1

Consider a statement of purpose of a physics PhD program.

Some people say that the statement of purpose does not matter, but a horrible one can hurt you. So, all that is necessary is to write a decent, straightforward statement of purpose.

Other people say that the professors reading these statements of purpose get bored and would rather read a statement of purpose written in an interesting style. Moreover, that such a statement makes the applicant more memorable in a positive way, which does aid in the application process.

Given these two (seemingly) conflicting viewpoints, I ask the question here.

I am also wondering if the answer changes depending on whether one is submitting a statement of purpose to a top physics PhD program for the field of interest versus a not top program.

Improve this question
4
  • I too am applying to physics phd. My first draft had more flair, but it felt weird. I ended up concentrating the passion into paragraphs discussing my future, and my interests. My paragraphs on previous research contributions I made dry, which felt more professional.
    – David Raveh
    Commented Nov 23, 2023 at 6:09
  • 2
    You're phrasing it as a loaded question. Firstly, "straightforward" and 'dull" are very different things. "Straighforward" is a good thing when you are actually trying to communicate something in a limited amount of space. Thinking of writing focused on efficient communication as being "dull" is not a very good way of looking at things. Secondly, you're assuming that writing a "literary" statement will make it more interesting. In reality, it's at least as likely that attempting to be "literary" will result in a statement that's annoying to read rather than interesting to read.
    – Adam Přenosil
    Commented Nov 23, 2023 at 6:25
  • I think what you are saying is true. But I was having trouble phrasing the question otherwise. Personally, I do not see how a straightforward statement can be interesting unless the content itself is extraordinary, which I think is untrue in almost every circumstance. @AdamPřenosil
    – Silly Goose
    Commented Nov 23, 2023 at 6:32
  • @AdamPřenosil I have edited the question in an attempt to make it less of a loaded question.
    – Silly Goose
    Commented Nov 23, 2023 at 6:34

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
4

Your question still hints at a false dichotomy between either "meeting the minimum requirements" or "writing in an interesting style". You are in effect suggesting that the reason to write in a straightforward style is because one does not really need to care about writing a good SoP, and conversely if you care about writing a good SoP, you need to distinguish yourself in terms of "interesting style". This is not true.

Moreover, that such a statement makes the applicant more memorable in a positive way, which does aid in the application process.

No, it does not. If you draw a beautiful, detailed, artistic picture of an elephant at the end of your SoP, this will certainly make you more memorable in a positive way, but it will not help you one bit with the application process. This is because while the reader might be greatly pleased by your pictures, your ability to draw beautiful pictures of elephants is entirely irrelevant to what the committee is looking for in a candidate. Now replace "picture of an elephant" with "literary style" and you have your answer.

Caring about writing a good SoP does not mean trying to amuse the supposedly bored reader with fancy stylistics, it means gathering as much evidence as you can for the proposition that you will thrive in their PhD programme and then communicating it as clearly as you can.

You can also think of it as follows. If the person reading your SoP likes your "literary style", they might get some pleasure out of it but it is not going to help your case that you are a good candidate for them to consider. if the person reading your SoP does not like your "literary style" and thinks "I am not interested in watching someone flex their literary muscles instead of giving me the information that I am looking for", it is going to hurt your application.

There is an adage that "good style is invisible". I would strongly urge you to aim for good style in this sense, rather than for "literary style" or "memorable" style. Your question sort of suggests that you believe that an invisible style is either boring or at least it is evidence that the writer does not care enough about the task at hand to distinguish themselves in terms of their style. In reality, it's quite the opposite: accomplishing an invisible, clear, unobstructive style is often the result of much work (and it's a safe bet to assume that the committee knows this too).

Improve this answer
1
  • +1 for the elephant example
    – David Raveh
    Commented Nov 24, 2023 at 2:58

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .