Skip to Content

Share

Detroitism

By
January 15, 2011

What does “ruin porn” tell us about the motor city, ourselves, other American cities?

Marchandmeffre-575.jpg Photograph by Yves Marchan and Romain Meffre courtesy Steidl.

Red Dawn 2, the forthcoming sequel to the nineteen eighties B-movie about a Soviet occupation of America, was shot last year in downtown Detroit. A long-abandoned modernist skyscraper coincidentally undergoing demolition served as a backdrop for battle scenes between American guerrillas and the Communist occupiers, now Chinese. For weeks, Chinese propaganda posters fluttered in the foreground of the half-destroyed office building, whose jagged entrails were visible through the holes opened by the wrecking ball. A pedestrian routinely bumped into Asian-American extras with Michigan accents and fake Kalashnikovs, while a parking garage played the role of a Communist police station. It was an uncanny spectacle: the very real rubble of the Motor City’s industrial economy serving as the movie backdrop for post-industrial America’s paranoid fantasies of national victimization. What made it even weirder was the fact that the film’s producers just left the posters hanging when they packed up. A red-and-yellow poster on that same parking garage assured us for weeks afterward that our new rulers were “here to help.”

“Do you have any books with pictures of abandoned buildings?” demanded a customer of a bookseller friend of mine at Leopold’s Books in Detroit. The man marched to the cash register and abruptly blurted out his question, looking, perhaps, for one of the recent pair of books on Detroit’s industrial ruins and its abandoned homes, Andrew Moore’s Detroit Disassembled and Yves Marchand and Romain Meffre’s forthcoming The Ruins of Detroit. These two books, along with the architectural history Lost Detroit: Stories Behind the Motor City’s Majestic Ruins, are part of a small Detroit culture boom over the last year. Besides the new books by Moore and Marchand and Meffre, photographers have chronicled the city’s decaying structures in the likes of Slate.com, the New York Review of Books online, and Time, which moved a troupe of Detroit bloggers to an old mansion on the city’s east side, an old-fashioned news bureau mixed with a bizarro-Real World social experiment. A new graphic novel, Sword of My Mouth, imagines a band of survivors living in a depopulated Detroit after the Rapture has swept up the righteous, a clever satire of the clichéd description of Detroit’s “post-apocalyptic” landscape and the moralizing that has always bolstered public discussion of the social problems of American cities. And while empty buildings would seem more suited to still rather than moving images, filmmakers like Julien Temple have recently explored industrial ruins in his Detroitsploitation documentary Requiem for Detroit?, while Detroit boosters respond with their own, sunnier films (Johnny Knoxville’s Detroit Lives and Florent Tillon’s Detroit Wild City) about entrepreneurs, artists, and urban farmers amidst the ruins.

Detroiters often react testily to this kind of attention (as I do), even when it is done skillfully and with good intentions, as much of it is. Some of the criticism of negative publicity is just boosterism, as when the City Council denounced the producers of the ABC crime drama Detroit 187 for peddling the idea that there are criminals in Detroit. Others, weary of condescending criticism from outsiders, will defend Detroit’s reputation, or at least their privileged right to defame it, something like defending a bad parent: I can say anything I want about the old man, but don’t you dare. Ruin photography, in particular, has been criticized for its “pornographic” sensationalism, and my bookseller friend won’t sell much of it for that reason. And others roll their eyes at all the positive attention heaped on the young, mostly white “creatives,” which glosses over the city’s deep structural problems and the diversity of ideas to help fix them. So much ruin photography and ruin film aestheticizes poverty without inquiring of its origins, dramatizes spaces but never seeks out the people that inhabit and transform them, and romanticizes isolated acts of resistance without acknowledging the massive political and social forces aligned against the real transformation, and not just stubborn survival, of the city. And to see oneself portrayed in this way, as a curiosity to be lamented or studied, is jarring for any Detroiter, who is of course also an American, with all the sense of self-confidence and native-born privilege that we’re taught to associate with the United States.

The city has been a bellwether of each major urban crisis since World War II.

That some of the recent focus on Detroit ruins is exploitative in its depiction of Detroit’s impoverishment bears repeating, but more compelling are the reasons for our contemporary fascination with images of first-world urban decline, and not just in the Motor City. Ruin websites, photography collections, and urban exploration blogs chronicle industrial ruins across North America and Europe, from Youngstown, Ohio to Bucharest, Romania. Yet Detroit remains the Mecca of urban ruins. Its impressive collection of pre-Depression skyscrapers have been memorably lionized as a “American Acropolis” by Camilo José Vergara, the pioneering photographer of American ghetto landscapes. Buildings that have escaped the wrecking ball have also, for the most part, escaped gentrification, since most of Detroit’s economic elite remain sequestered in the suburbs, with little of the desire for urbanity that one finds among the leisure classes of Chicago, New York, London, or Philadelphia. Nor has the city ever been able to do on any significant scale what Pittsburgh has accomplished with its defunct Homestead steel mill, now a shopping mall, or what New York has done with upscale condos in old warehouses—leverage the hollow shells of a productive economy into the shell games of the credit economy.

