"Tourists expect toilet paper — travelers carry their own (with the carton roll removed and pressed flat)," responds Craig from TravelVice to Eric's question to travel bloggers (including myself) at TravelBlogs.com: what is the difference between tourists and travellers? Eric's motivation? "It’s one of those quintessential questions among travellers (or should I say tourists?), popping up like a stubborn weed on forums and blogs," he says. Pam Mandel from Nerd's Eye View believes there's no difference and the question should die: "In a semantic dispute, one could argue that a traveler is anyone engaged in the act of travel. I traveled to the post office yesterday, downtown to dine with friends. More semantics: A tourist is anyone who is not a local or, alternatively, one who is in a location to tour, to see the sites. The underpinnings of this question are clear, though, to anyone who reads about travel." Gary Arndt from Everything Everywhere puts it more bluntly: "It is a distinction used by pretentious people to make themselves feel superior to others. To the locals, no matter how long you’ve been traveling or whatever your mindset is, you are still a tourist." I don't buy into the argument either. The ‘grand tourists’ after all were some of the most adventurous travellers, spending years on the road and months in one place, learning languages and local art forms. I'm pleased to see so many other bloggers agree. I love this response from Ant Stone of Trail of Ants: "If you gave a tourist £500, they will visit one place, for one week while trying to emulate the insight of the traveller. If you gave a traveller £500, they will visit five places over five weeks while trying to avoid the habits of a tourist. When they return home, the traveller will say “the tourist blew their money” while the tourist will claim “the traveller blew their time”. Personally, I think travellers who snub their noses at tourists are short-sighted. I’ve met hundreds of so-called travellers over the past nineteen months who say such things as “I’m not going there, it’s so touristy!”... ask them what they’ve done with their day. Museum. Monument. Market. McDonalds. There was me thinking they’d been laying grain out to dry after digging a new rice paddy." For me, what's more important than how we label ourselves, or others, is how we travel, how we experience a place and its people, how much we get out of that experience, and for some of us, how much we give back. I see much more value in focusing less on our own identities and more on the world and people around us. Make sure you drop by Eric's and check out some of the other responses.
Tourists versus travellers: refreshing takes on the (often ho-hum) debate
"Tourists expect toilet paper — travelers carry their own (with the carton roll removed and pressed flat)," responds Craig from TravelVice to Eric's question to travel bloggers (including myself) at TravelBlogs.com: what is the difference between tourists and travellers? Eric's motivation? "It’s one of those quintessential questions among travellers (or should I say tourists?), popping up like a stubborn weed on forums and blogs," he says. Pam Mandel from Nerd's Eye View believes there's no difference and the question should die: "In a semantic dispute, one could argue that a traveler is anyone engaged in the act of travel. I traveled to the post office yesterday, downtown to dine with friends. More semantics: A tourist is anyone who is not a local or, alternatively, one who is in a location to tour, to see the sites. The underpinnings of this question are clear, though, to anyone who reads about travel." Gary Arndt from Everything Everywhere puts it more bluntly: "It is a distinction used by pretentious people to make themselves feel superior to others. To the locals, no matter how long you’ve been traveling or whatever your mindset is, you are still a tourist." I don't buy into the argument either. The ‘grand tourists’ after all were some of the most adventurous travellers, spending years on the road and months in one place, learning languages and local art forms. I'm pleased to see so many other bloggers agree. I love this response from Ant Stone of Trail of Ants: "If you gave a tourist £500, they will visit one place, for one week while trying to emulate the insight of the traveller. If you gave a traveller £500, they will visit five places over five weeks while trying to avoid the habits of a tourist. When they return home, the traveller will say “the tourist blew their money” while the tourist will claim “the traveller blew their time”. Personally, I think travellers who snub their noses at tourists are short-sighted. I’ve met hundreds of so-called travellers over the past nineteen months who say such things as “I’m not going there, it’s so touristy!”... ask them what they’ve done with their day. Museum. Monument. Market. McDonalds. There was me thinking they’d been laying grain out to dry after digging a new rice paddy." For me, what's more important than how we label ourselves, or others, is how we travel, how we experience a place and its people, how much we get out of that experience, and for some of us, how much we give back. I see much more value in focusing less on our own identities and more on the world and people around us. Make sure you drop by Eric's and check out some of the other responses.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment