Jacob Christensen

A young and still hopeful reader of the blog mailed me some days ago and asked: What does it take to enter a Ph.D. programme in Political Science?

My immediate reaction was to think that I was the wrong person to ask as I have never been on a committee which assesses applications for Ph.D. programmes. But then again I’ve met a number of Ph.D. students over the years so maybe I have learnt something along the way.

Perhaps I should start by pointing out that in Sweden and Denmark accepting a Ph.D. student is an investment for the department in question. Unlike in Germany, the programme has to be financed in advance, and departments (or rather faculties) receive payments for the number of Ph.D. students who pass their programmes. So, first of all: The department, or the committee, wants to be reasonably sure that you will deliver a dissertation. Of course, things happen: Life has its nasty surprises and students may discover that spending life in academia is not their real goal in life. But if taking your MA took ten years and you have a nasty collection of 2s and 4s on your papers, you may as well forget about it. On the other hand, you do not need a full collection of 12s to get accepted. I know people who never got a 12, or the equivalent, and have made nice careers.¹

My guess is that dependability, rather than talent, is important. Research is also a craft to be learned and applied. And we know that not everyone is an Einstein. In fact, a discipline full of Einsteins may not be a good thing.

When it comes to your application or your project, I would say that having an idea about the current theoretical discussions and the state of the art with regard to empirical or theoretical research topics helps. But this is something you can use your masters thesis for.

Finally, my recommendation is that you pay the chair of the local Ph.D. programme a visit. This could also give you an idea about what type of applications and applicants they are looking for. Oh, and taking your Ph.D. somewhere else than where you took your MA is not necessarily a bad thing.

1. 2s, 4s and 12s? In case you are clueless, look here. [↩]

Life isn’t too short for French films. Some French films, that is.

Durin the week, I have watched Le gout des autres, directed by and featuring Agnes Jaoui, and L’ennemi public n°1, the second of two films about the notorious criminal Jacques Mesrine starring Vincent Cassel.

Le gout des autres is interesting and worthwhile because it explores human awkwardness without exposing its characters needlessly. It may not be a path-breaking piece of art, but it manages to be reasonably profound and entertaining at the same time. (By the way: Can anyone tell me how the French always manage to come up with attractive actresses who look like real people and not illustrations from a textbook in plastic surgery?)

L’ennemi public n°1 was a disappointment. I actually liked L’instinct de mort, even if Jacques Mesrine is (was) a very problematic character. Like many criminals he was first and foremost a (violent) criminal trying to come up with a justification for his acts. Still: Even if Instinct was much surface and not too much depth, I felt that I got a feeling for Mesrines personality.

After considering the issue for a couple of hours, I think my problem was this: Ennemi is, dramatically speaking, just more (as in: Two hours) of the same. Mesrine doesn’t really develop as a character during the second film. At the same time, the French state (in all likelihood for good reasons) develops a serious grudge against Mesrine with the shooting executed by a division of the police in 1979. It would have been interesting if the second film had turned the perspective and followed the process which led to a decision to kill Mesrine.

But on the other hand that may have been to controversial in France, even after thirty years.