Several hours later, Fellner removed the post for “legal issues” (and today he removed the post that said he had removed the post for legal issues).
Given the recent controversy here at HTMLGIANT, I have to say that what worries me about the Fellner thing is that, due to some “legal issues,” whatever those were, Fellner decided to delete his criticism of ALC; fortunately, this was an ineffective, though no less meaningful act, as the post is still widely available online (not Fellner’s fault). Thanks to Google, you may read Fellner’s post, titled “Why a Creative Writing ‘Firm’ May be the Most Unethical Entity in the Literary Community At Large,” in your Google Reader – simply follow Fellner’s blog, Pansy Poetics, and the post will show up in the feed. (Update: the Google cache snapshot is no longer accessible.) Here’s a tidbit from Fellner’s post, in which he questions the firm’s basic concept:
I’d really be interested to know more details on the legal issues behind Fellner’s removing his post.
I have more to say on this, but haven’t the time to articulate it intelligently, so for now I’ll just leave it at that.
Feel free to discuss.
II.
Given the recent controversy here at HTMLGIANT, I have to say that what bothers me about the Fellner thing is that, due to some “legal issues,” whatever those were, Fellner decided to delete his criticism of Abramson Leslie Consulting (ALC); fortunately, this was an ineffective, though no less meaningful act, as the post is still widely available online (not Fellner’s fault). Thanks to Google, you may read Fellner’s post, titled “Why a Creative Writing ‘Firm’ May be the Most Unethical Entity in the Literary Community At Large,” either as a page in Google’s cache or in your Google Reader (simply follow Fellner’s blog, Pansy Poetics, and the post will show up in the feed).
Sure, perhaps Fellner overstepped a little, grew too passionate, got carried away with the “seems corrupt,” “is evil,” and “pure greed” bits and a few assumptions he makes (“But the blog, I guess, felt compelled to disclose the numerical data to increase the anxiety of MFA applicants. That’s right: the blog its and [sic] oh-so-generous information was a strategy for providing the ultimate solution”), but I really don’t see anything that appears to be libelous in the post (note: I’m no lawyer)? Instead, I see a bunch of questions about the legitimacy of a project such as this, a firm that intends to charge $335 in order to review/respond to a fiction writer’s application portfolio, and I see someone making his negative opinion of the project publicly known. I don’t see anything wrong with that?
Nor does ALC seem to have a problem handling questions regarding its practices:
You have questions; that’s understandable. As no one has ever before tried to create a consulting firm exclusively for poets and writers, it would make sense for the exact mechanics of the thing to be the subject of some discussion
So, if questions are understandable and if discussion makes sense, then why would Fellner delete the post due to “legal issues”?
(And, obviously, I’m making the assumption here that some sort of private exchange occured between Abramson and Fellner that led to Fellner’s removing the post. Unfortunately, I have no verification that this happened, nor did I try to find out. So, I can’t stress enough how irresponsible it is of me to make this assumption.)
It would probably be best to hear from either Abramson or Fellner on the matter, so until then, I’ll simply leave the speculation at that and move on. My apologies to both Abramson and Fellner.
Instead, let’s start some discussion.
III.
First, what are the exact mechanics of this thing anyhow? Based on the website, ALC contracts work out to one of its six consulting associates, who are assigned a client. The client, who first had to be ‘accepted’ by ALC as an eligible client, then emails to the consultant his or her portfolio ($335 or $260 according to genre), or statement of purpose ($80), or a request for help “formulating a list of programs to apply to” ($75). After 14-21 days, the consultant sends the client an initial email response/evaluation of the application materials with suggestions, line-edits, and so on. The client then can set up a follow-up email or phone conference to speak further with the consultant about the comments/suggestions. Interestingly, ALC requires that clients that request a consultation make payment beforehand (other services of this sort offer a free preliminary consultation; that’s what I’ve seen anyhow). In the event of the client’s being turned down, ALC will refund the cash through the post.
A fiction writer, for example, could spend up to $490 dollars, if he or she requested all three services. That plus the $20 application fee (across, let’s say, five programs), and he or she has spent nearly $600 dollars for a chance at studying creative writing in a graduate program.
For that’s really the purpose of all this money: to help one move closer to an opportunity. Nothing more. There’s no guarantee that all of this cash will lead to an acceptance, and ALC says as much. Submission services make the same disclaimer. Writers who offer private one-to-one manuscript consultations for a fee also make the same disclaimer. In a sense, MFA programs, which can run up a graduate student’s debt load, also carry this same uncertainty. Money cannot guarantee that one’s writing will improve, or be published, or win awards.
So why spend all that money?
IV.
I do not know Seth Abramson (nor do I know Steven Fuller), but I am sort of familiar with Seth Abramson’s blog, his devotion to helping writers navigate the MFA application process (even if his careful collection of statistics sometimes makes the process more complicated than it really should be), and how much time he seems to put into the MFA world. For example, he is a pretty active commentor on the Poets&Writers MFA Programs forum; he often responds directly to fellow commentors’ questions, and he is really generous with his advice (read: it’s FREE).
I understand that, after all of the time and effort Abramson has put into studying the MFA application world, he has become an expert of sorts. He has contributed to Tom Kealey’s book. His blog gets massive hits, especially during application season. He writes for the MFA Weblog. He went to a top creative writing program. He has a new book out. And so on. Basically, he has succesfully navigated the MFA world, so it makes sense that he commands a certain amount of respect from those who wish to be a part of that world.
Furthermore, I understand that everyone’s got to support themselves. It makes sense, then, for Abramson to find a way to turn his expertise into a bit of income, right? Just like other writers try to earn some cash by running workshops, right?
But I adamantly resist ventures of this sort because they significantly, in my opinion, change the literary atmosphere from that of a community bent upon stumbling forward together to that of a weirdly competitive marketplace. ALC takes my concern with submission services, which I think hurt the writer/editor relationship as well as the little nodes of communities that surround various periodicals, and explodes it: now submitting to writing programs is a statistical problem to solve. A service that attempts to help a client impress a review board risks, whether it means to or not, giving less creedence to the art itself.
I’m not saying that Abramson Leslie Consulting is going to churn out writers with uninspired portfolios, or that its clients won’t benefit in other ways aside from simply receiving that acceptance call late one night. How could I when I haven’t even experienced a consultation with them? Nor am I saying that making money is wrong and that marketing is wrong and on and on. I only mean to say that I get worried each time I see someone take a step towards commodifying some aspect of the artistic world, especially that aspect that revolves around our inherent need to make something beautiful. So, despite the respect I hold for Abramson’s passion for the subject, I think ALC is a mistake.
V.
Which brings me to my specific concern with Abramson’s ALC. Take a look at the copy from the FAQ page of ALC’s site:
It’s important to note that Abramson Leslie is, at base, a one-on-one tutorial service, no different in aim or concept than the sort of undergraduate courses or private workshops for which young writers routinely – and with excellent results – pay some form of tuition or admission fee. We have no interest in turning creative writing into a business, or “gaming” the graduate creative writing program admissions process. Our partners and asociates are all professional writers who enjoy working with younger authors on a one-on-one basis, and who see their role as being one of guidance and instruction. We don’t aim to steer our clients toward and particular aesthetic, but rather to help clients do whatever it is they’ve chosen to do better.
I have to correct ALC here. Though ALC and undergraduate/private workshops might share similar structures, in that all three are organized based on a loose workshop model, their basic aims are quite different. The instructors of undergraduate workshops, at least those I’ve studied with, often cite as the course’s objective some variation of “this workship will help you harness traditional story-telling techniques.” The participants in private workshops with whom I’ve worked are more general in their objectives: “I’m just here to, like, improve my writing and meet people, you know.” I have yet to see a workshop leader, undergraduate or private, specifically claim that the goal of the course is for the workshop to help its participants gain admission to graduate creative writing programs. Whereas ALC specifically says that it is a firm “designed exclusively for applicants to […] Creative Writing programs” and that all of its services are executed “with an eye towards admission to the top programs in this extremely competitive field of study.” Its target clients are writers expressly interested in applying to creative writing programs.
What I’m interested to know, then, is how ALC will reconcile its intention to “help clients do whatever it is they’ve chosen to do better” with its aim to help clients get into “the top programs in this extremely competitive field of study.” How, if the field is “almost entirely subjective,” can ALC offer portfolio advice aimed at getting those clients into the targeted program? What sort of research and data exists that could possibly help a writer improve his or her writing?
I seriously don’t believe there are answers to these questions, though I’m sure Abramson has some of his own. Rather, I think these sorts of questions simply point to a greater issue regarding MFA programs and the debate surrounding them. Fellner writes, “Is the firm ridiculing the inherent nature of MFA programs? That within colleges, institutions that offer grades, art is something that [can] be measured and assesed with perfunctory, mechanical accuracy?”
VI.
I have no doubt that Abramson and his associates are committed to helping out fellow (“younger”) writers, nor do I doubt the sincerity behind their wanting to avoid “gaming” the system and “turning creative writing into a business.” But, seriously, let’s be realistic here: what is this but the very act of turning creative writing into a business?
I cannot say that I agree with Fellner regarding the evil nature of ALC, though it’s not something I’ll recommend to anyone. Instead, I’ll be happy to share with prospective MFA candidates what little I can regarding my application process/experience. It’ll cost nothing.
The following information is taken directly from the website of Abramson Leslie Consulting:
Abramson Leslie Consulting (ALC) is a creative writing program application/portfolio consulting firm launched by poet Seth Abramson and novelist Chris Leslie-Hynan. The firm currently claims, in addition to the two partners, four fiction associates (Katie Chase, Jennifer duBois, Kevin Gonzalez, and Matt Griffin) and two poetry associates (Luca Bernhardt and Jane Lewty). 100% of the contracted associates and partners of this firm graduated from the Iowa Writers’ Workshop, have published extensively, and have held fellowships/residencies.
ALC’s fees are as follows:
- $335 fiction/$260 poetry for a portfolio review, which includes an initial response from the associate regarding the portfolio and a follow-up email/phone conference.
- $75 for assistance from Seth Abramson in “formulating a list of programs to apply to.”
- $80 for “in-line commentary, suggestions for improvement, and a general critique” of the Statement of Purpose essay.
ALC will respond in 14-21 days regarding the above services.
ALC provides the following disclaimers:
Come on Ryan! I want to hear what you have to say, articulate or not.
Come on Ryan! I want to hear what you have to say, articulate or not.
I was afraid Seth Abramson had something to do with this from the title of the post. What a lecherous blight. $250-$350 for a portfolio review to see if you’re MFA material?? I’m pretty disgusted that he managed to rope in a number of IWW grads to do this with him.
With the economy the way it is, and with the Internet (kindle included) blowing everything up, it’s only sharks who would say: The MFA is the only way and we’ll let you in on how to get there for this ridiculous sum of money.
I was afraid Seth Abramson had something to do with this from the title of the post. What a lecherous blight. $250-$350 for a portfolio review to see if you’re MFA material?? I’m pretty disgusted that he managed to rope in a number of IWW grads to do this with him.
With the economy the way it is, and with the Internet (kindle included) blowing everything up, it’s only sharks who would say: The MFA is the only way and we’ll let you in on how to get there for this ridiculous sum of money.
ive not yet fully figured it out. so, youll have to wait.
ive not yet fully figured it out. so, youll have to wait.
Also good to see they expected to be flooded with so many portfolios that they reserve the right to refuse to review yours if they feel you don’t have a chance of getting into one of 300 graduate writing programs.
Also good to see they expected to be flooded with so many portfolios that they reserve the right to refuse to review yours if they feel you don’t have a chance of getting into one of 300 graduate writing programs.
80 bucks to review a one-page statement of purpose that most programs won’t even give a shit about? (Mine didn’t even read them.) Sheeeesh. Are people really this desperate for a magic feather?
80 bucks to review a one-page statement of purpose that most programs won’t even give a shit about? (Mine didn’t even read them.) Sheeeesh. Are people really this desperate for a magic feather?
hey guys, i’d like to direct you to my new email-based ‘firm’ where you email me pictures of your mouth and i tell you whether or not you need to go to the dentist. rates are really reasonable, drop me a line.
hey guys, i’d like to direct you to my new email-based ‘firm’ where you email me pictures of your mouth and i tell you whether or not you need to go to the dentist. rates are really reasonable, drop me a line.
I guarantee the only “legal reasons” were that Seth Abramson threatened to sue him.
I guarantee the only “legal reasons” were that Seth Abramson threatened to sue him.
that is fucked up.
that is fucked up.
[…] “You Can’t Make This Stuff Up” 2009 August 3 by famouspoet we at vowel movers stand behind steve fellner’s criticism of the abramson-leslie consulting firm. and we applaud HTML giant for helping others access fellner’s now defunct post. […]
Abramson and his cohorts at the (ridiculous) MFA Blog and in the (marginally useful) MFA Handbook have gone on at great lengths about how you can never really know what a school is looking for–be it a particular aesthetic, a mastery of prose, a familiarity with a certain genre or school of writing–and now this douchebag is offering to let people pay him for his useless, empty encouragement. Oh, wait, he’s going to “evaluate” the application for them and offer constructive advice. It’s so obvious and commonsense that I feel stupid for saying it, but isn’t it the MFA board’s job to evaluate the application? And if Abramson isn’t on any MFA board, how does he know his advice is worth a damn?
I really hope this ruins his career.
Abramson and his cohorts at the (ridiculous) MFA Blog and in the (marginally useful) MFA Handbook have gone on at great lengths about how you can never really know what a school is looking for–be it a particular aesthetic, a mastery of prose, a familiarity with a certain genre or school of writing–and now this douchebag is offering to let people pay him for his useless, empty encouragement. Oh, wait, he’s going to “evaluate” the application for them and offer constructive advice. It’s so obvious and commonsense that I feel stupid for saying it, but isn’t it the MFA board’s job to evaluate the application? And if Abramson isn’t on any MFA board, how does he know his advice is worth a damn?
I really hope this ruins his career.
There are no objective standards in art. I got rejected from 8 of the 9 schools I applied to and did well at the one school that accepted me. Most of my friends have some variation of that story. I fail to see how this “consulting firm” could help a writer. It’s just another group of people saying this is good or this is not good, which is essentially what an MFA admissions committee does. An MFA admission committee is group of individuals sitting around looking for work that may show promise. If your work sways those individuals you’ll be accepted. If not, rejected. An oversimplification, yes, but not by much. It’s a subjective process. To pay for another subjective process on top of the one you already are paying for is to throw money out the window.
There are no objective standards in art. I got rejected from 8 of the 9 schools I applied to and did well at the one school that accepted me. Most of my friends have some variation of that story. I fail to see how this “consulting firm” could help a writer. It’s just another group of people saying this is good or this is not good, which is essentially what an MFA admissions committee does. An MFA admission committee is group of individuals sitting around looking for work that may show promise. If your work sways those individuals you’ll be accepted. If not, rejected. An oversimplification, yes, but not by much. It’s a subjective process. To pay for another subjective process on top of the one you already are paying for is to throw money out the window.
I take it you’ve never had the displeasure of interacting with the guy?
I take it you’ve never had the displeasure of interacting with the guy?
It seems like the deletion of Fellner’s post has all but deleted this controversy from the blog-o-sphere. I read about it and was really riled up, but couldn’t find many people willing to come out and say they felt the same way as Fellner until I found this post. Let’s just say that I agree with rion. It sounds like a racket to me–I think it’s a _good thing_ that MFA programs are not law programs where you can guarantee yourself a spot in a “better” school by paying your way (maybe if there were high paying jobs promised at the end of the road that would make sense, but that’s a universe away from the oversaturated post-MFA job market, anyway.) In his comments to the most recent post, Abramson suggests that people are criticizing him because they haven’t volunteered their time to help other writers, which of course was part of Fellner’s initial criticism–that any creative writing teacher should be willing to freely give advice to his or her students.
It seems like the deletion of Fellner’s post has all but deleted this controversy from the blog-o-sphere. I read about it and was really riled up, but couldn’t find many people willing to come out and say they felt the same way as Fellner until I found this post. Let’s just say that I agree with rion. It sounds like a racket to me–I think it’s a _good thing_ that MFA programs are not law programs where you can guarantee yourself a spot in a “better” school by paying your way (maybe if there were high paying jobs promised at the end of the road that would make sense, but that’s a universe away from the oversaturated post-MFA job market, anyway.) In his comments to the most recent post, Abramson suggests that people are criticizing him because they haven’t volunteered their time to help other writers, which of course was part of Fellner’s initial criticism–that any creative writing teacher should be willing to freely give advice to his or her students.
yeah, which is why i think it was worth covering, not only because of the question of how/why it was deleted, but also because it seems like an interesting discussion to have regarding mfa programs. thanks for commenting
yeah, which is why i think it was worth covering, not only because of the question of how/why it was deleted, but also because it seems like an interesting discussion to have regarding mfa programs. thanks for commenting
Why berate someone for trying to make some money? You can’t make a living as a poet, so why not find some other way? If individuals are willing to pay for it, then there’s obviously a demand, so Abramson and co. are simply meeting that demand. Probably, it’s not on their top ten job lists, but they have found a way to use what skills they have. Abramson is a great poet who’s widely published, so I’m sure he’ll be able to help MFA applicants out.
Why berate someone for trying to make some money? You can’t make a living as a poet, so why not find some other way? If individuals are willing to pay for it, then there’s obviously a demand, so Abramson and co. are simply meeting that demand. Probably, it’s not on their top ten job lists, but they have found a way to use what skills they have. Abramson is a great poet who’s widely published, so I’m sure he’ll be able to help MFA applicants out.
your same argument, if reoutfitted with slightly different terms, could also be used for job positions such as female circumcisionist, warmonger, and heroin salesman.
your same argument, if reoutfitted with slightly different terms, could also be used for job positions such as female circumcisionist, warmonger, and heroin salesman.
One clear problem with this consulting firm is that Abramson clearly believes he has his finger on the pulse of what every faculty member at the 300 MFA programs thinks is indicative of good writing, or writing that shows promise. Really? My fear is that he and his cohorts will be advising their clients to polish up their writing–a process that can only result in trying to get clients to write in the narrow band of period styles. Is this really going to help? I did an MFA in poetry, and can be certain that the passel of poems I sent with my application was rough, raw, full of problems, but clearly appealing to the admissions committee. I can only guess, but I feel like Abramson–who is as obsessed with classification, with schools, as Silliman ever has been–would have advised me to right all my wrongs, clean things up, make my poems look more like Dean Young, Cole Swensen, etc.
One clear problem with this consulting firm is that Abramson clearly believes he has his finger on the pulse of what every faculty member at the 300 MFA programs thinks is indicative of good writing, or writing that shows promise. Really? My fear is that he and his cohorts will be advising their clients to polish up their writing–a process that can only result in trying to get clients to write in the narrow band of period styles. Is this really going to help? I did an MFA in poetry, and can be certain that the passel of poems I sent with my application was rough, raw, full of problems, but clearly appealing to the admissions committee. I can only guess, but I feel like Abramson–who is as obsessed with classification, with schools, as Silliman ever has been–would have advised me to right all my wrongs, clean things up, make my poems look more like Dean Young, Cole Swensen, etc.
This seems like the obvious step for Abramson. I remember when he came to the MFA blog, which at least originally was run by someone else, he immediately stopped all the community discussion that had gone on and turned it into a money thing. I have no idea if he made much at all, but almost every post he made included a link to his paypal and begged people to donate to him. Then he promoted his poetry book on there. Then he declared he wasn’t going to help anyone on the MFA blog unless they paid him through his website. Why was he still posting there then? Now he is making a consulting service to charge silly money to look at personal statements?
I guess people have to do what they need to do to get paid, but he has just seemed so blatant with his self-promotion.
This seems like the obvious step for Abramson. I remember when he came to the MFA blog, which at least originally was run by someone else, he immediately stopped all the community discussion that had gone on and turned it into a money thing. I have no idea if he made much at all, but almost every post he made included a link to his paypal and begged people to donate to him. Then he promoted his poetry book on there. Then he declared he wasn’t going to help anyone on the MFA blog unless they paid him through his website. Why was he still posting there then? Now he is making a consulting service to charge silly money to look at personal statements?
I guess people have to do what they need to do to get paid, but he has just seemed so blatant with his self-promotion.
This sort of service exists in every academic field, and has for years. (Disclaimer: It used to be my day job, though not in writing or arts of any kind.) I’m surprised it took this long for an MFA one to attract this much attention. Note: It’s not the first — there were already a number of mom and pop shops. Take a look in P&W Classifieds, for starters.
I find it interesting, but not surprising, that Seth’s quote cheerfully burns down “the blogging community” (by which he has to include The MFA Blog) as an information source. That’s the standard marketing model for admissions consulting: “There’s *some* information out there, we made sure of that so that you know we’re not totally talking out of our asses, but it’s not *nearly* as good as what you’ll get for a premium!”
The whole thing turns off a lot of people, sure. But the ones it doesn’t? They’ll be clients. And yeah, there’s demand (and revenue) out there.
If I could say anything to the people who read this set of comments and quietly think that maybe an MFA admissions consulting firm with a nice website and impressive-sounding credentials is worth $300+, other than “You know writing is more subjective than a lot of fields, right?” it’d be this:
Ask for client references, and talk to those references at length. If I’m reading right, only one of ALC’s eight consultants has served on an admissions committee — that would be a big hurdle for them in law, business or medicine admissions consulting. (While it’s possible to provide such a service without having slogged through the files, that experience is too valuable to ignore.) You are absolutely entitled to question and investigate the quality of the service for which you are paying. You’re entitled to know what you’ll get. Don’t let anyone intimidate you into thinking otherwise, no matter how many awards they’ve won.
This sort of service exists in every academic field, and has for years. (Disclaimer: It used to be my day job, though not in writing or arts of any kind.) I’m surprised it took this long for an MFA one to attract this much attention. Note: It’s not the first — there were already a number of mom and pop shops. Take a look in P&W Classifieds, for starters.
I find it interesting, but not surprising, that Seth’s quote cheerfully burns down “the blogging community” (by which he has to include The MFA Blog) as an information source. That’s the standard marketing model for admissions consulting: “There’s *some* information out there, we made sure of that so that you know we’re not totally talking out of our asses, but it’s not *nearly* as good as what you’ll get for a premium!”
