Prestige or passion? TSMGUY needs your help!

TSMGUY

The Situation

I have an offer of English Lit with Film Studies at Trinity for this September. I haven't got an offer from Cambridge (as I didn't want to apply before getting my points) but I've met the entry requirements and have a pretty good shot of getting in.

Basically, this is my problem. I hate the English Lit course at Cambridge. It's like 90% Middle and Old English and Practical Criticism for the first two years followed by a year of (slight) freedom. It's ranked 1st in the world for English, but yeah, the course is dry and boring as hell.

Trinity, on the other hand, is ranked 32nd in the world for English Lit (a very high ranking, but not even top 10, sorry for sounding like a grandiose dickhead but with a course as unemployable as English, prestige is important.) I absolutely love my course. Not only is the English Lit course way more interesting (way more modernist, way more flexible, study abroad option etc.) but I also get to do TSM (hence the name lol) and get a joint degree in Film Studies! Sadly, Cambridge doesn't do joint degrees, it's pure English Lit and that's that.

And, possibly the most pressing pro of TCD, I have a guaranteed place and I get to start next month! As a 19 year old repeat, I'd be lying if I said I wasn't eager to begin the college experience. Oh, and I ****ing love Dublin!

TL;DR
Do a lower-ranked course that I enjoy more THIS year or
Do a higher-ranked course that I don't particularly fancy next year.

It may seem blatantly obvious that the former choice is the clear one, but you have to bear in mind how many great writers have gone to Cambridge vs Trinity.

spurious

Follow your passion, every time.

BadBannana

Wait a year for Cambridge, you limey snob!

Follow your passion. Cambridge would just burn you out

Mr Rhode Island Red

Wait a year for Cambridge, you limey snob!

Rather than seeing this as having to decide between "a course in a highly-ranked college VS a course in a college a bit further down the tables" , you should see this as "a course I will enjoy VS a course I will mostly hate"

I understand that job prospects and what's going to look good on the CV in a few years are important, but your own happiness should rank way higher than those factors in making the decision.

mrkiscool2

I hate this. You do not do something in 3rd-level because you want to get a job, you do it because you want to get a better education in it. Sure, a job is usually a great thing that comes out of your advanced education, but it should be about doing something you want to learn more of. So, you should always pick the thing you want to do most. So, go to Trinity and do the course there. Do well enough in it and there will be doors open to you (post-grads, jobs etc) for you to get a career out of it!

TSMGUY

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

I hate this. You do not do something in 3rd-level because you want to get a job, you do it because you want to get a better education in it. Sure, a job is usually a great thing that comes out of your advanced education, but it should be about doing something you want to learn more of. So, you should always pick the thing you want to do most. So, go to Trinity and do the course there. Do well enough in it and there will be doors open to you (post-grads, jobs etc) for you to get a career out of it!

I agree 100% with that in theory, but in reality I'm a) working-class (single mother household, currently unemployed) and b) choosing a very impractical course even though I could have done many more practical courses with my points, so in a way I feel like I'm too poor to just "follow my dreams." I'm so confused right now. I don't see how I'm gonna decide by 5:15 tomorrow:(

Thanks to all of you guys, please keep sharing your opinions, they're very helpful. I think a pivotal moment for me was seeing a guy who got 625 contentedly choose UL. You can find absolute goobers in top top institutes and veritable geniuses in places that aren't technically prestigious like UL.

endacl

So, your choice is the best Arts degree in the world, or the 32nd best?

Choose either...

TSMGUY

endacl wrote: »

So, your choice is the best Arts degree in the world, or the 32nd best?

Choose either...

Well, now I know exactly what to do!:D:rolleyes:

randylonghorn

Wait a year for Cambridge, you limey snob!

TSMGUY wrote: »

It may seem blatantly obvious that the former choice is the clear one

As you've described it here, it is, and you've answered your own question.

TSMGUY wrote: »

but you have to bear in mind how many great writers have gone to Cambridge vs Trinity.

Cambridge didn't make them great writers, any more than Trinity made Swift, Beckett, Synge, Stoker or Kenneally into great writers. Sure, it gave them the education which helped them, but if all the Cambridge writers had swapped places with all the Trinity writers, it would have changed little.

