Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If you visit somewhere where you dont live you're a tourist. However, you don't have to act like a "tourist"
To me that's respecting a country's customs and not shouting at people in English trying to make yourself understood because you don't speak any of the local language
I'll take issue with that. Having been on the road for a pretty long time, I've seen this sort of thinking repeated and re-repeated in every knocked-off Lonely Planet travel book I've ever picked up from a streetcorner.
Now don't get me wrong. I love LP, they're a great resource when you somehow need to get from Huangshan to Chongqing in two days and you've gotta find some obscure hydrofoil terminal somewhere in the mix. I especially love them at a haggled 10% of a genuine LP's price, even if the picture pages are missing and their maps don't photocopy well into the knockoffs.
I submit for your consideration that this "spend more time in one place" or travel "free and easy" is just as much the mark of a tourist as a flag-waving "guide" and that an LP book and massive rucksack might as well be an American Tourister rolling suitcase and hawaiian shirt.
A "real" traveller, if there is such a thing, isn't interested in the experience. They're travelling. They're getting from point A to point B whatever way has the best value. They might suffer a half-dozen local busses and ride with chickens and TB diesase vectors, or they might hop on an AC 18-hour Vietnamese tourist sleeper bus depending on their goal. They might spend 2 hours peering out at Angkor Wat from behind tinted bus windows and 10 blurry sleepless days in overbuilt Patong.
I've hoofed it to the back-country s--tholes and I've been whisked around in comfort and style in a tour bus sealed off from the stench and misery of the common folk. For about the first 6 months, it's a game--exploring every last nook and cranny of Kashgar or battling your way through uncomprehending ticket salespeople unwravelling the weird network of trains out to Mundaka--but eventually you realize that local busses stink and are universally hated; if you take them for any reason other than to save money, you're a tourist. The path has already been beaten to the world's accessible wonders. If you spend six days hiking through Yangshou to go photograph a cow or a 15' rice terrace, you're a tourist. Generally, anytime the locals stare at you and wonder why this crazy [wherever-you're-from]er is squatting/riding/walking/sitting/wandering here when his/her fancy nice clothes/pack/equipment/skin/hair indicate he/she obviously could be somewhere nicer/cleaner/better, you're a tourist.
So--thanks in large part to my spouse's keen ability to cut through the BS--I've dropped the traveller act and accepted that, wherever you go, unless it's your home or you've got business there, you're a tourist. Go, see, do, enjoy, suffer--if that's your thing--but don't pat yourself on the back too hard. Remember that you're only doing this for a few days/weeks/months/years and eventually you'll go back to a nice 1st-world flat/house/apartment, eat as much healthy heavy-metal-free fresh food as you want, with doctors who can cure the parasites that crawled into your skin through those keen sandals or are living in your belly thanks to the lakewater those "authentic" noodles were washed in.
That's why I call all who travel for pleasure "tourists." There's a very tiny gap between those who travel on busses with flag-waving guides and those who walk down the dusty backroads and stay in barns; at least when compared with the people actually living and working in the places they're visiting.
Oh, and I've realized that, far more often than not, LP is full of [__]it.
Hmm... I still question though whether traveling for pleasure excludes someone from being a traveler. For example, I worked with a guy who spent a year traveling around South America. He traveled much in the way that you described... with a backpack and walking, and picking up rides occasionally... He did experience the trip differently from someone who is there for just 3-4 weeks. But what was he doing there? He said that he wanted to do something different and thought this might be interesting--which I would translate as 'traveling for pleasure.' Because isn't he choosing to put himself at that location willinglyh? This willingness suggests that someone wants to be there and has just opted to travel inexpensively. Where I've traveled through similar places using public buses, chicken buses, or hiring a guide/driver... he chose to walk or pick up rides where he could. And a 3rd person might be on a 60-person air-conditioned tour bus. We're all there because we chose to be.
I agree that if you're traveling in the way as you suggest, you will probably have more 'adventure' but I still think that 'tourist' has a lot to do with the 'tour' and the over-planned 'hour by hour' itinerary. But that's just my two cents... :-)
And yes, LP is ok for some things... but when they list something as 'off the beaten path' and everyone you see is carrying their guide, you're not off the beaten path.
I do think there is a difference and I would classify myself as both a "traveller" and a "tourist" depending on my travels.
When I am travelling a well beaten path and simply taking in the sights I am definitely "tourist" but when I am actually immersing myself in the culture and society of other peoples ( such as staying with a tribe in the Amazon or Papua New Guinea) then I am definitely a "traveller" or shall I say a visitor. I think both are equally valid in a way but a different way to experience travel.
I hope this doesn't sound too pretentious but I do feel there is a difference. To me someone who goes on a cruise around the world and meets no locals, does not interact with them as human beings ( rather than simply tourism facilities providers) , does not eat local, sleep local or shop local cannot be considered the same as someone who fully tries to integrate into the local mores and live among rather than alongside the locals.
I guess that is why I do so love to do home exchanges. It allows me a true insight into the daily lives of local people including the very mundane and through home exchanges you often get to actually meet "real" people rather than simply restaurant owners or museum ticket collectors... You do start to see the "other" in a completely different light and it is very humbling. People all of a sudden become so much more real and so much more interesting. It brings us closer together as people IMO.
I am both and happy to be so. In Rome going around the sites, I am most definitely a tourist , sailing to the Galapagos and staying with locals who are friends of friends I am a visitor most definitely.
The experiences are completely different ,to me anyway.
Different strokes for different people but I am one of those terrible snobs who has a little contempt for people who have no interest in discovering a country for themselves and never really get to experience travel , simply tourism.
I know the above sounds harsh but to me visiting an alien culture is one of the great joys of life, the discovery for oneself of different mores, socio-cultural traits, traditions, foods, smells, talking to locals as equals and being perceived as something else than a cash-cow is to me priceless.
Organised travel , cruises, resorts all that kind of travelling makes me feel quite queasy. Travel is about meeting people to me at the end of the day and not simply waiters or maids.
Now don't get me wrong. I love LP, they're a great resource when you somehow need to get from Huangshan to Chongqing in two days and you've gotta find some obscure hydrofoil terminal somewhere in the mix. I especially love them at a haggled 10% of a genuine LP's price, even if the picture pages are missing and their maps don't photocopy well into the knockoffs.
I'm both guffawing and nodding in agreement.
Quote:
I submit for your consideration that this "spend more time in one place" or travel "free and easy" is just as much the mark of a tourist as a flag-waving "guide" and that an LP book and massive rucksack might as well be an American Tourister rolling suitcase and hawaiian shirt.
Generally, anytime the locals stare at you and wonder why this crazy [wherever-you're-from]er is squatting/riding/walking/sitting/wandering here when his/her fancy nice clothes/pack/equipment/skin/hair indicate he/she obviously could be somewhere nicer/cleaner/better, you're a tourist.
Go, see, do, enjoy, suffer--if that's your thing--but don't pat yourself on the back too hard. Remember that you're only doing this for a few days/weeks/months/years
That's why I call all who travel for pleasure "tourists." There's a very tiny gap between those who travel on busses with flag-waving guides and those who walk down the dusty backroads and stay in barns; at least when compared with the people actually living and working in the places they're visiting.
Oh, and I've realized that, far more often than not, LP is full of [__]it.
Sponger, you very eloquently stated my case. That Thorn Tree can be prickly.
I agree with Moose that travel is about meeting people--and experiencing other cultures, but I agree with Sponger that travel is going from Point A to Point B.
I am not about to hold myself above others because I met some indigenous Guatemalans who were doing their laundry in Lake Atitlan, or talked myself out of getting mugged in Montego Bay, Jamaica.
To me, this attitude diminishes the very quality that a true 'traveler' purports to value: embracing differences.
We met a couple in Bayeux, France who had taken some sort of bus tour.
They finished their meal and had to get back to the bus. But you know what?
They were quite knowledgeable about the Normandy region and its history.
I do understand that most folks take different sorts of trips at different life stages, and I do not scoff at those who stick to the package resort places.
They might be quite daring in other aspects of their lives.
I'm both guffawing and nodding in agreement.
Sponger, you very eloquently stated my case. That Thorn Tree can be prickly.
I agree with Moose that travel is about meeting people--and experiencing other cultures, but I agree with Sponger that travel is going from Point A to Point B.
I am not about to hold myself above others because I met some indigenous Guatemalans who were doing their laundry in Lake Atitlan, or talked myself out of getting mugged in Montego Bay, Jamaica.
To me, this attitude diminishes the very quality that a true 'traveler' purports to value: embracing differences.
We met a couple in Bayeux, France who had taken some sort of bus tour.
They finished their meal and had to get back to the bus. But you know what?
They were quite knowledgeable about the Normandy region and its history.
I do understand that most folks take different sorts of trips at different life stages, and I do not scoff at those who stick to the package resort places.
They might be quite daring in other aspects of their lives.
I completely agree with you , travelling is certainly experienced very differently by different people but I still have a problem with what I call "list tickers" as I cannot help but feel it diminishes what in essence is supposed to be a discovery about more than simply a site or a landscape.
I have met so many people who genuinely feel they have "done" France or Thailand when all they did was go up the Eiffel Tower or spend their entire time on an all inclusive resort and it does for some reason jar with me.
