Writer in residence...in Detroit?

I saw that and think it's an awesome idea.

As for Detroit, I have read a number of articles or comments over the past year or so indicating that while, yes, the blight and bankruptcy are real, there is also something of a renaissance occurring, and some pretty creative stuff going on. Some voices are a bit disturbed that the blight angle is all that shows up in the mainstream press. Sorry not to have any of those articles to hand, but reading them changed my thinking about Detroit.

So I guess it's mostly about what an individual writer might find useful and supportive, yes? For some this might be really a good fit for their needs and for others, not so.

Clicking through the photo gallery on the site, what struck me was the image of dozens of discarded lotto slips on the floor. The lottery is huge business, especially in lower income areas where those who play don't usually have a lot of disposable income. People will redirect funds initially intended for other things on a chance that their gamble will pay off and get them to a better life.

There's no mention of how the home was acquired by the project, and it could be as simple as an elderly former occupant died with no one to inhabit the home after they were gone, but I can't help but think that the circumstances of its vacancy are less kind.

Cyia said:

The lottery is huge business, especially in lower income areas where those who play don't usually have a lot of disposable income. People will redirect funds initially intended for other things on a chance that their gamble will pay off and get them to a better life.

Click to expand...

People in lower income groups have about a 0.00% chance of getting a better life by any other means.

Even a miniscule chance is better than none at all.

James D. Macdonald said:

People in lower income groups have about a 0.00% chance of getting a better life by any other means.

Even a miniscule chance is better than none at all.

Click to expand...

I'm sorry, I have to disagree, because: No. Not when they're losing money for that miniscule chance.

It's like people who sign up with vanity publishers and pay oodles of money and hope they'll "get noticed." Sure, occasionally someone gets noticed ("wins the lottery"). But most people are just out their money.

I don't think the lottery should be illegal, and I have no problem with people playing for fun, or because they like the thrill of knowing "there's a chance" and they're willing to pay a dollar to feel it. But I have very Complicated feelings about how the lottery is designed to take advantage of people's lack of understanding of mathematics, particularly among people who are lower-income, and how it actively pushes and profits off of giving the impression that buying a lottery ticket is a good financial move rather than literally just forking over your money to them.

Most of the people who are taken advantage of by the lottery's con game of bad mathematics are those who can least afford to hand over their hard-earned cash for no return.

(eta: Er, as to the OP -- I like it. What a cool idea. And even if it only makes a tiny difference, it's still helping push Detroit in the right direction. I don't think anyone should feel bad about it, either, because it's not like you can do anything to help the people who were in those houses before, and the best thing for everyone in Detroit is if the overall economy improves, right?)

I feel solidly in the middle here. I think it's fine, it can be a nice opportunity for someone whose life is one big struggle and juggle to have that moment of hope, play a dollar or two on the lottery.

The problem I see is when someone is regularly playing $10-20 worth of tickets--which I do see regularly. That can make a real difference in the weekly budget for someone living so close to the bone. But I can't really judge, I've made plenty of my own poor financial decisions in the name of hope. Or stress.

ap123 said:

The problem I see is when someone is regularly playing $10-20 worth of tickets--which I do see regularly. That can make a real difference in the weekly budget for someone living so close to the bone. But I can't really judge, I've made plenty of my own poor financial decisions in the name of hope. Or stress.

Click to expand...

Oh, too be clear -- I'm not judging the people buying the tickets! It's the overall existence/advertising practices of the lottery itself that I find to be very sleazy bordering on a con game. I don't think less of anyone for falling for it (it's a very well-done con game), but it makes me actively angry to see all the ads that make people believe they have an actual, nontrivial chance at winning when in reality that chance is effectively zero.

(And yes, I'm thinking of exactly what ap123 is talking about -- people who buy a large number of tickets when they can't afford it, because they've been led to genuinely believe it's a good financial decision. )

To relate back to writing again, I wouldn't think less of a person for falling for a scam like Publish America -- I'd think we should try to protect them. Which is why organizations like Writer Beware are so awesome.

Even if someone paid $20 a week for twenty years it wouldn't pay for one semester at a good college ... and one semester at a good college won't do a lot for you as far as your prospects go.

Sure, the lottery as it currently exists has worse odds and less honest payoffs than the old Mafia-run numbers game ... but the people who played the Numbers Game were primarily lower-income folks who did so, not because they're stupid, but because for someone in their situation it actually makes sense.

I didn't think you were It's just become such a common song, "those people" shouldn't…as if a life of drudgery doesn't deserve any comforts at all.

And yes, it's exactly why it's important for people to understand why PA is a scam, and why writers should understand the rule of money flowing to the author, not the other way around (for traditional publishing, self pubbing involves out of pocket expenses unless you can do it all yourself).