Remember that historically Cambridge and Oxford were able to pull the cream of the crop from the UK and the empire, whereas Trinity drew mainly from Ireland itself. The number of great writers from Cambridge has far more to do with historical and social factors than it has to do with curriculum or teaching.


One thing I haven't seen you mention is current finances: surely Trinity would financially be easier?


I had thought from earlier posts that Cambridge was your "dream course" but ...

TSMGUY wrote: »

I hate the English Lit course at Cambridge. It's like 90% Middle and Old English and Practical Criticism for the first two years followed by a year of (slight) freedom.

Don't go to a course you hate the sight of, just don't (though I doubt it's really 90% Middle and Old English, even in Cambridge ... esp. as Perma and I discovered here one night that you had no clue as to what fitted under Old, Middle or Modern English ... not that you really need to know yet either).

Don't follow prestige rather than passion.

Prestige in the academic world tends to have a good pinch of snobbery thrown in (and I say that as an academic!). Also, as we discussed in a thread earlier in the year, a lot of prestige / college ranking is tied to research funding, and realistically that won't impact on you in the slightest as an undergraduate, except insofar as it funds a staffing model which allows Cambridge and Oxford to have some of the best staff : student ratios in the world.

That staff : student ratio, and being able to claim Cambridge as your alma mater, which in fairness will always impress, are about the only two factors I see in Cambridge's favour in your case.

Against that, there is the very, very convincing argument you yourself made for Trinity in your opening post.

EoghanIRL

When you graduate and start working I am sure employers will be interested in your portfolio and previous experience.
It's what you do with your degree that matters.

Can I suggest you try something simple, a decisional balance.
Pros of Cambridge and cons of trinity on one side of the page and the opposite on the other.
One side of the list should be longer than the other.

Elliott S

Wait a year for Cambridge, you limey snob!

Cambridge is very oversubscribed. The entry requirements alone are likely not enough to guarantee a place. I'd say a lot of people fulfill them but, say, don't impress at interview. What will you do if you don't get the place at Cambridge? Maybe work for a year, apply to Cambrighe and reapply to TCD also (or defer), just to keep your options open.

siebey123

Wait a year for Cambridge, you limey snob!

Didn't even have to finish reading your OP before clicking the Trinity option tbh :rolleyes: Follow your passion!

reason vs religion

Elliott S wrote: »

Cambridge is very oversubscribed. The entry requirements alone are likely not enough to guarantee a place. I'd say a lot of people fulfill them but, say, don't impress at interview. What will you do if you don't get the place at Cambridge? Maybe work for a year, apply to Cambrighe and reapply to TCD also (or defer), just to keep your options open.

Roughly as many ALevel applicants who go on to get A*A*A* are rejected as accepted from Oxbridge. (Three A*'s being the equivalent of close to maximum points.) If you really care, start in Trinity and apply to UCAS while there. But banking on a place is most unwise.

TSMGUY

randylonghorn wrote: »

As you've described it here, it is, and you've answered your own question.

Cambridge didn't make them great writers, any more than Trinity made Swift, Beckett, Synge, Stoker or Kenneally into great writers. Sure, it gave them the education which helped them, but if all the Cambridge writers had swapped places with all the Trinity writers, it would have changed little.

Remember that historically Cambridge and Oxford were able to pull the cream of the crop from the UK and the empire, whereas Trinity drew mainly from Ireland itself. The number of great writers from Cambridge has far more to do with historical and social factors than it has to do with curriculum or teaching.


One thing I haven't seen you mention is current finances: surely Trinity would financially be easier?


I had thought from earlier posts that Cambridge was your "dream course" but ...

Don't go to a course you hate the sight of, just don't (though I doubt it's really 90% Middle and Old English, even in Cambridge ... esp. as Perma and I discovered here one night that you had no clue as to what fitted under Old, Middle or Modern English ... not that you really need to know yet either).

Don't follow prestige rather than passion.

Prestige in the academic world tends to have a good pinch of snobbery thrown in (and I say that as an academic!). Also, as we discussed in a thread earlier in the year, a lot of prestige / college ranking is tied to research funding, and realistically that won't impact on you in the slightest as an undergraduate, except insofar as it funds a staffing model which allows Cambridge and Oxford to have some of the best staff : student ratios in the world.

