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.
I think the OP's premise is a little odd (and just a way for him to exhibit his usual judgy-ness) and somewhat illogical.
If I go to Paris for a week, no, I have not "seen France."
But...
If I go to Nice for a week, I have not "seen France."
If I go to Grenoble for a week, I have not "seen France."
If I go to Calais for a week, I have not "seen France."
If I have a year to traipse around the whole country, I'm a lucky dog...and yes, I've probably "seen France!"
But I really thing snobicelli also wants to suggest that the most popular cities to visit are not always a good representation of the country as a whole, and this I agree with in principle. I too would much rather pick one "second tier" place and explore it and its surroundings, and not be herded around tourist traps or packing and re-packing every 72 hours.
I notice many travelers go to a country and end up visiting only one country and that's it. For example, so many claim they have been to France but they only went to Paris and Paris only, nothing else. For London for the UK, or Barcelona in Spain, or Tokyo in Japan.
Interesting statement. Guess what? Even if they only went to Paris and Paris only, they've still been to France.
I don't get why people feel the need to be so judgemental about how other people travel. They go to the places they want to go to and see the things they want to see. There's nothing wrong with that. If you want to see other things, there's nothing wrong with that either.
Mod cut: Orphnaned (quoted post has been deleted).
I was born in LaRochelle, France, lived there and Ingrandes, France for years as a child, biked in the countryside with my dad, watched bike races in Marseilles, travelled all about there. Lived in Germany for years, travelled around around, Lake Constance, Switzerland, etc.
Basically, I've not just travelled, but lived in other countries.
Travel as you choose, enjoy what you will. To each their own.
For now, I'm happy visiting Santa Fe. Like the vibe, the culture, the indigeneous culture. It's enough for me.
If you only know so much about a country and you only have lets say a week, then I totally understand why you would spend that week in let say Paris if your destination is France. That is just human nature. Once you explored Paris, next time you travel you might pick another French destination. When people come to The USA for the first time they usually go to NYC, LA or SF first? Idk... I have traveled all over Europe, lived in Germany and Sweden. But I have never been to France. Next time I probably swing by Normandy..maybe Paris if we have time.
My preference is to stay in one place rather than knock myself out running around. I do my homework and find a walkable place I can spend 5 or 6 days soaking up the local culture and that will serve as a base for a few day trips. Europe's rail transportation system can get you someplace for a day or overnight excursion. It's harder in other places but in a really 3rd world country I would more likely go with a tour.
Notre Dame- one of the earliest and best preserved examples of what's come to be Gothic architecture and the use of flying buttresses that let you get the airy 'soaring up to God' ceiling heights. (We had a year of church history and a year of humanities class at my Catholic high school. There was much discussion of cathedrals and other architecturally noteworthy churches between the two classes. )
In our household, the Louvre is known as the place where you will walk six kilometers of corridors and up and down countless flights of stairs only to discover that the gallery you actually wanted to see is closed for renovation. But still so much goodness around every corner, and if you get away from the madness that is the Mona Lisa, plenty of quiet space to just contemplate whatever catches your eye.
I will admit to also loving Les Champs-Elysees, as overrun by generic chain stores as it is today. Step out of the flow of traffic both vehicle and pedestrian, hold any valuables tights, and close your eyes until you can just kind of squint and see the history of Paris' main street for the past 250 years go before you- parades of military defeat and victory, racing cyclists dancing on the pedals, the people of the 19th century world coming to see the expos, everyday Parisians celebrating and protesting there. Such a wonderful sense of place.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atlguy39
Good question. It was suggested to me by a friend who's a world traveler, but I still need to research. Its also close to Amsterdam by train. I'm a newbie traveling around Europe, so a little nervous about navigating it properly.
Munich was a possibility as well, but again, the only thing I KNOW I'm doing, is going to Amsterdam. So what would you recommend for a single, introverted guy who would like to meet some fun people and enjoy some different culture? Trip will be between 10-14 days, depending on where I ultimately decide to go and flights.
.
I'm a big fan of train travel. A good intro to European train travel is the Man in Seat 61:
If you decide that Munich is too out of the way, I'd look into an Amsterdam- Dusseldorf/Cologne- Paris routing. I really like Germany- lots of culture and sights, polite people who, as long as you're in the old West Germany, likely remember a fair amount of school English, generally pretty budget-friendly as long as it's not a special event weekend, mass transit that can get you pretty much anywhere if you don't want to drive the autobahn, and a good travel culture with a bazillion youth hostels (great for meeting other travellers) that have both dorm and private room options.
Always found it odd that they are so proud of the Louvre, when its filled with stolen art. Plus its more like a trip to an amusement park than a real museum.
Decent food and drink is very expensive. And the service is crap.
The people are mostly rude.
I would argue its true that if you have only been to Paris then you haven't been to France. The rest of France isn't like Paris at all.
Sure, its not all bad. But there just isn't enough good to redeem it.
I am sure that if your fabulously wealthy, speak fluent French and have the juice/connections to get into the best spots its a great place. But most of us don't live in that world.
I notice many travelers go to a country and end up visiting only one country and that's it. For example, so many claim they have been to France but they only went to Paris and Paris only, nothing else. For London for the UK, or Barcelona in Spain, or Tokyo in Japan.
It is sometimes ok as we may not have a lot of time, but too often they quickly move on to a different country right afterwards, completely ignoring the cultural offering as well as the wonderful landscape in the rest of the first country. I wonder why is that? It is because of ignorance (I know nothing about France outside Paris) or the vanity of increasing "numbers of country visited"?
Probably 90% of people I know who visited France only saw Paris. I usually try to see at least 2, preferably 3 cities/regions before moving to a new country because in this way you get to know a lot more about it. In most case, the capital/largest city doesn't really represent the country at all.
I always do it. Mainly cause they are business trips or with kids hard to get outside the city.
Sometimes I stay at resorts and never leave the resort. Did that in three countries
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.