The whole thing turns off a lot of people, sure. But the ones it doesn’t? They’ll be clients. And yeah, there’s demand (and revenue) out there.
If I could say anything to the people who read this set of comments and quietly think that maybe an MFA admissions consulting firm with a nice website and impressive-sounding credentials is worth $300+, other than “You know writing is more subjective than a lot of fields, right?” it’d be this:
Ask for client references, and talk to those references at length. If I’m reading right, only one of ALC’s eight consultants has served on an admissions committee — that would be a big hurdle for them in law, business or medicine admissions consulting. (While it’s possible to provide such a service without having slogged through the files, that experience is too valuable to ignore.) You are absolutely entitled to question and investigate the quality of the service for which you are paying. You’re entitled to know what you’ll get. Don’t let anyone intimidate you into thinking otherwise, no matter how many awards they’ve won.
thanks erin for this comment
thanks erin for this comment
blake, you’re my hero.
blake, you’re my hero.
Right, and what’s wrong with predatory for-pay agent or publishing scams? If individuals are willing to pay for it . . .
I applied to MFA programs at the same time that Seth Abramson did. Back then, I found his statistical information irrelevant at best and anxiety-inducing at worst. The most helpful advice I found back then was on Tom Kealey’s blog, before he passed it on to Abramson–don’t go into debt for an MFA and apply to places where you’d like to live. That’s the advice I pass on (freely) to former students and peers who are considering MFA degrees. Along with this: an MFA doesn’t make you a writer; writing makes you a writer. An MFA doesn’t even make you qualified for most tenure-track jobs anymore. You aren’t less of a writer if you never get an MFA. That one thing these “resources” (the MFA blog; the poets and writers speakeasy; a for-pay consulting firm, I’m sure) never tell you, but I think it’s incredibly important.
As for Seth Abramson being a “great” writer, his writing has never done a ton for me (I do like one poem, “Say the Boy”, which I’ve used in poetry classes; my students consistently hate it), but then, of course, “greatness” is subjective. Just as all tastes are subjective. Just as there’s no guarantee that a given poet will be an appropriate teacher for any given writer, there’s no guarantee that Abramson, or the other consultants, will give appropriate advice to an MFA applicant–appropriate in terms of the style of the nascent writer and appropriate in terms of the tastes of any particular admissions committee.
Right, and what’s wrong with predatory for-pay agent or publishing scams? If individuals are willing to pay for it . . .
I applied to MFA programs at the same time that Seth Abramson did. Back then, I found his statistical information irrelevant at best and anxiety-inducing at worst. The most helpful advice I found back then was on Tom Kealey’s blog, before he passed it on to Abramson–don’t go into debt for an MFA and apply to places where you’d like to live. That’s the advice I pass on (freely) to former students and peers who are considering MFA degrees. Along with this: an MFA doesn’t make you a writer; writing makes you a writer. An MFA doesn’t even make you qualified for most tenure-track jobs anymore. You aren’t less of a writer if you never get an MFA. That one thing these “resources” (the MFA blog; the poets and writers speakeasy; a for-pay consulting firm, I’m sure) never tell you, but I think it’s incredibly important.
As for Seth Abramson being a “great” writer, his writing has never done a ton for me (I do like one poem, “Say the Boy”, which I’ve used in poetry classes; my students consistently hate it), but then, of course, “greatness” is subjective. Just as all tastes are subjective. Just as there’s no guarantee that a given poet will be an appropriate teacher for any given writer, there’s no guarantee that Abramson, or the other consultants, will give appropriate advice to an MFA applicant–appropriate in terms of the style of the nascent writer and appropriate in terms of the tastes of any particular admissions committee.
I don’t see what the problem is with our business venture.
We have constructed the apparatus necessary to create a need for our firm by producing pro-Iowa and anti-Columbia rating systems, fragmenting and hyping the MFA application process, the same process by which one applies to any less romantic program, such as ones in forestry or French, establishing a superficial online community grounded in a single messianic individual who, despite is Ivy League education, is “poor,” though eminently published, and attempted to quantify a subjective process.
Soon you will see we are correct, and we will to join in on our future ventures, where we will offer consulting in the following areas: applications for dentures, orthopedic shoes, and cabbage farms.
I don’t see what the problem is with our business venture.
We have constructed the apparatus necessary to create a need for our firm by producing pro-Iowa and anti-Columbia rating systems, fragmenting and hyping the MFA application process, the same process by which one applies to any less romantic program, such as ones in forestry or French, establishing a superficial online community grounded in a single messianic individual who, despite is Ivy League education, is “poor,” though eminently published, and attempted to quantify a subjective process.
Soon you will see we are correct, and we will to join in on our future ventures, where we will offer consulting in the following areas: applications for dentures, orthopedic shoes, and cabbage farms.
My main problem is the lawsuit thingy- did this guy really threaten to sue someone for being critical of his enterprise? That just makes my skin crawl. So, all the discussion is interesting- especially phoebe and erin’s comments, I thought– but did he threaten to SUE? He’s a bad man if so.
This sort of concierge application service is not new. In almost every field there are “consultants” who will help you apply to college or medical school or law school or help you get a job in a given field or help you live your best life. Whatever. On some level, it is probably distasteful, but to go to the female circumcisionist extreme is also distasteful and a little insulting to… I don’t know, women who have been circumcised. It’s not even remotely the same thing to equate a service that helps people apply to MFA programs with a brutal practice that mutilates a woman’s genitals.
Sometimes, people need (or think they need) a leg up to get into programs and what have you. Sometimes people don’t know what it takes to apply to graduate school and they don’t have mentors who can show them the way. Others might be lazy and not want to use Google and the public library to find the information that they will likely pay for using the Abramson service. Does it really matter? I think this sort of service is crazy, and overpriced and not for me, but I don’t begrudge it’s existence.
This sort of concierge application service is not new. In almost every field there are “consultants” who will help you apply to college or medical school or law school or help you get a job in a given field or help you live your best life. Whatever. On some level, it is probably distasteful, but to go to the female circumcisionist extreme is also distasteful and a little insulting to… I don’t know, women who have been circumcised. It’s not even remotely the same thing to equate a service that helps people apply to MFA programs with a brutal practice that mutilates a woman’s genitals.
Sometimes, people need (or think they need) a leg up to get into programs and what have you. Sometimes people don’t know what it takes to apply to graduate school and they don’t have mentors who can show them the way. Others might be lazy and not want to use Google and the public library to find the information that they will likely pay for using the Abramson service. Does it really matter? I think this sort of service is crazy, and overpriced and not for me, but I don’t begrudge it’s existence.
As a person who got into an MFA and was rejected by MFAs and now reads applications for grad school in CW, what exactly is being sold by these people? It’s pretty damn obvious how to get in. Remember the three rules of real estate: location, location, location? Here are the three rules of getting in CW grad school, any level: writing sample, writing sample, writing sample.
Hello.
And shotgun your approach. Law of big numbers, people. Apply all over.
Write solid, get in.
Now send me a check.
S
As a person who got into an MFA and was rejected by MFAs and now reads applications for grad school in CW, what exactly is being sold by these people? It’s pretty damn obvious how to get in. Remember the three rules of real estate: location, location, location? Here are the three rules of getting in CW grad school, any level: writing sample, writing sample, writing sample.
Hello.
And shotgun your approach. Law of big numbers, people. Apply all over.
Write solid, get in.
Now send me a check.
S
The problem, Roxane, is that naive writers are very susceptible to scams because writers tend to get desperate. Especially if they have been toiling away for years without any success whatsoever and no information about how to reach that success. Think about the vanity press (an old favorite.), the National Library of Poetry, Michael J. Duckett…check out Preditors & Editors, the list goes on. Somebody mentioned that Abramson has in the past stressed that applying to MFA programs is subjective, so what sort of council can he give someone in entering a this sort of process?
And (good lord, I’m about to defend Blake Butler) I don’t think Blake was attempting to say Abramson’s project was as bad a female circumcisionist’s. I think he was saying the argument that an enterprise is A-OK because it might make money is a deeply flawed and cynical one. The argument is used all the time to defend the crack trade.
The problem, Roxane, is that naive writers are very susceptible to scams because writers tend to get desperate. Especially if they have been toiling away for years without any success whatsoever and no information about how to reach that success. Think about the vanity press (an old favorite.), the National Library of Poetry, Michael J. Duckett…check out Preditors & Editors, the list goes on. Somebody mentioned that Abramson has in the past stressed that applying to MFA programs is subjective, so what sort of council can he give someone in entering a this sort of process?
And (good lord, I’m about to defend Blake Butler) I don’t think Blake was attempting to say Abramson’s project was as bad a female circumcisionist’s. I think he was saying the argument that an enterprise is A-OK because it might make money is a deeply flawed and cynical one. The argument is used all the time to defend the crack trade.
Yeah, I’m not picking up what is unethical here: there isn’t anything coercive or duplicitous about the concept, as far as I can tell. And there isn’t the concern of a kind of “soft” coercion of something like college prep programs where there’s a large culture-wide push (and economic benefit) to going to college, so people feel pressured to get a leg up on other applicants. Also, Abramson is claiming he had nothing to do with the removal of the post: http://sethabramson.blogspot.com/2009/08/note-for-steve-fellner.html
Yeah, I’m not picking up what is unethical here: there isn’t anything coercive or duplicitous about the concept, as far as I can tell. And there isn’t the concern of a kind of “soft” coercion of something like college prep programs where there’s a large culture-wide push (and economic benefit) to going to college, so people feel pressured to get a leg up on other applicants. Also, Abramson is claiming he had nothing to do with the removal of the post: http://sethabramson.blogspot.com/2009/08/note-for-steve-fellner.html
But this isn’t a scam (ALC isn’t pretending to be something it’s not) and they haven’t made any extravagant claims about success rates or guaranteeing anything. They admit on their website that the application process is subjective. I think part of the concern about “naive” writers is an unavoidable problem. Many young writers (and the public at large) has very little idea what goes into writing, what it takes to be a writer, and what the actual life of a writer is like. But since there isn’t fraud involved, I think of this as the “Plumber Problem” (or mechanic, or lawyer, etc.) where you have a minor issue (in terms of cost) that you hire a professional to diagnose. An inexperienced individual might have a plumbing problem that a 50 cent washer would fix (and could easily be done by anyone) but that individual doesn’t know enough to avoid that, so they end up with a $100 service fee for a licensed plumber to put on the new washer. So the are likely going to be people who end up paying ALC $200 to tell them they need serious work on their poems (but, at least according to their website, with concrete feedback)–something they could learn if they probably talked to a few people who write/interested in poetry, or took a workshop at their local community college. I think the bigger concern for ALC is that you can receive close (if not perfect) substitutes of their services for free by taking the time to contact some people and do some research on your own, but for some people their time may be worth the consulting fee.
But this isn’t a scam (ALC isn’t pretending to be something it’s not) and they haven’t made any extravagant claims about success rates or guaranteeing anything. They admit on their website that the application process is subjective. I think part of the concern about “naive” writers is an unavoidable problem. Many young writers (and the public at large) has very little idea what goes into writing, what it takes to be a writer, and what the actual life of a writer is like. But since there isn’t fraud involved, I think of this as the “Plumber Problem” (or mechanic, or lawyer, etc.) where you have a minor issue (in terms of cost) that you hire a professional to diagnose. An inexperienced individual might have a plumbing problem that a 50 cent washer would fix (and could easily be done by anyone) but that individual doesn’t know enough to avoid that, so they end up with a $100 service fee for a licensed plumber to put on the new washer. So the are likely going to be people who end up paying ALC $200 to tell them they need serious work on their poems (but, at least according to their website, with concrete feedback)–something they could learn if they probably talked to a few people who write/interested in poetry, or took a workshop at their local community college. I think the bigger concern for ALC is that you can receive close (if not perfect) substitutes of their services for free by taking the time to contact some people and do some research on your own, but for some people their time may be worth the consulting fee.
Rion, I do know that naive writers are susceptible, but at some point we need to talk about personal responsibility. The Internet offers countless resources that are designed to identify scams and other such follies. Entire websites (such as the one you mention) exist to call out shady presses, publishers and agents. There are writers who will do anything at all in the hopes of getting published (or whatever else they’re looking for) no matter how rationally you tell them that the avenues they are pursuing are scams. They believe they are the exception.
I don’t relish the idea of people being taken advantage of, I really don’t. It saddens me that there are still people who think they’re being published by the National Poetry Library or that they need to pay for an agent or that the ads in Writer’s Digest are real.
But I still don’t think this service is any different than the services you can use to apply to law school, med school, dental school, whatever school. And I also don’t like arguments of extremes.
Rion, I do know that naive writers are susceptible, but at some point we need to talk about personal responsibility. The Internet offers countless resources that are designed to identify scams and other such follies. Entire websites (such as the one you mention) exist to call out shady presses, publishers and agents. There are writers who will do anything at all in the hopes of getting published (or whatever else they’re looking for) no matter how rationally you tell them that the avenues they are pursuing are scams. They believe they are the exception.
I don’t relish the idea of people being taken advantage of, I really don’t. It saddens me that there are still people who think they’re being published by the National Poetry Library or that they need to pay for an agent or that the ads in Writer’s Digest are real.
But I still don’t think this service is any different than the services you can use to apply to law school, med school, dental school, whatever school. And I also don’t like arguments of extremes.
I could give two shits about their ‘taking people’s money.’ If people are dumb enough to pay too much for work that they could do themselves in an hour of online research, hey, go for it. There’s no clause in life that says you aren’t allowed to take a sucker’s money. In fact, they probably SHOULD have it taken. Lord knows they’ll be paying through the teeth for whatever school they get directed to apply to, should they be accepted. Why not get them acquainted with the process all nice and properlike? Though indeed, the defense that ‘it makes money it must be okay’ is asinine beyond logic, hence my overbearing response.
And yet you’re right, the MFA program consultation company isn’t really like female circumcision at all. It’s more the MFA program itself that could be liken to cutting off your pleasure spot right at the hilt.
;)
Lighten up peoples.
I could give two shits about their ‘taking people’s money.’ If people are dumb enough to pay too much for work that they could do themselves in an hour of online research, hey, go for it. There’s no clause in life that says you aren’t allowed to take a sucker’s money. In fact, they probably SHOULD have it taken. Lord knows they’ll be paying through the teeth for whatever school they get directed to apply to, should they be accepted. Why not get them acquainted with the process all nice and properlike? Though indeed, the defense that ‘it makes money it must be okay’ is asinine beyond logic, hence my overbearing response.
And yet you’re right, the MFA program consultation company isn’t really like female circumcision at all. It’s more the MFA program itself that could be liken to cutting off your pleasure spot right at the hilt.