That staff : student ratio, and being able to claim Cambridge as your alma mater, which in fairness will always impress, are about the only two factors I see in Cambridge's favour in your case.

Against that, there is the very, very convincing argument you yourself made for Trinity in your opening post.

God, you're never gonna let me live down calling Beowulf Old English instead of Middle English, are you?:rolleyes: But it's not an exaggeration, here's the course for the first 2 years:
Mandatory modules
English Literature and its Contexts 1300-1550
Shakespeare
And you choose four from the following:

Practical Criticism and Critical Practice
Early Medieval Literature and its Contexts 1066-1350
English Literature and its Contexts 1500-1700
English Literature and its Contexts 1660-1870
English Literature and its Contexts 1830-1945, or English Literature and its Contexts 1870-Present

Elliott S

Wait a year for Cambridge, you limey snob!

reason vs religion wrote: »

Roughly as many ALevel applicants who go on to get A*A*A* are rejected as accepted from Oxbridge. (Three A*'s being the equivalent of close to maximum points.) If you really care, start in Trinity and apply to UCAS while there. But banking on a place is most unwise.

Exactly, there are so many more applicants than places, exam results alone won't guarantee a place. I don't think anyone ever assumes they will be accepted to Oxford or Cambridge. Everyone needs a contingency plan.

TSMGUY

Elliott S wrote: »

Exactly, there are so many more applicants than places, exam results alone won't guarantee a place. I don't think anyone ever assumes they will be accepted to Oxford or Cambridge. Everyone needs a contingency plan.

1 in 4 applicants for English Lit get accepted, compared to say, 1 in 8 for economics. The only courses less competitive than English are History, Theology and Classics with a 1:3 ratio. It really depends on the course. Plus, sciences and economics have an A*A*A entry requirement compared to A*AA for the humanities, so it's really not that bad.

rainbowtrout

Wait a year for Cambridge, you limey snob!

If you don't like the course it won't matter how prestigious the college is, you will be miserable.

TSMGUY

rainbowtrout wrote: »

If you don't like the course it won't matter how prestigious the college is, you will be miserable.

Starting to realize that!

Elliott S

Wait a year for Cambridge, you limey snob!

TSMGUY wrote: »

1 in 4 applicants for English Lit get accepted, compared to say, 1 in 8 for economics. The only courses less competitive than English are History, Theology and Classics with a 1:3 ratio. It really depends on the course. Plus, sciences and economics have an A*A*A entry requirement compared to A*AA for the humanities, so it's really not that bad.

1 in 4 is still pretty darn competitive though of course not all the applicants will get the required grades, so that cuts down the field even more. But it's always prudent to have a back-up. I've just finished reading a book by a first class honours Oxford English graduate and she is quite brilliant. This is the calibre of people who study English at Oxford and Cambridge.

I'd have accepted the TCD course and deferred. People will consider that selfish, I realise, but sometimes one needs to be. The points race is brutal but once someone earns the required points, it's up to them what they do with their course offer.

TSMGUY

Elliott S wrote: »

1 in 4 is still pretty darn competitive though of course not all the applicants will get the required grades, so that cuts down the field even more. But it's always prudent to have a back-up. I've just finished reading a book by a first class honours Oxford English graduate and she is quite brilliant. This is the calibre of people who study English at Oxford and Cambridge.

I'd have accepted the TCD course and deferred. People will consider that selfish, I realise, but sometimes one needs to be. The points race is brutal but once someone earns the required points, it's up to them what they do with their course offer.

Thanks for the vote of confidence!:D Was it by Victoria Coren by any chance?

Elliott S

Wait a year for Cambridge, you limey snob!

TSMGUY wrote: »

Thanks for the vote of confidence!:D Was it by Victoria Coren by any chance?

Well, I have no idea of your abilities! I'm just saying the bar is high. It was Kate Gross, she wrote a memoir when she was dying of cancer. I have never seen someone so in love with the written word as her before and with such a breadth of knowledge on the subject.

randylonghorn

Wait a year for Cambridge, you limey snob!

