3 ms·
I think another things is, these MFA programs aren't about scholarship or research. They're essentially exorbitantly expensive trade schools. Even weirder: in t
by mabub24 5y ago
I think another things is, these MFA programs aren't about scholarship or research. They're essentially exorbitantly expensive trade schools. Even weirder: in the past the idea of going to some ultra expensive trade school to learn how to make films would've been considered bizarre. Hollywood operated with an apprenticeship model (with, obviously a shitload of luck) that was kind of similar to the way a plumber-student would need to apprentice.
Even journalism schools when they first started, weren't bathing in the cache of a MFA program, they were trade schools for making reporters. They taught you bare bones shit about writing a column to set lines, and had you interning at newspapers and shadowing reporters right away. MFA programs and the rise of "creative non-fiction" are now making journalists think they're artists.
I don't have a problem with MFA programs existing (I mean, some CS programs are awful and churn out students who can barely code), but I think some applicants need to take a hard look at whether they even serve a purpose for their future employment beyond the letters "MFA" after your name; and, whether Columbia is actually the best MFA program to go to.
- germinalphrase 5y agoI worked in the film industry for about six years post college (camera: loader, 2nd AC mostly) and a member of the Cinematographers Guild. The apprenticeship model is still largely in place and folks come into the industry from all sides. That said, above the line and below the line are different worlds, and people I knew who came from money/Hollywood legacy did seem to have real advantages there. I ultimately left because the lifestyle wouldn’t be good for me long term (even if it was fun in my 20’s).