For media workers from more prosperous cities, Detroit’s spaces of ruination appear to tell a history, or at least evoke a vague sense of historical pathos, absent in those other, wealthier cities. Indeed, one of the notable features of this Detroit boom is the fact that few of the people driving it actually live here. For someone from New York, Paris, or San Francisco, history seems more visible here, and this is the visual fascination that Detroit holds. As Marchand and Meffre write on their website, “Ruins are the visible symbols and landmarks of our societies and their changes, small pieces of history in suspension.” In a country perennially plagued with a historical amnesia, ruins are rare permanent reminders of a history unsuited to the war memorials and equestrian statues that dot the national landscape. Another reason for the fascination with Detroit’s decline is less about history, though, and more about the future.

Coleman Young, Detroit’s charismatic and still-controversial mayor during the years of the city’s most precipitous decline in the nineteen seventies and eighties, put it well in his fascinating 1994 autobiography, Hard Stuff: “Detroit today,” he wrote, “is your town tomorrow.” From the 1967 riots, when Detroit became the flashpoint of the country’s political and racial crisis, to the deindustrialization and crime of the nineteen seventies and the nineteen eighties, the city has been a bellwether of each major urban crisis since World War II. Today, Detroit, to use an overused but appropriate metaphor given the city’s scarred appearance, is “ground zero” of the collapse of the finance and real estate economy in America. Detroit has been hit as hard as any city by the foreclosure crisis and by unemployment, and so it embodies the looming jobless future, or more precisely, our worst fears about that future.

godleftdetroit-575.jpgPhotograph by Andrew Moore courtesy DAP.

The Three Detroit Stories: The Metonym

Every week, it seems, brings another “Detroit Story” somewhere in the popular media: of laid-off auto workers, of the recently bankrupt auto corporations, tributes to hardy inner-city entrepreneurs, and more pictures of abandoned buildings. There are three principal conventions of Detroit writing in the major media. First, and most common, is the one that has the least to do with the city itself: the Metonym. In auto industry reporting, “Detroit” is a textbook example of metonymy, the trope in which a complex thing is replaced by a simpler, easily recognized equivalent: “10 Downing Street” for the British government, “Wall Street” for high finance, “Silicon Valley” for computer hardware, and so on. The substitution of “Detroit” for the auto industry bears within it an implicit, bitter irony, however, since the name of the city stands in for an industry that has largely abandoned it. “Detroit” can hold other, subtler meanings, too. For liberals, like George Monbiot in the Guardian newspaper, “Detroit” equals dirty industry and corporate welfare. His headline “Let Detroit die,” from a 2009 article that denounced the U.S. government’s loans to the Big Three automakers, sounded a bit callous if you happen to live or work here, and are therefore more often the victim rather than the beneficiary of pollution or corporate welfare. For rightists, “Detroit” also connotes unions and other bogeymen of urban Democratic politics. Thus, the conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer warned of “lemon socialism” once “the government owns Detroit,” a possibility almost as improbable in the literal sense as the People’s Liberation Army on Woodward Avenue.

The Detroit Lament

The second style of Detroit reportage I would term the Detroit Lament. The Lament turns from the purely rhetorical use of Detroit as metonym for something else to a more visceral depiction of the city’s scarred landscape, and occasionally, though only occasionally, its residents. The Lament is typically mournful in tone—elegiac at best and sanctimonious at worst. Because the Lament is thematically preoccupied with loss, of people, of buildings, of the always ill-defined “way of life” said to be nurtured by the old automotive economy and union wages, its primary subject is spatial: the empty lots, the derelict buildings, the overwhelming vastness of a city mutilated by freeways and marked by more vacant land than it can ever plausibly develop. For this reason, the Lament lends itself to the visual media, and for their elegiac emphasis on loss and decline we can classify Detroit Disassembled and The Ruins of Detroit in this category. The Lament signals a fascination with what seems to be all that we have of our twentieth-century history (at least besides those war memorials): the brick-and-steel spectacles of the industrial age, out of which some explanation could be found for the present desperate predicament of urban America.

Detroit remains the Mecca of urban ruins.

The Ruins of Detroit and Detroit Disassembled are products of a collaboration. The photographers are friends, and Moore was introduced to the city by the two Parisians Marchand and Meffre. They often take pictures of the same abandoned buildings, even the same rooms, sometimes from the same angles, showing how conventional and well-trod Detroit ruin photography has become, despite its pioneering posture and the real danger of some of these decrepit structures.

Moore’s pictures in Detroit Disassembled play heavily on a pervasive, uneasy sense of quietude. His photos of interior spaces and exterior architectural shots are similarly uncluttered by superfluous details, and the emptiness creates the eerie effect of evoking the absent people who once inhabited the offices and classrooms he depicts. One expects an urban ruin to be filled with debris and destruction, yet some of these rooms, like an empty nineteen-nineties corporate meeting room or an upended office, look as if the occupants only just left in a great hurry, knocking over chairs to flee an impending disaster that never arrived. The sparseness of his photographs is sometimes comically banal, as in the old dentist’s office frozen in time, and sometimes macabre, as in his picture of the rusting hulk of the Bob-Lo island ferry at sunrise. His captions offer only the most superficial details about the buildings depicted or the rare individuals who appear, which on the one hand suggests a lack of interest in these places in their own right. On the other hand, the evacuation of context from the photos gives them the uncanny feeling of a place you might have been before in some other time or place—and if you’ve ever been inside a corporate office, a Catholic school classroom, or a dentist’s office anywhere in America in the last thirty years, you have. Some of Moore’s photos evoke Young’s old dictum as a warning from the urban future—“Detroit,” a picture of a vacant offices whispers, “coming to your town soon.”

But other photos tend towards overwrought melodrama, like the photograph of an abandoned nursing home tagged with a spray-painted slogan, “God Has Left Detroit.” Moore leans on the compositional tactic of ironic juxtaposition, an old standby of documentary city photography since at least the days of Robert Frank and Helen Levitt. In one photograph (repeated in Marchand and Meffre’s collection) of the East Grand Boulevard Methodist church, its Biblical invocation, “And you shall say that God did it,” looms above its sanctuary. The irony is obvious, heavy-handedly so, yet the photographer’s meaning is less clear. One feels obliged to raise the obvious defense of the Almighty here: If anyone or anything “did it,” General Motors and the Detroit City Council had a hell of a lot more to do with it than God did. And who said God was ever here in the first place?

But of course, no photograph can adequately identify the origins for Detroit’s contemporary ruination; all it can represent is the spectacular wreckage left behind in the present, after decades of deindustrialization, housing discrimination, suburbanization, drug violence, municipal corruption and incompetence, highway construction, and other forms of urban renewal have taken their terrible tolls. Indeed, what is most unsettling—but also most troubling—in Moore’s photos is their resistance to any narrative content or explication. Moore’s shot of a grove of birch trees growing out of rotting books in a warehouse might be a sign of Detroit’s stubborn persistence, as the Detroit poet Philip Levine argues a bit too optimistically in his accompanying essay, but it could easily be a visual joke on the city’s supposed intellectual and physical decrepitude, a bad joke that does not need repeating. One often finds oneself asking of Detroit Disassmbled, The Ruins of Detroit, and indeed all ruin photographs, first, “What happened?” followed swiftly by, “What’s your point?” This comes partly from the awkwardness of the photographers’ aestheticism and postmodern detachment, which jars with the social violence of the history being depicted, and it’s partly down to their lack of interest in the human inhabitants of the city. But it’s a bit more than that.

These photos of uninhabited ruined spaces do little more than confirm what the most casual observer already knows about Detroit and cities like it. Moore is sensitive to this danger, and does includes a few photos that represent Detroiters leading lives amidst the ruins. Besides two portraits of Detroiters at home, Moore also includes a photo of a rooftop party by twenty-something white urban explorers, a self-conscious reflection, perhaps, on his own access to these spaces and on the well-beaten paths of ruin fetishists. Vergara, the Chilean-born photographer whose photographs of Newark, Detroit, Chicago, Camden, and New York are collected in The New American Ghetto, addresses the ahistorical failing of much ruin photography by investing much more heavily in the ruins: Revisiting the same site over a period of years, or even decades, Vergara’s pictures show with often heartbreaking clarity the slow, painful transformation of a house, a street, a neighborhood. And Austin and Doerr’s Lost Detroit combines ruin photography with architectural history, seeking to fill in the historical gaps. The ruin photos in Detroit Disassembled and The Ruins of Detroit, despite the authors’ obvious reverence for their brick-and-steel subjects, are also spectacles of degradation, in which, as Frederic Jameson writes about the postmodern condition, our “putative past is little more than a set of dusty spectacles.” In requisitioning the ruin’s aura of historical pathos, ruin photos suggest a vanquished, even glorious past but, like the ruins themselves, present no way to understand our own relationship to the decline we are seeing. After all, this is not Rome or Greece, vanished civilizations; these ruins are our own, and the society they indict is ours as well. As a purely aesthetic object, even with the best intentions, ruin photography cannot help but exploit a city’s misery; but as political documents on their own, they have little new to tell us.

Some of these rooms look as if the occupants only just left in a great hurry, knocking over chairs to flee an impending disaster that never arrived.

The British filmmaker Julien Temple’s documentary, Requiem for Detroit?, and his accompanying Guardian essay, “Detroit: The Last Days,” are the quintessence of the Detroit Lament. “Approaching the derelict shell of downtown Detroit,” Temple breathlessly writes, “we see full-grown trees sprouting from the tops of deserted skyscrapers.

“In their shadows, the glazed eyes of the street zombies slide into view, stumbling in front of the car. Our excitement at driving into what feels like a man-made hurricane Katrina is matched only by sheer disbelief that what was once the fourth-largest city in the U.S. could actually be in the process of disappearing from the face of the earth.”

This is the style denounced locally as “ruin porn.” All the elements are here: the exuberant connoisseurship of dereliction; the unembarrassed rejoicing at the “excitement” of it all, hastily balanced by the liberal posturing of sympathy for a “man-made Katrina;” and most importantly, the absence of people other than those he calls, cruelly, “street zombies.” The city is a shell, and so are the people who occasionally stumble into the photographer’s viewfinder.

parkingdetroit-575.jpgPhotograph by Andrew Moore courtesy DAP.

The Lamenter is both a very contemporary phenomenon and one of American literature’s oldest urban types. Over a hundred years ago, Jacob Riis wandered into the slums of downtown New York with a police escort, a flash camera, and a mission to document and improve the city’s “other half.” The Detroit Lamenter adopts a similar posture, although with less of Riis’s sense of moral purpose. How could the national conscience tolerate such misery, Riis asked, in the midst of ever-increasing abundance? And how is this possible, Temple’s film repeatedly asks, in a first-world country that put the world on wheels? What makes this subgenre of urban expose particularly contemporary, though, is the historical and economic phenomenon it struggles to represent, a phenomenon the newness of which few of us can adequately comprehend. Just as for Riis the teeming industry of the turn of the century created new spaces, like the urban factory and tenement, and therefore a new people, the shrinking cities of the first world are the equivalent new “problem” spaces of the twenty-first-century urban world. Across the global north, city-dwellers flee job-scarce shrinking cities, leaving behind an urban economy increasingly cut out of the national economy. Some estimates, for example, place real unemployment in Detroit at a staggering 50 percent. The third-world megaslum—cities like Mexico City and Jakarta, with populations close to twenty million inhabitants—and the first-world shrinking city look increasingly like the true cities of tomorrow. Yet the teeming cities of the global south seem like the least shocking of the two, since we expect that cities be crowded, dirty, busy, and always growing. The shrinking city, on the other hand, defies much of what we think we know about cities and their development, at least as long as “growth” and “development” are the only measures of vitality.

Detroit Utopia

The third major subgenre of the popular Detroit narrative is a backlash against the pornographic excesses of the Lament and is, at best, an attempt to find a new definition of urban vitality. The Utopians are well-meaning defenders of the city’s possibilities. Locally, they are often politically active, often young, and, it should be noted, often white. This class of Detroit story chronicles Detroit’s possibilities, with a heavy emphasis on art and urban agriculture on abandoned land. It can also take the form of human-interest stories about local entrepreneurs persevering amidst the destruction. Toby Barlow’s series of New York Times articles on bicycling and one-hundred-dollar houses in the city anticipated a gentrification-fuelled Detroit Renaissance that most honest observers must admit will never come. (If Detroit is really so full of possibilities, why do so many of the possibilities so closely resemble a cut-rate version of what western Brooklyn already looks like?) Despite their differences, the common problem with many of the Lamenters and Utopians is that both see Detroit as an exception to the contemporary United States, rather than as one of its exemplary places. Detroit figures as either a nightmare image of the American Dream, where equal opportunity and abundance came to die, or as an updated version of it, where bohemians from expensive coastal cities can have the one-hundred-dollar house and community garden of their dreams.

An imposing, neoclassical behemoth even in life, the windowless station has become a melancholy symbol of the city’s transformation in death.

The city fascinates because it is a condensed, emphatic example of the trials of so many American cities in an era of globalization, which has brought with it intensified economic instability and seemingly intractable joblessness. Detroit is also iconic, intimately familiar to generations of Americans who associate R&B music, automobiles, and the modernist skyscraper with urbanity itself, and yet the decline depicted in ruin photos is frightening and at times grotesque. While unique in its scale, however, Detroit’s entrenched infrastructural and economic problems are themselves as American as apple pie, reproduced on varying scales in Newark, Buffalo, Cleveland, and Camden. Detroit, then, isn’t an exception to a general rule of class mobility and meritocracy, the pillars of the so-called “American Dream,” as it’s often seen.

It’s a clear example of how that term, these days at least, increasingly looks like an optimistic delusion—and maybe it always was.

youarehere-575.jpgPhotograph by Yves Marchan and Romain Meffre courtesy Steidl.

In viewing Detroit Disassembled and The Ruins of Detroit, one is conscious of nothing so much as failure—of the city itself, of course, but also of the photographs to communicate anything more than that self-evident fact. This is the meta-irony of these often ironic pictures: Though they trade on the peculiarity of Detroit as living ruin, these are pictures of historical oblivion. The decontextualized aesthetics of ruin make them pictures of nothing and no place in particular. Detroit in these artists’ work is, likewise, a mass of unique details that fails to tell a complete story. Both books include a picture of a melting clock in the shuttered and soon-to-be-demolished Cass Tech High School; the clock is emblazoned ironically with the brand name “National Time,” inviting clucks of recognition from Salvador Dalí fans and armchair allegorists. Michigan Central Station on the city’s west side is an abandoned depot from the golden age of rail travel, designed by the architectural firm that produced New York’s Grand Central Station. The station is the Eiffel Tower of ruin photography and probably Detroit’s most recognizable modern monument other than the downtown Renaissance Center complex, as shown by the hobbyist and professional photographers who descend upon it on every sunny day.

An imposing, neoclassical behemoth even in life, the windowless station has become a melancholy symbol of the city’s transformation in death. Moore and Marchand/Meffre both treat the depot, appropriately, as a monument as much as a ruin. In Marchand and Meffre’s exterior photograph, the station fills the frame; there is no outside to this massive structure, no escaping its gaping windows and shattered glass, or the overcast daylight that lends the scene a grey, deathly pallor. Moore takes a subtly different approach, photographing the station as afternoon sunlight bathes one side of the building in shadow, while a tiny figure in red ambles brightly across a thin ribbon of parkland at the bottom of the frame. The figure is dwarfed by the massive station, and if it weren’t for his shirt, we probably wouldn’t see him at all. Similarly, it takes a careful observer to note, amid the wall of broken windows and grey brick, the “SAVE THE DEPOT” graffiti painted by defenders of the station, which is criminally neglected by its slumlord owner and periodically threatened with demolition by grandstanding politicians. If you look close enough, there is life here.

Michigan Central Station appears to be a potent symbol of decline and the inevitable cycles of capitalist booms and busts. But there’s also money to be made on destruction. The decrepit station has been owned for years by the city’s most notorious real estate mogul, Matty Moroun, a politically-connected, Teflon-coated trucking magnate who owns the bridge to Canada and covets land near the city’s major transportation hubs. Alas, a photograph can tell us little about the city’s real estate industry and the state’s cheaply-bought politicians. All it can do is show the catastrophic results. Taken together, all the images of the ruined city become fragments of stories told so often about Detroit that they are at the same time instantly familiar and utterly vague, like a dimly remembered episode from childhood or a vivid dream whose storyline we can’t quite remember in the morning: Murder city! Unemployment! Drugs! White flight! Crime! Because the ironic appeal of modern ruins lies in the archaeological fantasy of discovery combined with the banality of what is discovered—a nineteen-eighties dentist’s office is not implicitly fascinating for anyone who inhabited one in its intact state—a ruin photograph succeeds in providing the details of a familiar story whose major plot points we can’t piece together.

Photographs like Moore, Marchand, and Meffre’s succeed, at least, in compelling us to ask the questions necessary to put this story together—Detroit’s story, but also the increasingly-familiar story of urban America in an era of prolonged economic crisis. That they themselves fail to do so testifies not only to the limitations of any still image, but our collective failure to imagine what Detroit’s future—our collective urban future—holds for us all.

G

John Patrick Leary teaches American literature at Wayne State University in Detroit and is at work on a book on the place of the ”third world” in the American imagination. He lives in southwest Detroit.

Writer’s Recommendations:

Hard Stuff: The Autobiography of Mayor Coleman Young. The profane, confrontational, self-serving, but excellent autobiography from Detroit’s mayor from 1974-1973.

Dan Austin and Sean Doerr, Lost Detroit: Stories Behind the Motor City’s Majestic Ruins. Detroit ruin photography that fills in many of the architectural and historical gaps.

Camilo José Vergara’s American Ruins and The New American Ghetto depict dereliction and abandonment in cities like Detroit, Camden, Chicago, and New York City.

Thomas Sugrue’s essential The Origins of the Urban Crisis: Race and Inequality in Postwar Detroit is a powerful account of Detroit’s twentieth-century history.

Readers like you make Guernica possible. Please show your support.

Tagged with:

Share on FacebookShare on TwitterAdd to BufferShare on LinkedInShare on TumblrSubmit to StumbleUpon
Submit to redditShare on App.netShare via email

You might also like

18 comments for Detroitism

  1. Comment by vince carducci on January 18, 2011 at 3:21 pm

    Excellent piece of analysis. To your list of recommended reading, I’d add Robert Conot’s “American Odyssey: A History of a Great American City” (unfortunately appears to be out of print). Conot was hired by the Johnson Administration after the 1967 uprising as part of a group of researchers trying to find a communist conspiracy at the center of the civil disturbances that took place around the country to which another poster (Mary) alluded. When they didn’t come up anything (that is, anything people wanted to hear), the funding was cut. Conot finished the book on his own and it gives a great history from the beginning up to the Young Administration. I agree totally with Aku’s comment. The story that really has never been properly told is the connection between the transition between Fordism and neoliberalism for which Detroit, as the center of worker power and entitlement, served as the sacrificial lamb.

  2. Comment by Bryan Verhelle on January 19, 2011 at 3:26 am

    While this article is handsomely written, I tire of the debate within; to speak of or ignore Detroit’s blight. We hear that no one wants to take pictures of anything but abandoned buildings in Detroit. I don’t think thats true but I’m not bothered if it is. Contruction and deconstruction can be equally fascinating and Detroit’s industrial and architectural declination is relevant. Behemoths like the Michigan Central Station, the Packard Plant and old Cass Tech High along with smaller buildings like the Grande Ballroom, Eastown Theater and Roberts Brass Works make adventurers out of anyone curious enough to take interest and step inside. The demolition and/or renovation of buildings will leave some history in their wake albeit to differing degrees. While many buildings are still abandoned and accessible, I intend to fully connect with their past and present because their future is uncertain. You will pry my Ruin Porn from my cold dead hands. I am privileged to live and play in Detroit.

    By the way, I hear Greece is complaining that tourists are flocking to the Acropolis!

  3. Comment by Rebecca on January 19, 2011 at 6:54 am

    Bryan V., I don’t think ancient Greece and Detroit are very comparable except in the most basic sense.

    On the topic of ‘ruin porn’, these past few years it’s become another kind of kitsch, meaningless. Female nudes posed in decaying industrial spaces used to be limited to sophomore art student portfolios, but now they’re everywhere.

  4. Comment by James Davies on January 19, 2011 at 8:02 am

    An excellent article beautifully written.

    I’ll admit that I became aware of this article through Marchand and Meffre’s photos that have been widely published here in the UK. Yet after doing extra research I’m glad to have discovered, through articles like this and the Detroit Lives documentary, that there is life in Detroit. Perhaps it could be argued that a possible benefit of the numerous examples of Detroit’s ruin porn is that it might make people look beyond what is initially presented to them and investigate further and see what is really there.

    I think the general reaction and fascination to these types of photos of Detroit are understandable. People will recognise and feel some kind of connection with seeing something familiar in unfamiliar circumstances, whether it is a train station or a school, that ‘feeling of a place you might have been before in some other time.’ People connect with the places and buildings that they use, they can be familiar, conjure images and connections and hold memories. Seeing something similar in an unfamiliar way is bound to make people want to see. I think this also accounts for the ‘vague sense of historical pathos, absent in those other, wealthier cities.’ Personally I’d much rather visit a city that has a lived a life and has a story to tell with its scars on show. I’d much rather visit and investigate Naples, or spend a month in Liverpool (and now Detroit) than see somewhere like Monaco or Milan because they have a recent history that is much easier to see and connect with.

    Generally though I think it is hard to disagree with your suggestion that this type of photography ‘cannot help but exploit a city’s misery’. Whatever their intentions as photographers may have been when they first began their projects on Detroit, you have to wonder who benefits from the luxury hardback version of Detroit Disassembled that costs £500 (around $800). Even the regular copy of The Ruins of Detroit costs around £70 (roughly $110).

  5. Comment by Toby Barlow on January 19, 2011 at 9:16 pm

    re: ruin porn, I agree with Bryan, I often argue that it’s just like visiting Greek ruins here only without the airfare. We should love it and market it. Rome manages to balance its rebirth as a vibrant global city (after a time there in the Early Middle Ages when it looked a lot like Detroit) while not stressing too much about what the tourists are taking pictures of.

    Detroit is not a utopia, but, for the time being at least, I certainly prefer it to West Brooklyn.

  6. Comment by Kat on January 21, 2011 at 5:03 pm

    “And to see oneself portrayed in this way, as a curiosity to be lamented or studied, is jarrying for any Detroiter, who is of course also an American, with all the sense and self-confidence and native-born privilege that we’re taught to associate with the United States.”

    Thank you.

    I was born to a Ford family in the 70s, raised in the suburbs of Detroit, and later moved to California in the 90s. You perfectly describe how strange and confusing it feels to be from that region, that industry, and to also be an American.

