Chicago EA Essay Talk

<p>Decisions are at least 18 hours away, so while we wait, it think it would be fun to talk about the essays we wrote. One of the most interesting things about applying to Chicago (for me, at least) were the essays, which have been a distinguishing trait of the school's admissions process for as long as anyone can remember. And I do know that you folks are an extremely intrigued and intriguing lot, so before our decisions turn us into walking, taking case studies in depression or into euphoric acceptees who'll have nothing except Fall 2010 in their minds, it would be good for us, and for future applicants if we could share a little bit about our essays. I'll start.</p>

<p>Chicago Supplement: I chose the prompt about games and wrote about playing professional Scrabble, which in turn segued into a discussion on unusual interests and on why we play games in the first place.</p>

<p>Why Chicago: I didn't focus overwhelmingly upon particular departments that I liked (Econs/Sociology) but I did discuss my love for their sense of humor (do you guys look at Scav Hunt lists?), their core curriculum and the sheer joy of going to a place that's good at everything even as it ensures that you don't get caught up in trying to stick to your comfort zone.</p>

<p>Favorite Things: I wrote about how observing reality is like watching a great film, and how despite the great works of art and science that surround us, the quotidian experiences and observations we encounter really give a different level of satisfaction altogether. And of course, I brought up Robert Doisneau.</p>

<p>I hope more of you will decide to share.</p>

<p>Why Chicago: I talked about how I liked the fact that it’s known as “the place where fun goes to die” - obviously, people still have (plenty of) fun at UChicago, but I want to go to a school where I am very challenged, yet still encouraged. Also, I was a little bit of a kiss-ass and quoted Srikanth Reddy, one of my fave poets, who’s on their faculty. He wrote: “Suffer yourself to learn many words for one thing. Suffer yourself to elope like a river, suffer yourself to remain.” I said I wanted this to serve as a maxim, of sorts, for my college education.</p>

<p>Chicago Supplement: I guess I just like writing about quotes because I chose my own prompt, and wrote an essay based on something Salman Rushdie said: “A poet’s work . . . to name the unnameable, to point at frauds, to take sides, start arguments, shape the world and stop it from going to sleep.” </p>

<p>Favorite Things: I talked about almost everything I was interested in, haha - from Marcel Duchamp to the Velvet Underground to Judy Blume. It was admittedly scattered, but so am I, so it fits.</p>

<p>I did the games essay as well. I disliked my final product, and I think I could have done much better, but my essay was an analysis of the relation between players and games (specifically, for me, the game of soccer). Essentially, it had a Hobbesian/Rawlsian social contract feel to it. I described how each player had his/her motivation behind playing the game of soccer, and then showed how the players on a team established an overlapping consensus/quasi-social contract between each other that caused them to play together as a team. I then proceeded to show how each player actually played his/her own personal game as opposed to the general game of ‘soccer’ while also showing how each position that a player played caused him/her to play a different game, each with its own distinct goal (this personal/secondary game was shaped by the motivations of the players in relation to the needs of the team). Then I showed how certain games/positions attract certain positions, but that the ball (the consequences of the game - sense of community, healthy competition, etc.) truly remains in the court of each individual player.’ Then I ended with some horrific attempt to connect that all to personal experience.</p>

<p>Yup, I hated my supplemental essay, but hopefully they’ll be able to get the connection between my talk with my interviewer about my love of political philosophy, all my politically-oriented EC’s, and my supplemental political philosophy essays and the last paragraph of my essay won’t hurt me that much…</p>

<p>Dammit lol. I wish I woulda sent my essay where I had Ludwig Wittgenstein and Martin Heidegger as sportscasters, but oh well.</p>

<p>@swanagin: An initial draft of my favorite things piece discussed Marcel Duchamp too but in going for the whole reality is on a whole new plane of art thing, I was unfortunately precluded from keeping that example. Anyway, my name is incredibly similar to Srikanth Reddy’s (and I’m a poet too, tra la la). </p>

<p>@motion12345: Your games essay sounds interesting. In my case, I chose to keep it rather short so I worry that I might’ve been a bit brief and lacking in depth but I hope my common app essay (a meditation on cultural ignorance) might make up for it. And yes, it would’ve been hilarious to read an essay with Wittgenstein as a sportscaster. When this app season is all over, perhaps you could put it up on these forums.</p>

<p>Well that’s neat, I am too! But alas, my name is not similar to Srikanth. Did you by any chance submit any work in an arts supplement?</p>

<p>Yes I did. I sent in a poem (that was published in a litmag and re-printed in another this year) and several works of microfiction (yep, that’s exactly what it sounds like it is). Everything was contained in two short pages. If you’d like to trade supplements, my email is <a href="mailto:srrinath@gmail.com">srrinath@gmail.com</a>; I’d love to take a look at the work you sent to Chicago.</p>

<p>Chicago Supplement: I chose the prompt that asked whether or not law can be justified based on human personality and defined human personality as the expression of humanity’s creativity, the primary difference between us and other forms of life, and explained that, due to its pragmatic nature, law will never be justified based on the quirks you and I possess. </p>

<p>Why Chicago: I explained my interest in the particular ways the English and Anthropology departments handle their respective curriculum (as well as the faculty members of interest to me) and referenced particular organizations and activities (Scav Hunt!) I imagine I’ll enjoy.</p>

<p>Favorite Things: I wrote about my interest in a variety of different things, from satire (Vonnegut), to contemporary literature as well as the classics, to both the '80s music that my parents still listen to today - a sign of the ability of older generations to influence youth’s perceptions - to the classical music I listen on my own. The thesis of this essay was that I’ve defined myself both parallel to and independent of my environment.</p>

<p>oh god, i so regret deciding to remove this from the contents of my essay:</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Oh, why not? I have to procrastinate from my Chem final anyways. =D
Chicago main supplement: I wrote about human personality and how it relates to law. I basically used themes from Kuhn’s Structure of Scientific Revolutions and Aristotle’s Ethics. It was a cool idea, but I don’t know if worked out. I didn’t write it like a normal essay. I wrote it like a dialogue between students with a teacher handing out a “prompt,” persay.
“Why Chicago?”- I did something a tad bit riskier than normal and opted to JUST focus on Chicago’s critical thinking, “life-of the mind” factors. Basically, I used Plato’s cave analogy to illustrate that I am in a sort of cave, and that the intellectual diversity of Chicago is something that I need in order to see the “academic light.”
Arts/Culture essay- I wrote about how the news is the coolest thing ever and how that it makes me feel connected to a world that seems distant in so many ways.
I love your guys’ essay topics though…wow. Good luck!!! =D
Basically, I had a bunch of good ideas, but I didn’t explore them as much as I could. That’s my huge regret with my essays.</p>

<p>You guys are scaring me <strong>itless. My grades (and class rank), test scores, and EC’s are all worse than yours, and now it seems as though my essays are 10X worse than all yours…Not only that, but my supplemental philosophy essays seem like horsesh</strong> compared to your supplemental stuff…</p>

<p>Oh well, thanks for significantly raising my stress level :P. At least I can be proud of the people who beat me out tomorrow…</p>

<p>@ “motion12345”: I echo those sentiments entirely. I get more underqualified with every passing glance. Ugh.</p>

<p>How did you get caught: Wrote about the parallels between me and a robot named Andrew in “The Bicentennial Man.” Like him, I just wanted to fit in with everyone around me. It had some humor in it too. I talked about how I only “got caught” up by the similarities after I re-evaluated my life.(with an anecdote where I lied about my birthplace)</p>

<p>“Why Chicago”: explained how none of my friends got excited about the Hubble Deep Space image. Wanted to be with people who could see more than a few pricks of smudgy light</p>

<p>It’s easy to look at other people’s summary of their essays and just feel inferior. But your essay could be just as good–or better. I mean, writing about more <em>sophisticated</em> material doesn’t automatically transform an essay into a masterpiece. I am not judging you guys! But my essays seem more philosophically low-key in comparison…</p>

<p>As I sent them in and then lost all of the information on my computer, I was only able to salvage the data (and therefore memory (bah-dum-pshh) ) of my main supplement, in which I chose to write about my methods of surviving a zombie outbreak. I’m super proud of it, and I had a few people look it over, and they loved it. Also, I got a 35 on the ACT and I’m super-involved in ECs. I really hope my 3.6 doesn’t ruin all of that lol.</p>

<p>Haha, if we both do end up at Chicago we could go on and on about the hubble deep field. I hope you didn’t adopt a condescending tone towards your classmates though. In my case, I couldn’t go down that road because I attend a high school version of Chicago where no one sees the HDF as a few pricks of smudgy light. What was missing from my HS that I think Chicago makes up for in kind is a sense of balance and diversity. But I guess I couldn’t expect otherwise from a HS specialized in math/science.</p>

<p>motion, don’t get too down on yourself. Using a crapload of philosophical jargon doesn’t automatically mean the essay is a masterpiece. </p>

<p>spiralcloud, no offense. i’m sure your essays are fantastic.</p>

<p>Good luck to you all!</p>

<p>haha, I actually made fun of myself</p>

<p>The problem isn’t that. The problem is that my essay sucks lol.</p>

<p>Yeah, none of my essays sound as professional as Srrinath’s or motion’s essays!</p>

<p>The prompt I used was about:</p>

<p>The late-eighteenth-century popular philosopher and cultural critic George Lichtenberg wrote, “Just as we outgrow a pair of trousers, we outgrow acquaintances, libraries, principles, etc. at times before they’re worn out and at times-and this is worst of all-before we have new ones.” Write an essay about something you have outgrown, perhaps before you had a replacement-a friend, a political philosophy, a favorite author, or anything that has had an influence on you. What, if anything, has taken its place?</p>

<p>I wrote about my family situation and made an extended metaphor using shoes. I showed it to a friend of mine at Yale Grad School and he’s currently using it for his TA job in some of his writing classes. I didn’t think it was that great of an essay, but I guess others do (everybody else I’ve showed have also loved it).</p>

<p>I don’t believe that the other two essays are all that important. I wrote about what i wanted to major in and how my school limited my opportunities to pursue such interests these last few years. Then, for the optional, I explained how debate had made me delve deeply into philosophical texts.</p>