Why Not an MFA?

The way I see it, MFA programs have a few important things to offer. Mainly, these are:

1. Structured time
2. Motivation
3. Community
4. Mentorship
   
5. A degree
   

Before I started AWY, I debated doing an MFA program instead. Taking classes, working with practicing writers, and making new, like-minded friends were all powerfully appealing, as was, frankly, the idea of having a socially acceptable reason to write while not being otherwise gainfully employed for a couple of years. Because I'm not immediately interested in teaching, the degree itself held only limited allure.

As I thought more about what I really wanted, it gradually became clear that these benefits were outweighed by other factors and concerns, including the following:

• Overall, I'm a little suspicious about how large a role academia currently plays in literature. I believe part of the writer's role is to question and comment on the established ideas and institutions of his or her time, and I think that's difficult to do from an institutionalized context (however benevolent that institution may be). Moreover, I'm interested in writing that appeals to a wide spectrum of readers, and I worry that many MFA programs unintentionally promote a type of writing that is accessible only to a specialist audience.
  

• If I were to do an MFA program, I would want to enroll in a good one and study with someone I really respect. For me, that would necessitate leaving Chicago (an expensive and hugely disruptive proposition, at this point) or doing a low-residency program like Warren Wilson's... but if I did a low residency program, many of the major pluses of an MFA program (face-to-face workshops, interaction with like-minded colleagues, etc.) would be effectively negated.

• Low-residency or not, most MFA programs are expensive. Except for a handful with particularly storied programs, most universities like MFAs primarily because they are cash cows.

• I'm uncertain about the actual value of an MFA degree; I now have several friends who have completed MFAs, but (as far as I can tell) the degree hasn't gotten them much further along than they already were. I think they would all say they loved the experience and that it shaped them in important ways, but I would question whether they couldn't have achieved similar results by pursuing writing on their own, outside of the program structure.

• I don't feel compelled to teach writing at the college level, at this point. I could imagine doing a full-time MFA program only to emerge from it looking for exactly the same type of job I currently have (which uses my writing skills, pays reasonably well, and allows me to work from home).

• Although the MFA has emerged as a kind of credential for writers, that obviously wasn't always the case. To learn about writing, you read a lot of books. If you wanted to write a book, you went out and wrote one. If you were lucky you had another writer or two to correspond with about it. Of the writers I admire most, very few have MFAs.
  

• I've already published a couple of poems and seem to be doing all right on my own, in terms of improving my fundamental skills. More than anything else, the chief obstacle to pushing my writing further is having enough time to dedicate to it.

So, it seemed to me that my options were (1) to spend a lot of money on an MFA degree of questionable value or (2) to invest that money in myself (by allowing myself to take time off of work) and try to go it alone for a while. Given the factors I've described above, the choice seemed obvious -- the worst that could happen is that, after a year, I'd decide I needed an MFA after all, but at least by then I would presumably have a lot of material (and hopefully a few more publications) to support my application.