    Maybe it’s all the memories stirred by the mention of Red Dawn, but your article prompts me to share a personal experience regarding our popular media’s exploitation of Detroit.

    The moment occurred shortly after relocating to CA from MI in 1990, when a 14-year-old California girl gasped wide-eyed at the notion I was actually from Detroit. Or that anyone, for that matter, could be from Detroit.

    She exclaimed, without a hint of irony or sarcasm, “Oh my God, I just saw RoboCop.” She then touched my elbow and tilted her head to ensure that her eyes met mine. In a sincere voice, laced with a kind of pity only a young California native can feel for those with less fortunate origins, she asked, “How awful it must’ve been for you growing up there, were you even able to leave your house?”

    True story.

    Thank again you for beautifully articulating how misunderstood the city of Detroit is in the American psyche. You are right to point out that outsiders view Detroit as an “exception to the contemporary United States, rather than as one of its exemplary places.” I wholeheartedly agree. No city is more American than Detroit.

    In 2004, I came across a stunning and prophetic quote, credited to one of your colleagues at Wayne State. Your article echoes his sentiments.

    “Detroit is the most relevant city in the United States for the simple reason that it is the most unequivocally modern and therefore distinctive of our national culture: in other words, a total success. Nowhere else has American modernity so completely had its way with people and place alike.”

    – Jerry Herron, Director of American Studies, Wayne State University

  7. Comment by nailhed on January 22, 2011 at 2:59 am

    I second the recommendation of Conot’s “American Odyssey: A History of a Great American City”…it is perhaps the deepest, broadest, and most insightful approach to Detroit’s (and greater Michigan’s) social history that I have seen.

  8. Comment by Daniel Lynch on January 22, 2011 at 10:55 am

    People imagine that Detroit is the canary in the coal mine. They imagine that its decay is a preview of the rest of America in the near future. It has become a symbol of fear and loathing — like a homeless person on the street that everyone walks past.

    Detroit, like most American cities, was born from fertile imaginations — whether it gleams with fender chrome, or goes gray with neglect.

  9. Comment by Bob on January 22, 2011 at 12:04 pm

    “Globalization” did not force the automakers to do anything. It was the union leaders and their bought-out politicians who did not allow the automakers to adjust to globalization and thus forced them to leave an area into which they had invested unimaginable wealth. The politicos tried to use the automakers stake in the area to hold them (and their workers) hostage to unrelenting tax increases and (safety/gas mileage) regulations that forced the elimination of all of the features that made US autos unique: style and raw horsepower. This ploy backfired tragically. Detroit has no jobs and we have only generic little cars to drive.

  10. Comment by Don Hammond on January 22, 2011 at 2:04 pm

    I grew up in an adjacent suburb of Detroit and have lived in SE Michigan my entire life. I also studied architecture in college and worked at a downtown Detroit architecture firm for a few years in the late 80s, so I’m fairly familiar with the general physical decline of Detroit’s built environment, and I confess to find “ruin porn” alluring in an abstract aesthetic way. However, there’s a crucial point that should be acknowledged in all this, and it has to do with the fundamental architectural qualities of the once-grand and now crumbling buildings that form the real heart of Detroit’s “ruin porn.” I suspect that what makes these contemporary images interesting to most people is that they show structures that were designed and built with a level of craft and materials that are more or less unthinkable today. Formerly magnificent train stations, movie palaces, and homes for the long-gone wealthy are interesting as ruins because the nature of what kind of buildings they were is still visible, even in the context of peeling paint, falling-in roofs, and rotting floors. Comparatively little “ruin porn” focuses on the vast amounts of now-decrepit single-family wood frame homes that were erected quickly and cheaply in the early decades of the last century to house the throngs of manufacturing workers in Detroit. Neighborhood after neighborhood in Detroit is filled with these buildings, but they have far less romance about them because they were never remarkable structures in the first place. They’re not ruined icons of a once-golden era, but simply falling-down homes that are little more than shacks in many instances. That they once housed people who helped make Detroit one of the pre-eminent cities in the country doesn’t make their now-crumbling residences as interesting from a purely visual standpoint as the grander buildings that receive most of the photographic attention.

  11. Comment by Carole A. Kronberg on January 25, 2011 at 1:55 pm

    The arousal (and the intuitive placement of Detroit’s architectural treasures in the “porn” category) comes from our association of these images -their beauty and ruined condition– with the subconscious struggle between Eros and Thanatos (i.e., life/passion vs. death) or so my hero, Norman O. Brown, would have everyone know.

    Single-minded utilitarianism, a deadly biproduct of capitalism, is everywhere killing the proposition that “beauty is its own excuse for being.” Along with the death of that spiritual premise, Mother Nature is dying, and the people of Detroit as well as our no-longer-functional properties seem doomed.

