Study in blue

[j4]

Seeing hoiho's enthusiasm for his PhD application, and reading marnameow's post about wanting to study again, is really bringing home to me how much I miss studying. I originally wanted to do postgrad work in English, but my tutors talked me out of it (on the grounds that people only stood a chance of getting funding if they got a First, and they didn't think I should count on getting one); so I left, and got a job, and now I'm still in that job, and I feel as though I've achieved precisely nothing in the 3+ years I've been doing it.

The problem is, I don't think I'd know how to study any more. And I certainly wouldn't know how to begin writing about my "current research interests" as I'd have to do if I wanted to apply to do postgrad study -- basically, looking at the application forms and requirements, I need to be doing research in order to start doing research. Which means I should be doing it in my spare time while I'm working ... and I simply don't have the energy. Which, of course, means I'm not capable of doing postgrad study anyway: if I can't make the time/energy to study now, there's no way I could do a postgraduate degree.

I have so many ideas for things I want to write about, but I no longer seem to be able to put them into words. And if I do try to put them into words, the ideas seem to shrink and shrink until they're the kind of ideas that 14-year-olds would scorn to bother with for GCSE coursework.

I wish I could just make myself accept the fact that I'm not an intellectual, and never will be. Yes, I was passable at my schoolwork; that doesn't mean I can compete with adults. ... I wish I could stop thinking altogether.

Comments

[vyvyan.livejournal.com]

The criteria for awarding Firsts for exam essays at Cambridge that I've seen (in ASNaC and Linguistics) do emphasize originality. I remember when I was co-marking essays with another linguistics chap a few years ago, we often agonised over whether we could reasonably give a borderline First to an essay which was thoroughly competent, accurate, well-illustrated, well-organised, copious and highly relevant to the question, but which didn't show any evidence of original thought! We usually ended up giving them very high 2.1s instead, unless the question was particularly difficult.
So unless English at Oxford is utterly different, I'd have expected your First indicated that you demonstrated originality in your exams.