6. Go fish. Apply apply apply to journals, conferences, exhibitions, performance opportunities. The reason I say 'fish' is borrowed from Tenure Hacks. This means that you are not concerned with your rate of acceptances (so, unlike baseball) but rather are concerned with the size of your catch (fishing). Of course, balance this out with research and work, and make sure that you have solid (but not necessarily 'perfect' as it is the enemy of the good) work to submit.
Its another long conversation about whether you should do huge, long projects or small, short ones, etc. but you can probably be successful with both approaches. With the long projects, publishing an initial paper about your intentions/design will help you maintain constant output through a long project. Iterative design may also help you achieve outcomes in this situation. Smaller, earlier prototypes can find local or lower profile venues, and then you can build it up.
Look at a lot of other research, documentation, and outcomes, too, with a mind of -- what gets published? What is respectable? Hit those markers. Note that published papers are not perfect. Make it as best as you can, though, within the timeframe. Remember, you're fishing, so you need a lot of lines. Not just one.
Just, focus on outcomes. Don't focus on something brilliant. Just something you can get out there. Things will go wrong for you if you focus being brilliant or coming up with the one big thing that cracks whatever open. I mean, that is a great long-term goal. But don't expect any one paper or exhibition or performance to do that. Its too much on the poor thing.
I also have this idea about "brilliant": it is something that someone else calls you. It is not a goal. "Brillance" and related blah blah feel like they are about this internal, intrinsic thing that is ultimately elusive (to me). Ugh. I can't work with that. I just think of immediate outcomes. By immediate outcomes, I don't mean publishing. I mean, "I want sound to happen when I dance now". Then I can elaborate, look at consequences, how does that help people, etc. I try to remove the aim of brilliance.
7. Arts-specific. Make your documentation beautiful and professional-looking. This is duh, but really, this should be a very high priority. People in the visual arts know this but those in other areas don't always get the kind of training, esp. in video. Your documentation is more important than your performance, in terms of career. More people will see it.
Look at a lot of people's documentation in your field and evaluate what they did. That is really helpful. Your documentation should not look like student work. Your aim is for everything to look highly professional at all times.
8. Have a website and social media presence. It doesn't have to be incredibly up to date at all points but it should NOT be like, a year, since you last updated it. When you update your CV, update your website. Don't go crazy on the tech or design. Just get one up and make sure it looks professional. There's so many easy tools. It does not have to look unique. This is basically a must in the arts.
Like CVs, go through and look at everyone's website in your field. Look at what they do and don't include. Note that blogging, etc. can be a route to raise your profile, even outside of the arts. Put it in perspective, though.
Like CVs, go through and look at everyone's website in your field. Look at what they do and don't include. Note that blogging, etc. can be a route to raise your profile, even outside of the arts. Put it in perspective, though.
9. Do just enough service things. Weight them at the start of your grad career. Don't organize local/school things (unless you will teach organizing or it is directly useful to your path, eg. directing/conducting an ensemble) past your 2nd or 3rd year. You can get away with doing no service or organization or leadership ever but it will give you super valuable skills that you will need later. For instance, if you're a scientist, eventually you want manage your own lab, etc. It will be better to get these skills earlier rather than later. Same is true for ensembles, etc.
10. More arts-specific. Local and low-prestige showings and performances have very limited value on your CV, so while they perform other functions (a way to get good documentation, community engagement, etc.), no amount of local and low-profile venues can substitute for high or medium profile outcomes. Of course, there are exceptions for particular fields and work, etc. but if you are in those fields, you probably know. As a general rule, it holds. So prioritize your time. I learned this the hard way. If you are an artist, you want a national or really, international profile. That is what will make you hire-able.
11. Take the time that you need. Somehow I meet a lot of people who expect to finish in 3-4 years. OK. I don't know that many people that graduated within that timeframe, much less people who were competitive in academia. There are a few, so hats off to them. The exception is the MFA, but note -- not the DMA for composition (from what I can tell, a phd is more common, so you better be competitive with them).
It seems (from my experience) that if you take 5-6 years to do a doctorate, you can get away with low or no publishing/conference attendance for the initial years (1-3 years?) of schooling. Is this the best (tm) plan? I don't know. I do think some time to just develop and explore is pretty valuable in the long run. I should note that if you are taking these years to develop and figure things out or do a huge project, that I had a few outcomes from my Master's and in-between, so I started with initial outcomes and so that is what my experience is representative of. But I still think it is OK and that time without pressure can allow you to develop into something more outstanding/interesting.
That's why, even if you are in a 3-year program (in theory I was -- ha.) it may be valuable to take more time if that is possible. Thus, you may need to search for funding. And -- btw, there are few downsides to learning to get your own funding. If you actually want to get into academia you will have to do it!
12. Don't overwork. Always sleep. If you pull an all-nighter, make sure it is actually worth it -- like a very competitive conference deadline, an exhibition that you have to be ready for, etc. And only on the last day. I only do 55 or 60-hr work days the week before a deadline, and sometimes not even then. (Counting working only as hours I am actually doing work - I try to be as rigorous as possible when recording them).
Don't over-prepare for things that are just jumping through hoops. Be prepared. But in the end, they are requisites that everyone has. Unlike many, I advocate keeping your GPA up if you are at a GPA-having grad school. The reason is that many fellowships, etc. continue to look at your GPA (eg. Fulbright) so I think it is worth it. But really assess what it will take to get an A and then what it is worth it to your research/development. Make sure you prioritize things appropriately.
For instance, I made sure I was prepared for my dissertation defense. I didn't kill myself. I did enough to do pretty well. I didn't lose a single hour of sleep. BUT I killed myself for my job talk. I got tons of feedback, etc. and researched and went the extra mile. And note that the job talk was competitive -- the defense was not.
Have something outside of academia that you prioritize the same or more. Your dog or cat. Your boyfriend. Tango. Getting too caught up in whether you will be successful, whether you are ACTUALLY A REAL MUSICIAN OMFG AM I? or scientist or researcher whatever is the death spiral. Having other things builds resilience. It builds creativity. It lets you enjoy work. Really the way I think of it is that: the other parts of my life are fuel for my work. I need them or I have no fuel. And, honestly, vice versa!
Also, I just heard something in a podcast which I liked. I don't have work-life balance -- I just notice imbalances that reflect my current priorities. And then I correct when things are out of whack. Things are always getting out of balance -- that's just how it is! It's a process.
11. Take the time that you need. Somehow I meet a lot of people who expect to finish in 3-4 years. OK. I don't know that many people that graduated within that timeframe, much less people who were competitive in academia. There are a few, so hats off to them. The exception is the MFA, but note -- not the DMA for composition (from what I can tell, a phd is more common, so you better be competitive with them).
It seems (from my experience) that if you take 5-6 years to do a doctorate, you can get away with low or no publishing/conference attendance for the initial years (1-3 years?) of schooling. Is this the best (tm) plan? I don't know. I do think some time to just develop and explore is pretty valuable in the long run. I should note that if you are taking these years to develop and figure things out or do a huge project, that I had a few outcomes from my Master's and in-between, so I started with initial outcomes and so that is what my experience is representative of. But I still think it is OK and that time without pressure can allow you to develop into something more outstanding/interesting.
That's why, even if you are in a 3-year program (in theory I was -- ha.) it may be valuable to take more time if that is possible. Thus, you may need to search for funding. And -- btw, there are few downsides to learning to get your own funding. If you actually want to get into academia you will have to do it!
12. Don't overwork. Always sleep. If you pull an all-nighter, make sure it is actually worth it -- like a very competitive conference deadline, an exhibition that you have to be ready for, etc. And only on the last day. I only do 55 or 60-hr work days the week before a deadline, and sometimes not even then. (Counting working only as hours I am actually doing work - I try to be as rigorous as possible when recording them).
Don't over-prepare for things that are just jumping through hoops. Be prepared. But in the end, they are requisites that everyone has. Unlike many, I advocate keeping your GPA up if you are at a GPA-having grad school. The reason is that many fellowships, etc. continue to look at your GPA (eg. Fulbright) so I think it is worth it. But really assess what it will take to get an A and then what it is worth it to your research/development. Make sure you prioritize things appropriately.
For instance, I made sure I was prepared for my dissertation defense. I didn't kill myself. I did enough to do pretty well. I didn't lose a single hour of sleep. BUT I killed myself for my job talk. I got tons of feedback, etc. and researched and went the extra mile. And note that the job talk was competitive -- the defense was not.
Have something outside of academia that you prioritize the same or more. Your dog or cat. Your boyfriend. Tango. Getting too caught up in whether you will be successful, whether you are ACTUALLY A REAL MUSICIAN OMFG AM I? or scientist or researcher whatever is the death spiral. Having other things builds resilience. It builds creativity. It lets you enjoy work. Really the way I think of it is that: the other parts of my life are fuel for my work. I need them or I have no fuel. And, honestly, vice versa!
Also, I just heard something in a podcast which I liked. I don't have work-life balance -- I just notice imbalances that reflect my current priorities. And then I correct when things are out of whack. Things are always getting out of balance -- that's just how it is! It's a process.
No comments:
Post a Comment