;)
Lighten up peoples.
furthermore, the fact remains that their taking so much time to build a site and ’service’ that serves so little functional purpose makes me question something about them as entities. the behavior is more like something you’d expect from an interloper than someone who has already come through the circuit. but that discussion’s a whole different ballgame.
furthermore, the fact remains that their taking so much time to build a site and ’service’ that serves so little functional purpose makes me question something about them as entities. the behavior is more like something you’d expect from an interloper than someone who has already come through the circuit. but that discussion’s a whole different ballgame.
OK- but it’s clear that his email was available. And why did the other guy feel the need to take down his post? I mean, why? I want to know. THe other poet is also a lawyer. So – was a lawsuit involved? Even a threat of one. I just want to know.
PR–Yes, Fellner’s email address is easily accessed on his website. Abramson’s post reads like a personal statement of his own as opposed to an actual address to Fellner.
Also, I am surprised that no-one has mentioned this, but if you don’t have the ability or the creativity to write your own personal statement, perhaps you shouldn’t be going into an MFA (or even more shocking–a PhD) program for WRITING. Maybe that’s harsh, but it seems obvious to me.
PR–Yes, Fellner’s email address is easily accessed on his website. Abramson’s post reads like a personal statement of his own as opposed to an actual address to Fellner.
Also, I am surprised that no-one has mentioned this, but if you don’t have the ability or the creativity to write your own personal statement, perhaps you shouldn’t be going into an MFA (or even more shocking–a PhD) program for WRITING. Maybe that’s harsh, but it seems obvious to me.
Go get ’em, lawyer boy. Get those middle class kids and charge them $250 to tell them their poetry is shitty. Yee haw. Own eat they own.
Go get ’em, lawyer boy. Get those middle class kids and charge them $250 to tell them their poetry is shitty. Yee haw. Own eat they own.
[…] Livingston twitterededed about this, which gave me a sour stomach and made me think of horse races and jockeying for position so I […]
i refine this comment: the kids are fine. people are people. this “service” is still tawdry and sad.
i refine this comment: the kids are fine. people are people. this “service” is still tawdry and sad.
The whole “legal reasons” things could be anything people. If Seth Abramson had threatened to sue, why wouldn’t Fellner just say this? I’m guessing it’s because Abramson never threatened anything. Thus Fellner’s “legal reasons” seems potentially scurrilous. Its vagueness leaves open the possibility that Abramson really threatened legal action; but it could just as well be that Fellner thought, “Crap, I need a reason to take this down because I don’t want to have a huge fight over this, and I need a reason that doesn’t make me look cowardly… So I’ll cite unspecified ‘legal reasons’ and let people draw their own conclusions.” It really could go either way.
When I applied for MFA programs two years ago I paid a well-published poet/editor $60 to read my poetry portfolio and have an online conversation about which were the strongest poems. I was living in the middle of nowhere, had little to no access to poets, and I was really grateful that I could just pay somebody to read my work, even though I did not have much extra money. In fact I was in my third year of working for a nonprofit at the time and was making 10k a year (and not getting any help from parents, trust funds, or whatever it is other young poets live on). I knew I was about to spend 1k on MFA applications, not because it would “make me a writer,” but because I wanted a raise and I wanted to actually live in the vicinity of other writers and I wanted time to write. So, since I was about to spend 10% of my annual income to apply, yes, I wanted some kind of feedback from somebody who knew poetry. $60 was so worth it to me then. $300 for more extensive comments probably would have been too, if I could have swung it. I probably could have and would have if I couldn’t find anything else.
Seth Abramson is on the whole making poetry writing more accessible I think, not less. His website was crazy helpful back when I applied and I’m guessing his “firm” will be too to those willing to pay for it. It’s not like he’s guaranteeing admission or anything. He’s just promising to give people’s work a thorough look while they’re applying for MFAs as far as I can tell. Really, what’s the problem with that?
The whole “legal reasons” things could be anything people. If Seth Abramson had threatened to sue, why wouldn’t Fellner just say this? I’m guessing it’s because Abramson never threatened anything. Thus Fellner’s “legal reasons” seems potentially scurrilous. Its vagueness leaves open the possibility that Abramson really threatened legal action; but it could just as well be that Fellner thought, “Crap, I need a reason to take this down because I don’t want to have a huge fight over this, and I need a reason that doesn’t make me look cowardly… So I’ll cite unspecified ‘legal reasons’ and let people draw their own conclusions.” It really could go either way.
When I applied for MFA programs two years ago I paid a well-published poet/editor $60 to read my poetry portfolio and have an online conversation about which were the strongest poems. I was living in the middle of nowhere, had little to no access to poets, and I was really grateful that I could just pay somebody to read my work, even though I did not have much extra money. In fact I was in my third year of working for a nonprofit at the time and was making 10k a year (and not getting any help from parents, trust funds, or whatever it is other young poets live on). I knew I was about to spend 1k on MFA applications, not because it would “make me a writer,” but because I wanted a raise and I wanted to actually live in the vicinity of other writers and I wanted time to write. So, since I was about to spend 10% of my annual income to apply, yes, I wanted some kind of feedback from somebody who knew poetry. $60 was so worth it to me then. $300 for more extensive comments probably would have been too, if I could have swung it. I probably could have and would have if I couldn’t find anything else.
Seth Abramson is on the whole making poetry writing more accessible I think, not less. His website was crazy helpful back when I applied and I’m guessing his “firm” will be too to those willing to pay for it. It’s not like he’s guaranteeing admission or anything. He’s just promising to give people’s work a thorough look while they’re applying for MFAs as far as I can tell. Really, what’s the problem with that?
Part of the problem is Abramson used to have a crusade against the cost of MFA programs including things like high applications fees. If he succeeded in getting more funding for MFA programs that is great, but amusing to watch him charge out the ass for cover letter evaluations.
It seems similar to the Narrative magazine debate. Neither of these things are illegal or scams or necessarily dishonest, but that doesn’t mean they are worthy or not sketchy either.
Part of the problem is Abramson used to have a crusade against the cost of MFA programs including things like high applications fees. If he succeeded in getting more funding for MFA programs that is great, but amusing to watch him charge out the ass for cover letter evaluations.
It seems similar to the Narrative magazine debate. Neither of these things are illegal or scams or necessarily dishonest, but that doesn’t mean they are worthy or not sketchy either.
” “Crap, I need a reason to take this down because I don’t want to have a huge fight over this, and I need a reason that doesn’t make me look cowardly… So I’ll cite unspecified ‘legal reasons’ and let people draw their own conclusions.” It really could go either way.”
This is a big stretch and it appears to me you’re just trying hard to avoid the possibility that this man may not be an overall good person, regardless of certain good things he has done. Often, when threatening to sue, that threat has to do with not being able to talk about the legal action, because it reflects badly on the person suing, so a gag order becomes part of the whole legal blabla. (There was some other crazy poetry fiasco where the poet/publisher insisted on gag orders….some book contest thingy…months ago) Anyway, it is true we don’t know for certain the details. I’ll give you that.
When I saw this I thought, “I bet I could find the same amount of (skilled/talented) folks on the internet that would read my portfolio for free and give me suggestions.”
And I could use that money for books, new jeans, and having the dog operated on since his testicles haven’t descended yet.
When I saw this I thought, “I bet I could find the same amount of (skilled/talented) folks on the internet that would read my portfolio for free and give me suggestions.”
And I could use that money for books, new jeans, and having the dog operated on since his testicles haven’t descended yet.
I see nothing wrong with what Abramson and his colleagues are doing. I might even use his services.
I live in the middle of nowhere, so a local writing group and local writing workshops are unavailable. I could solicit feedback on my potential portfolio stories from strangers on the internet, but I frankly don’t have a lot of confidence that the outcome would be worth the effort.
