Shout out to humanodon louderwords cW . I think this is a great opportunity for all/any of us (as long as you are located in the U.S.) and if you haven't heard of it, I'm glad to share it with you and I really think we should all take a chance (relatively low risk!) and try it out. Also shout-out to anyone who writes prose too, because the residency is non-genre/non-style specific. @shaxxonit@
Yeah, my Facebook feed lit up with that Amtrak thing. Good on 'em. A publicly subsidized company publicly subsidizing the arts. It's like we're in Europe, only with Bulgarian-level transport. And if I didn't have a life and a bunch of gigs and a wife and a daughter and a deep and aspiring loathing of having my work judged by people who aren't going to pay for it, I might even apply. Like every one of my friends have. Because a week on a train car for free? Sure, sounds like fun. If we're being honest, though, there are more romantic ways to do it. I'll say this though: The constant emphasis on residencies was the #1 reason I bailed on Writer's Digest. You discuss "what makes a 'real' writer." I don't call myself a writer and I've optioned two screenplays and penned a handful of magazine articles. I've also not optioned seven other screenplays so the pallor of failure is everpresent (never mind that the WGAw poll results indicated most people option their eighth screenplay and I optioned my third). I don't make my living writing. I know several people who do. They're "writers" but unless they've got a book on the NYT list or a movie in theaters they don't get taken seriously at restaurants, either. At least I have a fallback profession that sounds slightly-less made up (In this town, at least. Try telling people in Eu Claire you're a "sound mixer" and they group you in with "key grip" and "best boy electric" and "gaffer" and other such jobs they see in credits but don't understand). I suppose a "residency" is a way to be a "real writer" but since they're almost always limited-appointment, limited-remuneration, limited-prestige competitions for limited-awareness universities out in the back of beyond, the end result is the whole concept of "residency" gets dragged down. Does paying $4k to Southern Indiana University to spend a month in their "writers in residence" program make you a writer any more than going to Rock Star Fantasy Camp makes you a musician? Combine that with the fact that any subsidy of these residencies comes, in one way or another, out of the exorbitant tuition that's on everyone's mind. Would I rather see universities subsidize poets than fitness centers? Actually, no. The building of fitness centers creates jobs, and the occupation of fitness centers creates fitness. Subsidizing poets and writers convinces everyone in the system that poets and writers need not actually sell anything as welfare is gonna pick up the bill. At one point I considered Clarion West. I'm friends with a guy who was instructing at the time. You'll note they don't call it a "residency" they call it a "workshop". "Workshop" I believe in. It implies you're going to learn something, you're going to do something. "Residency" implies you're going to sleep there.
I think a residency is something that is much drooled over but in effect, I think a long-term one would be difficult. Personally I find that the more I have to do, the more I do. That sounds redundant. What I mean is that I am most productive when I have multiple things on my plate; when I don't have enough time to dick around. On the surface it sounds like heaven but I know my personality. I feel like I would waste a lot of time. Admittedly, if I wasted 20 hours of a 40-hour week the other 20 would still be spent on poetry, theoretically, which is more than I (probably) do now. This may be one of those things I can't truly speak on til I've experienced it (ha! When! If ever!). The Amtrak residency seems like an ideal amount of time to maintain drive and focus. I think to be a writer all you have to do is write. The rest are trappings and ego-strokes. The rest are ways that poets(or just plain writers) use to judge each other. It takes more, yeah, to be a good writer but it doesn't take things like residencies, grants, any of that jazz. Those are more like the rewards, if you want them and if you're doing it right. They are recognition of talent, but they do not mean yours is the only or the best talent, and the lack of them does not mean you lack talent. (Or so I tell myself... ;) ) I will say that good MFA programs will cover tuition and/or provide a stipend. Were I to pursue an MFA (a long term plan indeed but maybe not impossible ) I would not go to a school that would require me to go into debt. I think that's ridiculous. An MFA is ultimately in many ways a frivolous degree. (Sorry, MFAs.) It will not help you get a job, at least not a job that would allow you to pay back any student loans. For me personally obtaining an MFA would actually knock me out of my career path and would probably make it substantially difficult to return to it. You try explaining to an interviewer