Ha, I almost ended up in Detroit!

Of course, my mom started freaking out because one of my HS teachers posted on my Facebook how some distant family member had been shot on the campus of the school I was going to attend.

Then luckily, this current opportunity in Nevada came up!

Still, this writer's hideaway sounds like a very nice deal!

James D. Macdonald said:

Sure, the lottery as it currently exists has worse odds and less honest payoffs than the old Mafia-run numbers game ... but the people who played the Numbers Game were primarily lower-income folks who did so, not because they're stupid, but because for someone in their situation it actually makes sense.

Click to expand...

I'm not saying people who play the lottery are stupid; I'm saying I believe many of them are being misled.

If people genuinely understand the odds and still find it fun to play, then I have no problem with that at all. People can do with their money what they like, no matter what income bracket they're in. But my feelings about the lottery are something like my feelings about pyramid schemes -- sure, you can make money investing in a pyramid scheme if you happen to be in one of the top layers, but the vast majority of people aren't going to be there. And even if the folks running it are totally upfront about how their pyramid schemes work, I still don't think they're ethical, because they're using flashy marketing to make people look past the fact that they're using bad math, and even if those people put their money in voluntarily, that still feels an awful lot like stealing to me.

Anyway, I have Feelings about people being taken advantage of that way. (These Feelings are also, I'll admit, tangled up in how strongly I feel about not misleading people via bad math -- don't get me started on Geico commercials -- but that's neither here nor there.) The lottery, for sure, is relatively small-scale in what it bilks from people, but to me it feels like the same theoretical category. (IMHO.)

Er, I'll stop derailing this thread now. Sorry.

James D. Macdonald said:

Even if someone paid $20 a week for twenty years it wouldn't pay for one semester at a good college ... and one semester at a good college won't do a lot for you as far as your prospects go.

Sure, the lottery as it currently exists has worse odds and less honest payoffs than the old Mafia-run numbers game ... but the people who played the Numbers Game were primarily lower-income folks who did so, not because they're stupid, but because for someone in their situation it actually makes sense.

Click to expand...

Um, I went to a college, and I have friends who went/are going to good colleges where $20 a week for 20 years ($20800, for the record) is a year or more of tuition.

How many people who spent that kind of money on the lottery actually won something? I'm sure there are statistics somewhere, but that $20000 could be used for many more useful things.

Yikes.

I definitely didn't mean to start a multi-post derail.

Sorry about that.

Government taking the limited resources of the poorest segments of the population by falsely holding out hope -- what's not to like?

Cyia said:

Yikes.

I definitely didn't mean to start a multi-post derail.

Sorry about that.

Click to expand...

For your punishment we're going to make you live in one of those houses in Detroit and perform duties as a Detroit Writer in Residence.

Kylabelle said:

For your punishment we're going to make you live in one of those houses in Detroit and perform duties as a Detroit Writer in Residence.

Click to expand...

Yeh, you git in your 80% habitable house and fix er up right. And you BETTER BE A PILLAR OF THE LITERARY COMMUNITY *shakes fist*

...in seriousness, it's an interesting idea, and should be interesting as well to see how it plays out

(but what *does* 80% habitable mean, exactly...? )

buzhidao said:

(but what *does* 80% habitable mean, exactly...? )

Click to expand...

An excellent question and one I would definitely investigate closely, should I be a candidate for one of these houses.

I'd guess it means there will be some painting and maybe some minor carpentry fixes, like that. Hopefully all the plumbing will be functional.

ETA in my younger years I participated in fixing up a lot of old rowhouses in Baltimore, and lived in a couple of those. For a youngun with energy, it can be lots of fun.

I became interested in Detroit while working on a novel that takes place there.

I think this is a really neat idea, and I think there's potential benefit there. Were I living another life (i.e., didn't have a fiancè and a mortgage and and), I'd apply for it.

buzhidao said:

(but what *does* 80% habitable mean, exactly...?)

Click to expand...

It means the roof only leaks when it rains.

James D. Macdonald said:

It means the roof only leaks when it rains.

Click to expand...

Or that one of the five rooms has no floor.

It means 20% uninhabitable.

There's just that one room. One room you need to leave the door closed. Everything else is great!

If I didn't have the kid, whom I'd have to take out of school ...

This is definitely the sort of opportunity I'd love to take advantage of, though.

I would love a free house and an expectation to write. And I'm told Detroit isn't a bad place to be (as long as you stay out of Detroit! bad-um tish) But, um, does it say where my FOOD would come from? As much as I love writing, I think I would go batty (and very, very hungry) if it were all I did.

I like the idea. If I didn't have a family I think I would have applied for something like this. But the crime rate kind of deters me from bringing my children along for the ride...