I have taken online courses and workshops, spending a few thousand bucks altogether. I’m going to spend well over a thousand bucks applying to MFA programs.
I make a good enough living that I can easily afford to pay someone at ALC, someone who has actually read the portfolios of past Iowa applicants, to read over my portfolio and give me his opinion. What’s wrong with that? (The answer is nothing.)
ALC is offering a potentially useful service for an extremely reasonable fee. People who think this is some kind of travesty really, really need to get a life.
I see nothing wrong with what Abramson and his colleagues are doing. I might even use his services.
I live in the middle of nowhere, so a local writing group and local writing workshops are unavailable. I could solicit feedback on my potential portfolio stories from strangers on the internet, but I frankly don’t have a lot of confidence that the outcome would be worth the effort.
I have taken online courses and workshops, spending a few thousand bucks altogether. I’m going to spend well over a thousand bucks applying to MFA programs.
I make a good enough living that I can easily afford to pay someone at ALC, someone who has actually read the portfolios of past Iowa applicants, to read over my portfolio and give me his opinion. What’s wrong with that? (The answer is nothing.)
ALC is offering a potentially useful service for an extremely reasonable fee. People who think this is some kind of travesty really, really need to get a life.
i think people who consider this to be a travesty arent simply reacting to the service itself, but to a bigger concern they have with mfa programs, the shifts and so on going on in the ‘field.’ seems like a worthwhile thing to talk about?
i think people who consider this to be a travesty arent simply reacting to the service itself, but to a bigger concern they have with mfa programs, the shifts and so on going on in the ‘field.’ seems like a worthwhile thing to talk about?
right, we dont have the details. so cant really konw for sure. instead, whats interesting to me is the idea that ‘legal issues’ (whether originating from yourself or another person) can cause you to completely remove (not edit) your opinion from a public arena. seems like a strike against debate. i understand the reason why defamation laws are in place, but it seems like theyve not caught up to blogworld yet? but i dont know – im not familiar with that sort of thing.
right, we dont have the details. so cant really konw for sure. instead, whats interesting to me is the idea that ‘legal issues’ (whether originating from yourself or another person) can cause you to completely remove (not edit) your opinion from a public arena. seems like a strike against debate. i understand the reason why defamation laws are in place, but it seems like theyve not caught up to blogworld yet? but i dont know – im not familiar with that sort of thing.
Define “extremely reasonable.” I think my definition would be a lot different from yours.
Define “extremely reasonable.” I think my definition would be a lot different from yours.
[…] Words About the ‘Firm’” has been posted. I’ll also update the original HTMLGIANT post with links to other discussions as I find […]
I sort of defined it already. When you consider the thousands of dollars it costs to prepare for an MFA program, and the thousand-plus in application costs, and the tens of thousands that an MFA program will potentially cost you (e.g., depending on how much funding you might get, or in the case of someone like me who already has an established career, even if I go to a program with full funding I will be sacrificing well over $100,000 in lost income over the duration of the program), a few hundred bucks for a portfolio review is a comparative pittance.
Obviously for some people a few hundred bucks is hardly a pittance, but I don’t see that as an issue worth discussing — i.e., that discussion amounts to talking about how unfair life is, or whether capitalism is immoral, or some such fruitless conversation, and, let’s face it, anybody who is even thinking about getting an MFA, or really anybody who has the luxury to sit around and write poetry or fiction even without benefit of an MFA, is already reveling in a rare level of privilege and advantage.
I sort of defined it already. When you consider the thousands of dollars it costs to prepare for an MFA program, and the thousand-plus in application costs, and the tens of thousands that an MFA program will potentially cost you (e.g., depending on how much funding you might get, or in the case of someone like me who already has an established career, even if I go to a program with full funding I will be sacrificing well over $100,000 in lost income over the duration of the program), a few hundred bucks for a portfolio review is a comparative pittance.
Obviously for some people a few hundred bucks is hardly a pittance, but I don’t see that as an issue worth discussing — i.e., that discussion amounts to talking about how unfair life is, or whether capitalism is immoral, or some such fruitless conversation, and, let’s face it, anybody who is even thinking about getting an MFA, or really anybody who has the luxury to sit around and write poetry or fiction even without benefit of an MFA, is already reveling in a rare level of privilege and advantage.
I’m sorry you think that the discussion of whether capitalism is immoral is fruitless.
I just find it odd that people are so willing to accept the status quo. That you have to sacrifice $100,000 to learn how to write. Weird. But whatever, it’s your funeral.
I’m sorry you think that the discussion of whether capitalism is immoral is fruitless.
I just find it odd that people are so willing to accept the status quo. That you have to sacrifice $100,000 to learn how to write. Weird. But whatever, it’s your funeral.
Sure, that’s a worthwhile thing to talk about. However, if you read Seth Abramson’s lonnnng post about his new consulting firm, you will see that his work compiling statistics on MFA programs, particularly their funding, actually has a higher purpose, something to do with raising the funding of programs across the board, so more poets can enjoy the luxury of writing full-time (or nearly so) for 2 or 3 years. That’s a vision I can get behind.
Of course, I don’t subscribe to the view that MFA programs are stifling creativity, generating dull conformity, etc., and therefore I think more people getting to go to better funded MFA programs is a Good Thing. People who think MFA programs are detrimental will have a different view, a view that I think is mostly wrong, but that I nevertheless try to afford at least a modicum of respect.
Sure, that’s a worthwhile thing to talk about. However, if you read Seth Abramson’s lonnnng post about his new consulting firm, you will see that his work compiling statistics on MFA programs, particularly their funding, actually has a higher purpose, something to do with raising the funding of programs across the board, so more poets can enjoy the luxury of writing full-time (or nearly so) for 2 or 3 years. That’s a vision I can get behind.
Of course, I don’t subscribe to the view that MFA programs are stifling creativity, generating dull conformity, etc., and therefore I think more people getting to go to better funded MFA programs is a Good Thing. People who think MFA programs are detrimental will have a different view, a view that I think is mostly wrong, but that I nevertheless try to afford at least a modicum of respect.
sounds good
sounds good
Rickard,
Be aware that in no way have any of the people offering services have “actually read the portfolios of past Iowa applicants.” Abramson would not have had access to the application process as a student; nor would any of the other “advisers.” If you don’t believe me, just email him. In fact, my guess is that none of the “advisers” to his site/service have ever actually served on an admissions committee. This may not matter to you. But it’s worth pointing out.
Rickard,
Be aware that in no way have any of the people offering services have “actually read the portfolios of past Iowa applicants.” Abramson would not have had access to the application process as a student; nor would any of the other “advisers.” If you don’t believe me, just email him. In fact, my guess is that none of the “advisers” to his site/service have ever actually served on an admissions committee. This may not matter to you. But it’s worth pointing out.
I’m just going by what it says on their web site, e.g., “Chris Leslie-Hynan … served as a first- and second-reader of Iowa Writers’ Workshop applicants in fiction for the 2008 and 2009 admission cycles.”
I’m just going by what it says on their web site, e.g., “Chris Leslie-Hynan … served as a first- and second-reader of Iowa Writers’ Workshop applicants in fiction for the 2008 and 2009 admission cycles.”
yeah, i remember reading that too and thinking, ‘well, at least one them has?’
yeah, i remember reading that too and thinking, ‘well, at least one them has?’
Seth Seth Seth Seth Seth — not sure what sort of a “talent” Seth is (writing-wise) but he’s definitely one of the most interesting characters in the writing business…. i read his blog regularly,… and though i have to skim it (it’s quite dense)
i enjoy it immensely………
Seth Seth Seth Seth Seth — not sure what sort of a “talent” Seth is (writing-wise) but he’s definitely one of the most interesting characters in the writing business…. i read his blog regularly,… and though i have to skim it (it’s quite dense)
i enjoy it immensely………
Isn’t it clear the only “higher purpose” was to leech off aspiring poets? He has used it as a money making and status making platform from the beginning.
Isn’t it clear the only “higher purpose” was to leech off aspiring poets? He has used it as a money making and status making platform from the beginning.
dan i don’t know what this thousands is. it cost me 500 bucks with postage to apply, and most of that is because one of the schools was 100 bucks to apply to.
and matt, i don’t know what other people’s impressions are, but in general most mfa programs have no interest in teaching people how to write. the idea is that you know how to write. that the program gives you time to write and gives you feedback that maybe makes you a better writer and in addition gives you a bit of an education through the seminars and lectures and such. also an mfa is a terminal degree, sort of, for the moment, so in terms of people who want to teach creative writing, there’s also that.
dan i don’t know what this thousands is. it cost me 500 bucks with postage to apply, and most of that is because one of the schools was 100 bucks to apply to.
and matt, i don’t know what other people’s impressions are, but in general most mfa programs have no interest in teaching people how to write. the idea is that you know how to write. that the program gives you time to write and gives you feedback that maybe makes you a better writer and in addition gives you a bit of an education through the seminars and lectures and such. also an mfa is a terminal degree, sort of, for the moment, so in terms of people who want to teach creative writing, there’s also that.
I hear you. Maybe if they did actually teach one how to write, the $100,000 would be worth it! I would walk in with a briefcase full of cash and say, ok, now teach me to write like Dan Brown. The profits from my first book would easily pay off my debt–that suitcase full of cash didn’t just come out of nowhere….
I hear you. Maybe if they did actually teach one how to write, the $100,000 would be worth it! I would walk in with a briefcase full of cash and say, ok, now teach me to write like Dan Brown. The profits from my first book would easily pay off my debt–that suitcase full of cash didn’t just come out of nowhere….
I am laughing at this 100,000 figure. I would say you can get an MFA free, but that would be incorrect. MFAs will PAY YOU, once you get in. You will get a stipend and a scholarship. I advise many undergrads who go on to MFAs and I begin the conversation with one sentence: Do not pay to get your graduate degree.
They don’t. Have you read AWP? Poets and Writers? These programs compete with each other for students.
If you get in, you shouldn’t spend ANY money. As for lost wages, how do you put a price on art/community/networks/time/space/work done while writing for years in a program?
I’ve seen thesis books earn several hundred thousand dollars in advances. So while writing that thesis, you earned 200,000 dollars (one example from a friend’s advance).
S
I am laughing at this 100,000 figure. I would say you can get an MFA free, but that would be incorrect. MFAs will PAY YOU, once you get in. You will get a stipend and a scholarship. I advise many undergrads who go on to MFAs and I begin the conversation with one sentence: Do not pay to get your graduate degree.
They don’t. Have you read AWP? Poets and Writers? These programs compete with each other for students.
If you get in, you shouldn’t spend ANY money. As for lost wages, how do you put a price on art/community/networks/time/space/work done while writing for years in a program?
I’ve seen thesis books earn several hundred thousand dollars in advances. So while writing that thesis, you earned 200,000 dollars (one example from a friend’s advance).
S
‘I’ve seen thesis books earn several hundred thousand dollars in advances.”
That’s hilarious. Sorry. I’m a poet.
‘I’ve seen thesis books earn several hundred thousand dollars in advances.”
That’s hilarious. Sorry. I’m a poet.
[…] help writers with their applications/portfolios to creative writing MFA/PhD programs. Here is one negative reaction, here is more on the dispute.5. G.A. Cohen has passed away. VN:F [1.5.8_856]RATE THIS POSTplease […]
Well, some shitty placed might pay you, too. Does that matter?
Well, some shitty placed might pay you, too. Does that matter?
Blake, add to that MFA programs and the irony bites hard.
Here is the analogy for everyone –
ALC:MFA::MFA:Writing Career
The fact that no one brought this up yet seems to be a little strange.
Blake, add to that MFA programs and the irony bites hard.
Here is the analogy for everyone –
ALC:MFA::MFA:Writing Career
The fact that no one brought this up yet seems to be a little strange.
Yeah, this seems a little weird. But what about this statement from Fellner?
“the idea that one should ethically manipulate their art to receive possible help from other poets and fiction writers?”
But the whole reason to go to an MFA program is to manipulate the art, right? If it didn’t need manipulated, from an aesthetic or other point of view, why would you attempt to join a community (by which I mean, pay tuition) in order to have classmates and professors critique it.
On the other end, we all “manipulate our art” to some extent in order to get an agent. After we get an agent, we manipulate it again to get it published.
Yeah, this seems a little weird. But what about this statement from Fellner?
“the idea that one should ethically manipulate their art to receive possible help from other poets and fiction writers?”
But the whole reason to go to an MFA program is to manipulate the art, right? If it didn’t need manipulated, from an aesthetic or other point of view, why would you attempt to join a community (by which I mean, pay tuition) in order to have classmates and professors critique it.
On the other end, we all “manipulate our art” to some extent in order to get an agent. After we get an agent, we manipulate it again to get it published.
[…] help writers with their applications/portfolios to creative writing MFA/PhD programs. Here is one negative reaction, here is more on the […]
I can’t figure out what annoys me more–Seth’s assertion on the ALC blog that he co-authored The Creative Writing MFA Handbook (sorry, folks, it’s clearly authored by Tom Kealey, with Seth as a contributor for the latest version) OR the erroneous hyphenation of “highly-regarded” whenever ALC refers to its consultants.
First of all, don’t misrepresent yourself.
Second, “quality” creative writing is subjective (which makes this whole endeavor a farce, in my opinion); the rules of hyphenation are not. I would hope that these consultants could at least help their clients with the very basics of writing, and I’m sorry to see that their website portrays otherwise. Proofread, damnit! And if you don’t know basic grammar, hire a grammar consultant!
I can’t figure out what annoys me more–Seth’s assertion on the ALC blog that he co-authored The Creative Writing MFA Handbook (sorry, folks, it’s clearly authored by Tom Kealey, with Seth as a contributor for the latest version) OR the erroneous hyphenation of “highly-regarded” whenever ALC refers to its consultants.
First of all, don’t misrepresent yourself.
Second, “quality” creative writing is subjective (which makes this whole endeavor a farce, in my opinion); the rules of hyphenation are not. I would hope that these consultants could at least help their clients with the very basics of writing, and I’m sorry to see that their website portrays otherwise. Proofread, damnit! And if you don’t know basic grammar, hire a grammar consultant!
[…] those still interested in the ALC/Fellner story, I spoke with Steve Fellner over the phone on Saturday. I want to share his side (with his […]
If only people put this kind of effort into writing poetry.
If only people put this kind of effort into writing poetry.
Oho. Well, Seth’s just hissed at me on his ALC blog, so I’ve responded.
http://abramsonleslie.blogspot.com/2009/09/q-september-2009-3.html#comments
I invite legal issues.
Oho. Well, Seth’s just hissed at me on his ALC blog, so I’ve responded.
http://abramsonleslie.blogspot.com/2009/09/q-september-2009-3.html#comments
I invite legal issues.
[…] HTML Giant […]
[…] old post about Seth Abramson (from way back on August 3rd, 2009) is #1 again on HTMLGIANT!! (ie, it’s getting by far […]
http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2827/9505138828_ac6bda2daa_o.gif
y/n?