I wasn't intending to do a PhD, but I feel that I may be suitable for one as I attained the highest grade category in both my undergraduate and postgraduate studies. However, I feel I've started too late as I'm already thirty. I've emailed several potential supervisors at a few universities to discuss my ideas, but I haven't been able to make a strong proposal to begin in either February or October 2024. Quite simply, the nature of the proposal eludes me. I've been told that one is supposed to formulate questions naturally during the PhD, yet for the proposal one already needs to have found gaps and thus to know one's subject area inside out. I'm struggling to find a suitable area for further research. It doesn't seem that a year will be enough time, but my goal for 2024 is to research potential topics and questions. Sadly, I'm already struggling, having gone down a handful of avenues already. There's a lot of pressure because there's a good chance I'll miss out on the next application window. Given how long a PhD is, I can't afford to do this.
It's frustrating because my area of study has always been the natural world, but there's no one area I know well enough. This is reinforced by the fact that I did my two-year diploma in countryside management, my undergraduate degree in ecological science (dissertation on carrion beetles), and my MA Res in English Literature with a heavy focus on philosophy (Earth-centred sacrality in Lord Dunsany and Tolkien). It's pointless regretting things, sure, but I wish I'd followed a more consistent study trajectory and gradually built upon the same subject from each course. In all, I feel like I'll be in my mid-thirties by the time I'm expert in one particular area to start a PhD. That's not good.
I'm doubtful about the PhD route now. While I can see myself working in the field of literature and environmental ethics at a university, perhaps, I'm wracking my brain trying to understand if writing books for a general audience is a better way to go. What I care most about is getting my work read and making an impact. I could do this without getting a PhD, couldn't I? A PhD would lend credibility, but I wonder if this really matters in the end. I'd rather spend my time writing books for a general audience without getting a PhD if it means that more people read my work. I think that's what it comes down to. The frustrating thing is that I could do both by turning my PhD into a monograph or just getting a PhD and then writing a book. Why wouldn't I do both? The fact that I could do both makes this much, much more difficult. As you can probably tell, I'm at a bit of a crossroads here. I'd probably be less stressed if I could just think of an area or research question and then I'd probably just go for the PhD.