TSMGUY wrote: »

God, you're never gonna let me live down calling Beowulf Old English instead of Middle English, are you?:rolleyes:

The other way round! :rolleyes:

TSMGUY wrote: »

But it's not an exaggeration, here's the course for the first 2 years:
Mandatory modules
English Literature and its Contexts 1300-1550
Shakespeare Modern (Early Modern, if you want to break it down further)
And you choose four from the following:

Practical Criticism and Critical Practice
Early Medieval Literature and its Contexts 1066-1350
English Literature and its Contexts 1500-1700 (Early) Modern
English Literature and its Contexts 1660-1870 Modern
English Literature and its Contexts 1830-1945, or English Literature and its Contexts 1870-Present Modern

More of an emphasis on earlier stuff than most universities all right; I would love it tbh.

TSMGUY

randylonghorn wrote: »

The other way round! :rolleyes:



More of an emphasis on earlier stuff than most universities all right; I would love it tbh.

"all right", is that Old English for "Alright" now that we're being smartasses?:D

Pssshhhh, I guess as much as I love literature, the course just isn't right for me. I don't have much of an interest in the part of the literary canon that Cambridge focuses on but I do love the University and the third year (part II of the Tripos.)

I think I have my solution - I'll do Philosophy at Cambridge for 2 years and then switch to English in Year 3!

Thank you for the many sensible suggestions, guys. It seems I'm even more of a limey snob than an eejit, and I'm a fairly big eejit:pac:

EDIT: Wtf, "all right" is apparently the proper form of "alright" when written. All righty then.

randylonghorn

Wait a year for Cambridge, you limey snob!

TSMGUY wrote: »

EDIT: Wtf, "all right" is apparently the proper form of "alright" when written. All righty then.

TSMGUY

randylonghorn wrote: »

I want to slap you in the face and slam your head against a desk, so take your pick:D

randylonghorn

Wait a year for Cambridge, you limey snob!

Like my t-shirt?

TSMGUY

randylonghorn wrote: »

Like my t-shirt?

God, I bet the women can't resist you wearing that ultra cool T-shirt and reading Canterbury Tales like a boss, randylongscarf.

rainbowtrout

Wait a year for Cambridge, you limey snob!

TSMGUY wrote: »

God, I bet the women can't resist you wearing that ultra cool T-shirt and reading Canterbury Tales like a boss, randylongscarf.

Well once it's not Catcher in the Rye......:pac:

TSMGUY

Boy, was I wrong about Chaucer, Randy. I found this cool line by line Harvard translation of Canterbury Tales and it's actually interesting as hell. With the kinds of professors they have over at Cambridge, I'll probably love the course. English at Cambridge it is (hopefully:D)


http://sites.fas.harvard.edu/~chaucer/teachslf/tr-index.htm

spurious

In 'ye olden days' we all read Chaucer, albeit abridged.
Three library books every two weeks on top of whatever we were reading at school. Those were the days.

TSMGUY

spurious wrote: »

In 'ye olden days' we all read Chaucer, albeit abridged.
Three library books every two weeks on top of whatever we were reading at school. Those were the days.

Yeah, but Netflix didn't exist back then. Between watching Dallas and The Riordans, your generation had feck all else to do for entertainment!

Bazinga_N

spurious wrote: »

In 'ye olden days' we all read Chaucer, albeit abridged.
Three library books every two weeks on top of whatever we were reading at school. Those were the days.

You know I was actually speaking to my friend's dad (he'd be in his late 50s) awhile back, and he told me that when he was our age he was expected to read far more than we are and far more challenging books than we have today. Is there a reason why our education system 'dumbed down', for want of a better phrase, our literature?

It seems silly to me that kids are doing the Hobbit, Private Peaceful and The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Nighttime for the Junior Cert when those books are more suitable to 11/12 year olds in primary school. There's no reason Junior Cycle students wouldn't be able to tackle King Lear, The Great Gatsby, The Plough in the Stars, etc. but instead they're not introduced to students until Leaving Cert. The Higher Level English course for Leaving Cert doesn't really tackle very challenging literary pieces either. It just seems very watered down to me. Obviously I know allowances have to be made for those not inclined towards English and Reading Skills but surely the higher level course could have more challenging literature?

I dunno really :P Maybe I'm being over-dramatic about it!! :rolleyes:

TSMGUY

Bazinga_N wrote: »

You know I was actually speaking to my friend's dad (he'd be in his late 50s) awhile back, and he told me that when he was our age he was expected to read far more than we are and far more challenging books than we have today. Is there a reason why our education system 'dumbed down', for want of a better phrase, our literature?

