The Student Room Group

UCL - boring?!

I'm in the middle of deciding between Leeds and UCL for English Literature, but have stumbled across a problem.

The course at UCL actually looks quite boring in comparison to Leeds. The first years are similar, just an intro to the course, but the ranges of choices at UCL for the next two years seem kinda confined to Medieval literature (something which really doesn't appeal to me). Leeds, on the other hand, has a massive range of choices in modules which really take my fancy.
Of course, UCL is a more prestigious university and I'm honoured I've been offered a place - however I just can't shake off the feeling that the course will bore me! Are there any UCL or Leeds students who can help me out with some opinions - or anyone who can say whether the whole thing really matters or not?
Reply 1
Yeah, the more traditional English courses like Oxford and UCL do seem boring, in that they're quite rigid and you don't get massive amounts of module choices. That also means you can't specialise as much as at other universities. But on the plus side, they give you a thorough grounding in English literature which some people enjoy more (or find more useful).
Reply 2
UCL is in London. How boring can that get? :wink:
Reply 3
It depends - I actively wanted a v. trad. English course but it sounds like you prefer having lots of choice over modules etc. If your only concern with LEeds is it not being as prestigious, i don't think that matters - Leeds has a really good reputation, especially for English, and if you think you'd enjoy the course more I'd go for it.
go to leeeeeeeeeeeds!
Leeds looks wicked - you can do some really interesting modules on romantics such as Blake and the idea of the visionary in literature.
Reply 6
sob. dann is not impressed by this thread! but yeah, definately go for the course that intrests you most. I picked UCL because I wasnt that keen on the higher amounts of drama on some other courses, and the whole traditional approach is what I was looking for (im not sure I even trust myself to pick what modules i am allowed!)
I accidentally sat in on an Eng Lit lecture at UCL cos I had a stonking hangover and couldnt find my timetable and self-induced amnesia meant I couldnt quite remember where my Contract lecture was...

Anyway, three saliant points:

1) The lecture hall was full of hot women.
2) The lecturer was hot.
3) The lecture, considering it was about a poem on King Arthur and I didn't much get on with Eng Lit A level, was amazing. The lecturer was engaging, witty and extraordinarily intelligent.

And witty.

The wordload is intense, so Ive heard, but it is certainly worth going to UCL.
If only cos you'll have plenty of time to explore Tottenham Court road's pubs, Oxford Street's shops and 10 mins away, the fantastic giant amusement park/gay parade/bars of Leicester Sq (the bars got me on the eve of this particulat lecture..!)
Based on the city and the wit/looks of Phonicsdude's lectuer (not to mention the man himself.... well, he listens to beautiful music anyway!) go to UCL!

Oh and I had a similar, albeit it less pleasant, hungover wrong lecture-stumbling experience; I ended up in a Computer Science lecture with a non-witty bearded man and many unattractive (well, 99% guys anyway!) students. Fortunately I was with a charming and delightful girl with whom I was heading to the English lecture in the first place.
Reply 9
You know, those apparently 'rigid', traditional courses that don't let you choose many papers for yourself and traipse you through the gamut of English literature often involve a great deal more choice than modular systems. That's my experience, anyway. Sometimes it means you can almost craft your own course rather than working your way through mandatory reading once you've picked modules.

But I have no idea how UCL works, really, having not been there. And even to me the six hour compulsory Chaucer paper seems a bit excessive (do they still have that?).