Decision Time- To Harvard or not to Harvard?

In case you hadn't heard, I finally got letters back from Harvard and Brandeis, two places I applied to, to do master's degrees.

Both offered me places. History at Brandeis, Teacher Education Program at Harvard. Both are incredible schools (one a little more so than the other).

Both cost a small fortune to attend.

I thought figuring out which schools to apply to, and what to study there was hard; now I am faced with difficult task of deciding what I actually want to commit myself to doing. Where do I want to be? What do I want to be doing? Where do I want to end up? And of course, how much am I going to be getting into debt?

So, I have lots of thinking to do. And I would certainly appreciate any comments of any type from anyone out there. Do I pick one over the other? Or do I reject both, and focus on trying to find a job? I suppose the biggest pro of being offered a place, is that it is something set in stone; it's a guaranteed way for me to get another visa and stay here in the US. On the other hand, I wouldn't be staying here in Madison, WI, a place I truly love, and the place where my apartment and my beautiful girlfriend Nicole are.

I know I would really enjoy doing an MA in History. I love practically all aspects of the subject, and felt throughout my undergraduate degree that I would love to be doing more. Exploring wider periods and places, and going deeper into the topics I love. But, though Brandeis could reduce my tuition my $19,000, I would still have to pay $20,000 myself, plus living expenses. Boston is not cheap.

Furthermore, I am not really sure how much getting an MA in History would advance my career prospects, or my life goals (not that I really know what they are!) After all, many BA graduates in History don't really know what to do with their degree, so what difference would an MA really make, besides putting me a little ahead of others and giving me a Master's Degree.

So while I know I would have a great year at Brandeis, I can't help but feel it just wouldn't really get me anywhere.

Harvard on the other hand is different. I think the biggest draw about Harvard is that it is the number one university in the world. Number One. That really is something incredible, definitely not something to take lightly. Any kind of degree from Harvard will surely benefit me, whatever I choose to do.  But even with financial aid, Harvard would still be $30,000. And whose to say I would enjoy it there- Ivy Leagues do seem to have a certain type of air about them, and based on what I saw in The Social Network recently, I can't really say it appealed. Of course, that was "fiction".

Harvard would provide me with a Master's degree which I could put to work; namely, giving me a M.Ed. and training me as a teacher. But is that really what I want to do? I have always thought I would make a very good teacher, and the experience I have had in that field has always been rewarding and enjoyable. But I never really "studied" the area, and it has never been a strong desire of mine. More of just a fall back. Do I really want to spend time and money on something I don't have super strong feelings about? Plus, I would have to attend a summer school, and would only be qualified to teach in Massachusetts. I would have to go through more time, training and cost in order to teach in the UK or anywhere else in the US.

Still, it's Harvard!

I initially wanted to apply to the Kenendy School of Government at Harvard, but those programs were only really suitable for those with more work experience than I had. So I decided to wait on that one. Hopefully in a few years time.

I suppose ideally, I'd like to be working towards getting more experience. And saving up. That way I have a better chance of affording Grad school. However, there is no guarantee that I could get a job. I'd love one here, but I just don't know if that is possible; there is no guarantee I would even find one in the UK. Grad school does offer some security at least.

Basically, it all boils down to the fact that, I really don't know. Perhaps I should take the advice one very very wise man once said to me: "If there is a doubt, there is no doubt"

Wisconsin... it crops up everywhere!

By this, I don't mean all the recent news concerning the whole collective bargaining debate, although that did place the state on the international news agenda. Instead I refer simply to the fact that Wisconsin, and perhaps UW-Madison in particularly, have an uncanny habit of cropping up left, right and centre in a wide variety of sources.

Take this recent news article, just one example of a strange story to come out of this cheese state.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/feb/14/vatican-official-sighting-virgin-mary?INTCMP=SRCH

 

Whenever I was reading history or politics books for my degree, I always found that Wisconsin or UW-Madison made an appearance, a recurring appearance, in such diverse topics as Civil Rights, Manifest Destiny theory, gender interactions, and US foreign policy. It often popped up in the most random of places. A very popular university.

Pop culture has a great knack for referring to the state too, in more examples than when someone mentions something about cheese or cows! In 2012, the disaster movie for example, when a tsunami takes out California, the couple there announce their regret at leaving Wisconsin. Later, Wisconsin becomes the new geographic North Pole! In Love Actually, the young protagonist heads out to America to seek his fortune and a new girlfriend, and ends up in our very own Milwaukee, WI.

Donna Moss in the West Wing, and Andrew Shepard, US President in The American President, are fictional alumni of UW-Madison (thanks Aaron Sorkin!), as is Harry Crane from the TV show Mad Men, and characters in Definitely, Maybe and He's Just Not That Into You (Affleck actually wears a Bucky Badgers shirt!)

That's not to the mention the long list of actual alumni, including Dick Cheney, Charles Lindbergh and Michael Mann.

Of course, Wisconsin is famous for it's Green Bay Packers Team, and UW-Madison Football and Basketball teams.

Now naturally, other states and universities get mentioned in pop culture too, but I just can't help but notice the relative prevalence of Wisconsin. Not that this is a scientific study or anything. I could just pay attention more when I hear Wisconsin!