that you just decided to take 2-3 years off for a completely unrelated degree. Those years off would cause my experience and knowledge to become outdated and significantly less valuable. An MFA would probably cause me to lose value - at least, in the world in which I currently exist. (This post is getting too long; I have been thinking too much about this lately.) I see your point that subsidizing poets & writers and allowing them to merely "exist" and "create" without necessarily having to "produce" or generate returns is a form of welfare. Jobs are absolutely better, though I have misgivings just typing that. Let's say: please don't take that statement to an extreme. Jobs are better, but it doesn't mean I would advocate for art's extinction if it meant everyone was employed. A world without art and full of jobs: I think it would be a gray hell. I think we would be drones. But instead of demanding or seeking a subsidy via a residence, grant, or other similar opportunity, I think that the wise choice is to support oneself in the daytime, and pursue the passion in the downtime. It's a more sustainable, reliable approach. I completely agree with the distinction between workshop and residency. A workshop is a class; a residency doesn't guarantee any kind of feedback or learning experience, doesn't even guarantee that you'll have a mentor or another poet/writer around to bounce ideas off of. If I had an MFA and were offered a residency well yes I'd take it; you'd be a bit of a fool not to. But if I were offered one today and had to give up my job it would be easy to turn down. You might enjoy the blog post I have drafted, coming up in a week or so. It will discuss why National Poetry Month sucks, and compares writers to musicians. It's currently pretty opinionated. May end up toning it down. Edit: As for transiberian, <s> ugh but yeah, then I'd actually have to get a passport and like, leave the country </s> And as for MFA programs, I've got my eye on Texas.
I've spent plenty of time in Texas. I'll take Siberia, thanks. The way to make a living on residencies is the same as with any academic - grant-chasing. It's a drag. You're also not really participating in an open market - you're pandering to a select few that control grant money. I'd argue that the detachment of poetry and classical music from the general populace is largely due to it being produced for, consumed by and judged over by a tiny splinter of the population that holds Middle America in contempt. FYI - the Nicholl fellowship is generally open to between six and ten people a year. Between 7500 and 10,000 apply every year. I know two Nicholl fellows personally; my career isn't that much behind theirs. And while I could write volumes on the Nicholl, I will say that six out of 7,000 is damn near a sweepstakes... and the Amtrak thing is taller.And as for MFA programs, I've got my eye on Texas.
Yeah I know. Stupid long odds. And they probably aren't as interested in poets as prose writers. But if I don't try I guarantee failure. Rejections all the time mang, I swim in dat shit. Edit: for facts, I have submitted about 77 poems for consideration in various lit mags so far this year. One has been accepted. I'll post it, of course, when it's up.
I really like this video by the world's best vlogging robot zefrank about rejection. One of the things he tells is that you should be somewhat grateful for rejection, as it means you're aiming high and trying how far you can go. A lot of people dont get rejected at all and are playing it safe. I hope you'll try your best anyway.
Great video. I appreciate the words of support. Rejection really is just the name of the game in the poetry world. To be honest I've been lucky and mostly get really nice rejections, like, "we like your poems, they're just not right for us right now." it can be frustrating but then i write poems about it. Or they tell me "we like this it's just not right for us, send us other stuff in the future!" The acceptance I received recently was really encouraging and I have been submitting even more. last year I submitted 110 poems total. I figure I'll double that this year. It's all per aspera ad astra here. Not everyone is going to like my stuff. I just flip this clip on and keep doing everything I can think of to learn more and get better because I figure that's my only option if I want to keep doing this, and I do. Thanks again. I'd rather give the whole writing/publishing thing a shot and get rejected than live in a protected bubble. And I'm hoping to publish a collection later this year, though whether I do it through self-publishing or a press is TBD. I try just to not expect much. That way any return is positive.
It's nice to see that an organization that is so flush with cash-flow is giving back to the world. ....oh, wait. But, I say go for it you guys. I would.Round-trip train travel will be provided on an Amtrak long-distance route. Each resident will be given a private sleeper car, equipped with a desk, a bed and a window to watch the American countryside roll by for inspiration.
-That sounds pretty cool to me. As someone that has taken long distance Amtrak trips many times -(some tips in that link on how to do so in style), I would jump at this opportunity if I were a budding writer, even if I had to "write about trains."
The thing is, this program isn't going to make or break Amtrak. In fact, I would argue that the value in offering a program like this is financially brilliant. What do you think when you think Amtrak? Trains? Um....old school? Um....who takes Amtrak? I have no idea. On LA radio, they are advertising Amtrak from LA to Chicago for 2 or 3x the price of flying to Chicago. My only thought was "why would I want to take a fucking train to Chicago? My god that sounds long and horrid and expensive." Maybe because I'm on the west coast or because my only experience with Amtrak was taking a $110 train from NYC to Boston after a snowstorm because the $15 chinatown busses weren't running and class was starting, but I don't ever think about Amtrak or google them or look at prices or consider using them to travel anywhere. The opportunity to get people on board, for a nobel reason, so perhaps they chose Amtrak over flying or Chinatown busses next time is a great decision. Writers may have a great experience and advise friends, family or internet buddies to take Amtrak in the future. They might see some gorgeous country and chose to take their kids on Amtrak later. People might check prices on flights, busses, and Amtrak next time they need to go somewhere. No one really considers Amtrak as a viable mode of transportation but Amtrak does have an opportunity to establish themselves as a transportation + relaxation + great scenery + get work done. My views on Amtrak have changed a bit solely because of this single Hubski conversation. How many other people have thought about Amtrak as a company and service solely from this incident? The branding / name recognition in such a positive light will more than pay for the cost of the program and the twitter and blog conversations are worth more than the media buys for their national ads.It's nice to see that an organization that is so flush with cash-flow is giving back to the world. ....oh, wait.
Yeah, I was joking. That said: Amtrak board meeting: Bigshot: Anyone have any ideas on how we can become solvent once again Insom: What if we give select poets the ability to ride for free and write about it? Bigshot: Finally, someone around here is thinking. I think it's a cool idea and will cost next to nothing in the grand scheme of things but to say it is "financially brilliant" is a bit of a stretch, don't ya think? My reason for posting the sarcastic link in my OP was just to point out that Amtrak is/has been hemorrhaging money for years. Since they're so heavily subsidized, they might as well be giving free rides to artists. But to suggest that this is somehow the best way to create awareness in the market that Amtrak is a good option is kinda silly, don't you think?I would argue that the value in offering a program like this is financially brilliant
-hmmm, brilliant? Really?
Based on what I know, they took advantage of an existing situation, correct? They didn't have top level people, 5 social media gurus, an ad agency, and media buyers sitting around coming up with this plan. The only cost was the cost of the tickets and integrating into existing marketing. The reason I call it brilliant is because you can't buy this type of publicity. They couldn't have paid $5m to have social media platforms explode with this type of authentic conversation. People separate advertising and what they actually think of a company so heavily these days. We ignore and avoid traditional ads like the plague. I don't have numbers for what Amtrak spends on radio and tv ads or social media, but it's far less than what giving writers free train tickets will cost and far less effective.
I will say that it has generated considerable publicity and I expect it will do so pretty solidly through the coming year. It is also better publicity than they could get from a simple ad. This puts them in a positive light on a couple of different levels. In addition, there's the word of mouth. I've been telling tons of people about this because it seems like a great opportunity and also, just a really cool thing. I think that my enthusiasm and personal avocation of the program probably has more impact that an Amtrak poster or YouTube ad would have. Financially brilliant? Maybe, if they are also using this as an opportunity to downsize their marketing. AKA axe a couple jobs.
Let's reconvene in 2 years on this post and see what sort of financial impact it had on Amtrak. Once again, for the record I think it's cool that they're doing it but I don't think it's worthy of the "brilliant" claim. Also, as the one person in this thread thus far that has extensive Amtrak experience, I'll say that I hope they've focused time and energy on improving customer service or put these writers on "special trains" or the testimonials that come from this may prove interesting. Also, I'm having a bah humbug type of day. Sorry.
's okay TNG, we all have them. I really only think it would merit the term brilliant if they are basically laying off their whole marketing department because that would probably save them a nice bit of money. However it would also be a stupid long term move. (Unless they know something we don't.)