Hi everyone, I'm new to the forum and hope you all don't mind my picking your brains. I am going to start a phD in French cinema in September and would love to hear from anyone who managed to complete a UK arts phD in 3 years. This is what I'm aiming for. I've already done a lot of work in my research area as part of my Masters. I know it seems to take everyone much longer, but it'd be great to hear from anyone who did indeed manage it in 3 years or expects to! Many thanks.

Quite possibly. I think the research methodologies used for Arts based PhDs better lend themselves to on-time completion than other subjects. My husband should have a complete first draft written for his by 2 1/4 years in and is aiming to finish on time to start work......

Thanks Pamplemousse! That's good to know. Good luck to your husband.

A humanities PhD in the UK will take, on average, between 3 and 4 years full time. I think that the chances of a supervisor agreeing that something is ready after 2 or 2 1/2 years are minimal - actually zero. Not only for £ reasons (the university will want their tuition money) but also it is impossible to start, research, write, and defend a thesis in the humanities within two and a half years. I do know of some humanities PhD students in history who have do it more or less exactly in three but they are unusual and had projects that were very well defined and had been well trod in existing secondary literature. They had it written and examined in 3 years exactly.

So block out your diary for 3 years if you're an optimist and 4 if you are a realist. If you give yourself a two and a half year deadline you would allow yourself no time for research dead ends, procrastination, illness, relationships, and other life events of problems. It can't be done.

I diasgree strongly with the idea that humanities methodologies lend themselves to finish in 3 years. There is endless scope for endless redrafts, the caprice of supervisors (even absent supervisors), methodological or source impasses, etc etc

Thanks for your reply, Chrisrolinksi. I think I need to speak to my supervisors. I will say that I've done a heck of a lot of preparatory research already, throughout my undergrad degree and my Masters. I wouldn't aim to finish in 2.5 years or anything like that, but I would like to be finished by the time the 3 years are up.

You can knock an Arts PhD out in around two weeks. As previously said, the lack of rigorous methodological requirements means that they'll just accept any old shite you cobble together. That's why its the equivalent of two level 6's in year 9 SATS. So I would suggest you write your thesis in the first two weeks and then spend the rest of the time drunk.:-)


On a less serious note, having also done a lot of research before I started my PhD, my first year has been spent realising A) that not all of it is relevant B) that there is a hell of a lot more research to be done.

======= Date Modified 08 Apr 2010 17:32:28 =======
Ah, French Cinema, awsome! I would have liked to have done a PhD in that, would have been nice to have interviewed all the pretty leading ladies and laced my theses with pictures of them all; In fact, I would have dedicated my entire theses to French women in Cinema.

Hmmmm, getting a bit fruity here aren't we?

Back onto a more serious note. I don't know Arts PhDs that well so can't comment specifically.

I will say that wanting to get the whole project done in 3 years or less is perhaps the wrong attitude to research generally. Some PhDs will simply take longer, it all depends what situation you are in, whether you have a good supervisor/topic or both, or what other life events happen to take place during that time. My advice is not to set a time limit to something like this, simply accept that it will take as long as it takes................ if this seems like a somewhat unpleasant outcome, perhaps you don't have the essential level of dedication that is required here?, sounds harsh, but just something I think you should consider.

======= Date Modified 11 Apr 2010 13:13:47 =======
======= Date Modified 11 Apr 2010 13:11:40 =======
Hey Doc Moobs, I am amazed, astounded and blown away by the deep levels of ignorance you display about visual studies, and the study of films, specifically. What the bloomin' heck would anyone get from discussing feminsim in French film with a leading actor? Apart from the obvious fact that any feminism in a film would, almost certainly, not have been put there by its actors, feminist film usually equals key, and very influential, surrealist films which were made a very long time ago by women film makers, and whose lead actors, and directors, are dead.

A PhD in performance in contemporary French film might lead you to La Tatou (although the clock is ticking on that, when did she last make a French film?), as might a PhD on performance in Hollywood biopic films. Interviewing key players isn't usually necaessary in any film PhD, most directors and actors have already said most of what we need to hear anyhow (plus the film industry is a notorious site of major b***** propensity) although I am hoping too pursuade my supervisor that an interview with one of my directors is necessary after all...

How about I offer you my expertise on a thesis in your field? Manboob?

======= Date Modified 11 Apr 2010 13:54:14 =======

======= Date Modified 11 Apr 2010 13:44:05 =======
I will not feed the troll, but Sneaks, we have one, the advertising works!

======= Date Modified 11 Apr 2010 13:47:57 =======

======= Date Modified 11 Apr 2010 13:59:31 =======
Quote form Manboob

'Yes, I do blindly believe that I know everything, especially things that I have no expertise or experience in, and I do also have zero respect for the expertise and experience of others, so I am really sorry for that, and for talking twaddle, being a petty child and moaning about typos, and for not actually reading your posts properly'

That's Ok Moob, just remember this a voluntary position.