Tourist sites are an important part of travel , most of us have very much enjoyed seeing what millions enjoy ( usually for excellent reasons) but if you never try to genuinely immerse yourself in the local culture I feel you are letting yourself down and being disrespectful in a way to the locals by saying you have no interest in their actual real lives.
I have actually heard ( many times) people complain that such and such a place would be so much nicer if only the locals weren't there. That to me is not travel , it is simply tranposrting yourself to another location but wishing everything was still the same as home. I find that really pathetic.
For Brits who go to the Spanish Costas and expect everyone to speak English, to be able to eat English food and buy British goods in the supermarket and will never venture inland ( the majority of them BTW) .
It is lazy and culturally arrogant to go to another country and ignore the locals. And really, really ignorant.
Great thread though, I obviously am a terrible travel snob as I see different "levels" of travel.
Tourism is perfectly fine, we all indulge in it , travel and being an open minded visitor is so much more rewarding though.
I suppose I hate the passivity involved in what I would term "mass tourism".
There is little individuality and little genuine awareness of the "other" which I find terribly sad.
We are becoming a blander society by the minute with a monoculture sweeping through the planet and all seem to now all wear the same, eat the same, buy the same etc... Mass Tourism to me is the ultimate in the superficial and artificial standards many expect at all times, anywhere around the world. "Resorts" make me shudder I must admit as do cruise-ships.
They are to Travel what fast food is to Gastronomy. convenient, mass produced with universal standards and yet deeply unsatisfying from my perspective anyway.
We seem to have lost our way as far as travel is concerned , having replaced a sense of true wonderment and adventure for a guarantee of what we will experience. We tick lists rather than just sit back and enjoy the ride, letting us take it where it will.
The world has become a smaller place because we have tried desperately to make it a uniform one with little regard to cultural and social diversity.
I personally prefer a polychrome world in all its horrors and glory, its untidy and dirty mess and its wondrous beauty and yet undiscovered marvels.
Mass tourism detracts from that. It sullies something which is often the only true way for us to reach out and touch the rest of the world.
I have loved travelling since I was a tiny Tot and though stunning sites and scenic wonders can leave you breathless and full of memories, all my most memorable travelling moments have been spontaneous encounters with people I had on the surface nothing in common with.
The generosity of spirit, kindness of strangers and genuine interaction one on one with "real" people around the world has enriched me beyond measure.
Even the scary, dangerous and often uncomfortable/dirty moments have added to my sum of experience and I would not swap even those for mass tourism.
Our Shared humanity should bring us closer to each other but our apprehensions and expectations prevent us from truly embracing what travel ultimately is about. People. Cultures. Languages. Food. History. Architecture . A deeper understandign of how the other live, thinks and feels.
Maybe it is the Archaeologist/Anthropologist in me but travel without people is travel without context. Meaningless in many ways and instead of opening doors you are keeping those closed for some bizarre reasons.
Excellent thread though BWP, I know that you are a great and seasoned traveller and from your posts know you to be very open to new experiences.
I'm just a travel snob! What can I say, I can't help it.
And yes, LP is ok for some things... but when they list something as 'off the beaten path' and everyone you see is carrying their guide, you're not off the beaten path.
Exactly.
Many backpackers like to hold themselves apart from the package tourists, but then gather together at the same spots. (Prague or Cesky Krumlov, anyone?)
I don't see how herds of backpackers or so-called "independent travelers" are any better than a busload of tourists--they are the same to the locals, and probably spend less money.
This herding practice has turned some tiny, quaint places into human petting zoos.
On a backpacker site I visit, there was once a guy from yet another site that caters to budget travelers, who was trying to sniff out the latest *undiscovered* backpacker destination.
It seems as if travel has become oneupsmanship.
Our Shared humanity should bring us closer to each other but our apprehensions and expectations prevent us from truly embracing what travel ultimately is about. People. Cultures. Languages. Food. History. Architecture . A deeper understanding of how the other live, thinks and feels.
I agree.
It's just that I think this attitude starts at home.
Everyone has their own cultural filter.
Some travel more, some travel less.
Moose, you've been around much more than I have, I've been around much more than my next-door neighbor--but wherever we go, we each bring within us a *different* sort of wealth of experience.
Likewise, from our trip, we take away within us something meaningful.
Maybe we go to the beach. We might go diving, which helps us meet locals, fascinates us no end, and pumps some money into the local economy.
Maybe we go on a cruise, which I admit I am not super fond of, but the two times I did it, I met people from all over the world, heard fascinating stories.
I know what some of y'all mean about large groups of people on tours who sort of sweep in, sometimes rather noisily--and they aren't always English or American. It might feel rather boisterous and overwhelming.
But as dgz said, we're all there because we chose to be.
