad career that affected your GPA

What is a serious GPA issue? I know it depends on the program, but generally speaking. Below a 3, certainly, but any other guidelines?

[tchan]

This is an interesting thread-- I am writing my SOP now and have thought of the same thing.  One program I am applying to explicitly states something like "Also point out any weaknesses you have.  We appreciate honest self-appraisal."  I have been wondering how genuine this is.  For example, I suck at one of the required languages for my program, even though I have studied it for 2 yrs.  Should my SOP say "Seriously, I blow at xxx language."  Or are they looking for those fake, job-interview weaknesses that are really strengths, like "I work too hard," or "I'm too goal oriented." I imagine such statements would be immediately seen through by anyone with half a brain. Ya' never know though.