Any other stories of Wisconsin cropping up people want to share? Comments appreciated as ever.

Anyone know any vocal coaches/speech therapists?

You see I have this thing. It's kind of ingrained in me. Sometimes it fades, sometimes it super strong. Kind of depends on who I am talking to. Sometimes it makes people laugh. Sometimes they just look confused. Some people think it's a little ugly. Some think it's endearing. Some may even say cute.

Either way, I need to learn to control it. Turn it on, turn it off.

I am talking about my British accent. And I need to find someone who can help me master a "standard" American accent. Kind of like the Midwest accent- only without the nasal aspect.

I need to master it, in order to get hired at an acting agency. Apparently I am a good actor, with a warming, engaging smile. But I say words funny sometimes.

So I need someone to teach me, like legitimately teach me, to speak American.  Hopefully it won't cost me too much to hire an accent coach, or someone like that. If anyone out there knows anyone like this, in Madison or at the UW- please let me know!

Thank you! I'm off to work on that accent now..!

Mother Nature

Can we ever be truly be prepared for what the forces of nature can throw at us? Volcano eruptions, hurricanes, tornadoes, cyclones, droughts, floods. And of course earthquakes and tsunamis.

If the recent disaster in Japan tells us anything, it is that no matter how well we prepare, how much time and money we spend, nature can outwit us, and destroy everything we have worked towards. She is truly a phenomenal force.

Would you be more willing to respect nature- recycling more, wasting less water, reducing emissions- if anything like what happened in Japan happened to you?

Perhaps what worries me most about the disaster in Japan is that it is just one of many fault line earthquakes which happened in the past month or so. Christchurch and Japan were the big ones, but there have been smaller ones reported too. Something is certainly going on down there, under the Earth's crust, and it makes me wonder what the future will hold. Don't things come in threes? Will there be another large quake soon?

We certainly thought about that while we were in California last week, chilling out on the old San Andreas fault line. The last major Earthquake there hit in 1994, in the Northridge area. (Ask Nicole for more details on that one). Many have said it's long overdue another.

When I first visited Cali (by first I mean that I can actually remember being there) a couple of years ago, there was a small earthquake the first day I got there. At the time, I wondered what it was, and thought it was kind of cool. Having now seen the kind of destruction it wrought in Japan, cool is no longer the word I think of.

Still, in some ways, disasters like the ones that befell New Zealand and Japan can bring out the best in people. Everyone chips in to help out, camaraderie holds the nation together, and rebuilding- buildings, infrastructure, lives- soon gets under way.

Though it perhaps doesn't seem that way, the most abstract news I saw regarding the Japanese disaster concerned stock prices. I suppose it's only natural, but it seemed strange to me that in the face of such catastrophe, people thought about their money. Barrels of oil went down in price, as speculators predicted a fall in demand from Japan. Construction and raw material stocks all rose, as increased demand was expected to come from rebuilding efforts.

Makes you wonder if some evil people actually hope disasters (most notably war) happen, so they stand to increase their fortunes. It sickens me.

effect on stockprices- strange to think thats what people think about, in the face of such catastrophe.

It's an interconnected world, but it moves too fast?

As my lovely girlfriend talks about in a number of her blog posts, the technology at our fingertips makes getting news and information instant and incredibly easy. At any given time, I can log onto the BBC News website or the NYTimes and learn what is going on in the world, often at that exact moment. With Twitter, approximately every 10 seconds I get a new update from some news source or another, with a new bit of information or a new take on something. Or even a whole new story I haven't even seen yet.

It's incredible to think how much is really happening at any given time in the world, and that even with all this technology at our disposal, how much we still miss. I could spend a  whole day clicking links from just news sites, and reading the associated articles, but I would still miss a large portion of the day's news and events. Perhaps even more than half.

And that's not to mention all the untold stories and events, those which media moguls deem too trivial, or too boring, or just not worthy of being told. (Sub-Saharan Africa for example, continues to struggle with absolute poverty, unclean drinking water, corruption and violence- but, it's Old News. Been there. Done that.)

While I agree with Nicole that such instant easy news is great for the population to access, especially those people who perhaps shy away from traditional news sources, I think the fast pace of online journalism and 24 hour news has its downsides. My biggest problem is the amount I miss because everything is updated so fast. Breaking news takes the top spot on the BBC website for example, then something else happens, it's relegated to second place, then more developments in the second event prompt multiple articles, and before you know it, the first event has completely disappeared from the front page. If you didn't catch it when it happened, you have probably now missed it.

That's why I like the newspaper; even though the news is hours old by the time it reaches my door- never mind the time I actually read it- the printed material gives me time to peruse a number of stories that I would not normally have read about.

Of course, it could just be me being slow! That's true in the case of my blogging- there's something I want to write about, and I spend too much time procrastinating and doing other things, that by the time I get around to writing it, the events have come and gone and a lot of people have forgotten about it and no longer care!

Or do they?

I think that because news moves so fast, there are a number of angles to stories, particularly human interest ones, which never get heard. There is more depth to events which never quite surfaces. There is just more to be said.

So that's why I am going to keep writing about the news events that I want to, regardless of whether they are a few months old. It will be a welcome refresher, and may even make you think about something you hadn't considered before... That's if I am lucky.