Some of those people in these tour groups might be obnoxious, and they might have what we consider to be a passive, superficial travel experience.
OTOH, I've met obnoxious 'travelers,' too, who complained about the tea--or (amusingly) the crowds--they inevitably share their exhaustive lists of the places they've conquered.
Oh well.
I know that the world has changed; travel no longer consists of the Grand Tour for those who can afford it, and steerage for those who can't.
I think every little bit of multi-culti exposure helps, just a little bit, to fight ignorance.
I can't disagree with you as you are absolutely right , still I always have this little niggle every time I see yet another coachload of people with 1hr to "do" Oxford ( and and I see those every single day) before they move on to bath and Edinburgh having "done" the UK in 5 days , then on to France etc...
And I agree we should all be entitled to take it travelling as we wish but it seems so soul-less so incredibly artificial and shallow a way to see the world.
I am truly , genuinely pleased that people do now have the opportunity to travel and see the world, don't get me wrong I don't want to see a return to the age of the Grand Tour where only the privileged few got a chance to leave their native town .
I just think somehow we have been given this amazing opportunity to truly see the world with our eyes and hearts open and we often allow inidfference or dare I say ignorance to get in the way and that to me is really sad because this world is definitely getting more and more bland and soon there won't be much difference between you and I and some people in Papua New Guinea or Burkina Faso....
Now is the time to seize the day and truly embrace the great big adventure on our doorstep. We have all the pre-requisites for a real journey and most people still choose to simply look without seeing.
How lucky we truly are to be able to have some chance to go out and discover things , it seems a shame to spend all our time trying to tick things off a spurious "bucket list" in a way.
All our prejudices and preconceptions about the "other" can never truly be discarded if we stick our head firmly in the sand and I see so many people who are full of strange ideas about places they have either never visited or simply seen from a lounge chair on an exotic beach.
We are all different and I appreciate that not every one feels the same I do about travelling but maybe if I am at one extreme there is a happy middle ?
I have had to curtail my real adventurous travelling because of long term health problems and I do pine for it so badly. I miss being on the road , never truly knowing what will happen.
It is an ache which never goes away. My only addiction and only vice. I long to get back on that road and really feel alive again. I guess I am just projecting my own deficiencies on others perhaps! :0
because this world is definitely getting more and more bland and soon there won't be much difference between you and I and some people in Papua New Guinea or Burkina Faso....
I have a friend who is marrying someone from Burkina Faso.
She never would have met her true love if she had not gone there!
I don't think this world is too terribly bland yet.
I had major culture shock merely leaving Colorado to move to northern Florida.
Quote:
We are all different and I appreciate that not every one feels the same I do about travelling but maybe if I am at one extreme there is a happy middle ?
Probably so.
Quote:
I have had to curtail my real adventurous travelling because of long term health problems and I do pine for it so badly. I miss being on the road , never truly knowing what will happen. I guess I am just projecting my own deficiencies on others perhaps!
I'm sorry, Moose.
My own travel is much more scripted now, but there were a few days last spring in France where we were unsure where we'd go let alone where we'd sleep, and that was fun. Couch Surfing can be fun, too, though it is likely a hit-or-miss venture.
(For us, it's been good both as guest as well as host.)
I personally prefer a polychrome world in all its horrors and glory, its untidy and dirty mess and its wondrous beauty and yet undiscovered marvels.
Even the scary, dangerous and often uncomfortable/dirty moments have added to my sum of experience and I would not swap even those for mass tourism.
These two lines, taken horribly out of context, are what I take issue with. For the "traveller", the horrors, untidy dirty mess, and uncomfortable moments are but a passing fancy. "Slumming" if you will, before they return to their London flat or their faux-bohemian 1st-world urban or suburban refuge.
Again, I point out that 2 months dodging stray bullets in Sudan or a brief encounter with rioters in Urumuqui does not equate to a childhood (or lifetime) of actually living there and understanding or suffering alongside the locals. Because the "traveller" as defined in this case gets to "go home" when things get a bit too dodgy (or when the money, visa, etc. runs out) I have a hard time taking seriously the 2-3 degrees of difference between them and the so-called "tourist".
At least not compared to the aid worker, the soldier, the child who has to live there, who eats everyday from the fly-infested "charming" street market with neither running water nor dependable heating at home.
Maybe I've simply been on the road too long. The magic of visiting these places has faded and now I only see what seems to be a bleak reality.
I will agree to common ground in that package tours arranged from one's home country are usually worthless in terms of anything but comfort and escapism. I'll also raise a glass with anyone else who cares to laugh at some backpackers' sense of self-importance, large buzz-cut pinkish-white men with flowered shirts in asian countries, and whomever should think that shouting in their native language will get them anywhere when speaking softly in it only garners them confused looks. Cheers.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