It seems silly to me that kids are doing the Hobbit, Private Peaceful and The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Nighttime for the Junior Cert when those books are more suitable to 11/12 year olds in primary school. There's no reason Junior Cycle students wouldn't be able to tackle King Lear, The Great Gatsby, The Plough in the Stars, etc. but instead they're not introduced to students until Leaving Cert. The Higher Level English course for Leaving Cert doesn't really tackle very challenging literary pieces either. It just seems very watered down to me. Obviously I know allowances have to be made for those not inclined towards English and Reading Skills but surely the higher level course could have more challenging literature?

I dunno really :P Maybe I'm being over-dramatic about it!! :rolleyes:

I wouldn't necessarily agree with that. T.S. Elliot, Shakespeare, The Bronte Sister and John Donne were all on the LC course in the last few years. I'd say that's a great introduction point for the canon and a very solid course for 16-18 year old students. There's always the danger of the "back in my day mentality." My grandpa (who's in his late 80's) gave me his old maths copybook from when he was my age and it was literally the exact same stuff about logarithms in my textbook.

Bazinga_N

Actually I agree that the Leaving Cert poetry course is quite tough but even with the Shakespeare it's always the same 4 texts they only ever delve into Hamlet, Macbeth, Othello and Lear. They don't ever touch on Anthony and Cleopatra or Julius Caesar or any of his other stuff.

I do agree with what you're saying about that mentality though! People often have a very romanticised vision of the past.

TSMGUY

Bazinga_N wrote: »

Actually I agree that the Leaving Cert poetry course is quite tough but even with the Shakespeare it's always the same 4 texts they only ever delve into Hamlet, Macbeth, Othello and Lear. They don't ever touch on Anthony and Cleopatra or Julius Caesar or any of his other stuff.

I do agree with what you're saying about that mentality though! People often have a very romanticised vision of the past./QUOTE]

Wasn't like that back in my day.....:rolleyes::pac:

spurious

We covered this for Inter. Cert..
http://www.angelfire.com/nv/mf/elia2/superann.htm
Make of it what you will.

Mango Joe

Just make sure you're employable afterwards..... All this running around with your pigtails floating in the breeze, follow your dreams nonsense is not guaranteed to make for a happy and financially secure future for yourself and your dear Mam who's done her best by you always.

I've seen a few people struggle for decades post graduation with degrees that don't have an actual career afterwards, it never looked like fun and it sometimes means recommencing third level courses in evenings/weekends etc while working in low paid jobs...... Perhaps I'm ill-informed and clueless as to the likely career opportunities etc - But just sayin.....

Bazinga_N

spurious wrote: »

We covered this for Inter. Cert..
http://www.angelfire.com/nv/mf/elia2/superann.htm
Make of it what you will.

What a fantastic essay! What a brilliant view of retirement and freedom. I could never imagine such a piece being shown to a Junior Cycle class today, and it's a real pity!

spurious

Bazinga_N wrote:

What a fantastic essay! What a brilliant view of retirement and freedom. I could never imagine such a piece being shown to a Junior Cycle class today, and it's a real pity!

I think we were perhaps a little young tackling it. The subject matter may have been more appropriate for LC, but gosh the essayists in the prose book had such fantastic command of the language.

TSMGUY

spurious wrote: »

We covered this for Inter. Cert..
http://www.angelfire.com/nv/mf/elia2/superann.htm
Make of it what you will.

Well, it's a great piece of writing! It doesn't look like it'd be too challenging for a good JC student though.

Mango Joe wrote: »

Just make sure you're employable afterwards..... All this running around with your pigtails floating in the breeze, follow your dreams nonsense is not guaranteed to make for a happy and financially secure future for yourself and your dear Mam who's done her best by you always.

I've seen a few people struggle for decades post graduation with degrees that don't have an actual career afterwards, it never looked like fun and it sometimes means recommencing third level courses in evenings/weekends etc while working in low paid jobs...... Perhaps I'm ill-informed and clueless as to the likely career opportunities etc - But just sayin.....

Harshly worded but very true sentiments there. I'd be lying if I said my mum would be happy with me going to TCD.

Ponguin

Kinda miss TSM guy's posts, wonder what he's up to now