    I am happy to see that so many of my fellow Detroiters have taken the time to comment here regarding what is or is not the most appropriate, real or ideal socio-economic message for Detroiters to put out. (Certainly, surrender to utilitarianism ISN’T it!) We DO need to UNITE and WORK to define/characterize ourselves and our city, before more clueless outsiders move in with bulldozers to do that for us!

    Jessica, here’s an url for you. I think these photographs, “The Comfort Collection” by Richard Avedon, may be what sparked your rash of nudes in the ruins. (Kitsh now, is it?) Well, when these photographs came out in The New Yorker (in 1995) they were so HOT even I (who have almost no sexual pulse) clipped and framed them! Enjoy!

    Meanwhile, Neighbors, keep the faith (It helps to watch Tavis Smiley and support our own media!) and keep an eye out, because the huge, ravenous Beast who feasted here, leaving all these gigantic skeletal structures, is still around, dreaming up clandestine schemes in the daytime and heartlessly picking the marketable copper marrow out of Detroit’s lovely bones by night.

  12. Comment by SueBee on July 19, 2011 at 6:09 pm

    As a kid moving from place to place, I often would notice abandoned homes, offices, and other buildings right away, and at the first instance of freedom after school or work, I’d be off exploring them almost immediately with a bit of food, water, a flashlight and/or perhaps even a camera. These places were fascinating records of what existed previously to when I moved to the neighborhood, and they often contained all kinds of artifacts of lives I’d never know, and that most people around me (even if they’d lived in the area for decades) might never venture into. These days, I have more of an understanding of the thrill, the confrontation with mortality, and information lightly gleaned from a story long gone than I did at the time.

    Sure, some of the photo books and articles about Detroit (and many abandoned places) may have a distinct ring of cynical exploitation, but for the most part, I think that most people with interest in the subject matter are doing it for other reasons, some of which they might not be in touch with, but nonetheless feel in some facet of their being. I might get a little bored with the repetition of photos and phrases, and especially with some of the language (“Street zombies”? Ugh.), but overall, I also know that if the people documenting the decay of Detroit and other places weren’t undertaking the work, it might not otherwise ever be documented at all; I wish that some caring person from Detroit or who is otherwise civically minded would make a comprehensive book of photos where a portion of the profits went to existing schools, urban farms and other social programs.

  13. Comment by Hambone on August 1, 2011 at 4:10 pm

    When buisnesses move out, then a city goes to pieces. For example, see “Roger and Me” where Flint Michigan depended on GM to keep it thriving and clean and what happened when GM pulled out.

    Detroit was once thriving with clean strong buildings.

    If and when businesses were to come to Detroit and not leave, it would return to its past greatness.

    It’s very ignorant to make it a racial issue as its about money and not race.

  14. Comment by Anonymous on August 1, 2011 at 4:27 pm

    They are discussing the real reasons because they are educated enough to look at the big picture. Making it a racial issue is ignorant as many cities without “Negroes” have bad areas. England, Ireland and other nations have areas gone to pieces without businesses.

  15. Comment by Anonymous on August 1, 2011 at 4:43 pm

    Since this publication allows ignorant hate speech, I won’t be back. Racist hate postings are not simply views that I disagree with. The Holocaust tells us what hate speech leads to. You either like where it leads, and allow hate speech to be printed, or you don’t and refuse to print hate speech.

    Hate leads to murder in America– or Norway.

  16. Comment by The Editors on August 2, 2011 at 10:30 am

    To those of you who complained about those racist comments by DeniseBarber, we owe you our thanks.

    We do not allow, elicit or accept racist comments on our blog. Those have been deleted, spammed; and DeniseBarber or any alias she may use from the same IP address will be blocked. We merely did not see them when they were initially posted.

    We will be more vigilant. We appreciate your alerting us to them.

    All our best,

    The Editors

  17. Comment by hambone on August 4, 2011 at 2:42 pm

    If you do a simple search you get things like

    “The Old Abandoned Buildings of Northern New York Website” You can do this for Ireland and any country on the globe. There is a You Tube vid of a bad area in Ireland.

    Old abandoned building with grafitti is not unique nor is it only found in Detroit.

    Like any other city, Detroit also has many great renovated areas also. A lot of work has been done on the Downtown area, but if you are a newscrew coming there to film, you will deliberately ignore the good areas and find a bad area to film.

    You will give people outside what they want to see and not the truth.

  18. Comment by Jon on May 13, 2012 at 7:57 pm

    Where the hell is WEST Brooklyn?!

    You mean Park Slope, Clinton Hill, Red Hook and a bunch of other neighborhoods? You can say South Brooklyn but no one says Western Brooklyn.

    Western Brooklyn..ridiculous.

Leave a comment




Anti-Spam Quiz:

Subscribe without commenting