Thomas1836

When I was planning my trip to Bruges, I got advice on a Fodor forum that I could see everything in a day or two. Having spent five glorious days here, I find that advice hilarious. I guess it depends on how you travel. When I'm in Europe, I enjoy the different pace, the cafe life, being what the French call a flaneur. I have no interest in feeling or being rushed. I also know my first day there is often a time of being tired, so I take it extra easy. But honestly, I have not remotely exhausted what there is to do here. I've been to the museum with the Memlings, the Basilica and half a dozen other gorgeous churches. I've wandered along various canals, savoring the architecture. I've seen major and minor squares, tried various restaurants and gone back to the ones I loved for languorous meals. I followed some of the wise advice in the brand new Bruges City official guide available on amazon which has several different walking tours through very different parts of the city. Anyone who tells you that you can see Bruges in a day or two hasn't really seen the city, please give it time if you really want to experience being here. I also recommend coming for Ascension Day. They've been parading since 1303 and the current version is full of history, dance, juggling, flag waving, faith, and more. Also not to miss: Vissinghe Pub which has
been open for 500 years.

danon

Not everyone wishes to see EVERYTHING in a place they visit.
Sort of like in a museum.
Nothing " hilarious" about other people's interest or lack of it.

stevewith

I ended up being glad I mistakenly booked several days in Bruges because I hated the ambience the moment I arrived -- my mistake was not sussing out ahead of time it was a totally touristy place I would want to flee.

But by being unable to get out of my hotel reservation without it cost a lot of money, I stuck it out and therefore was able to get away from the touristy core once I saw the Michaelangelo that I had mainly come to see, and found some interesting parts of town that aren't Disneyfied.

i still wouldn't recommend it as a destination to others, but to those planning a visit sight unseen, it is good to know that the long walks away from the tourist mobs can be rewarding. Food standards in Belgium overall are so high, mass tourism hasn't ruined the restaurants.

TPAYT

I love the way you describe Bruges. It's been on my list for several years now. I like your style of travel and taking your time.

I looked at your thread when you were chosing a place to stay. I think you chose perfectly.

More please!

Sassafrass

While there are may places I would recommend over Bruges, I spent a week there once. We did a day trip to Ghent (a now favorite place) and a day trip to Oostende (very pretty). We rented bikes and biked along canals and windmills. There was a big, fun flea market. Not my favorite place or trip, but pretty and peaceful and very sweet people.

It would still be way down on my list of places to see in Europe.

uruabam

>When I was planning my trip to Bruges, I got advice on a Fodor forum that I could see everything in a day or two. Having spent five glorious days here, I find that advice hilarious. I guess it depends on how you travel. <

Good for you. Tourist sites are notorious for "experts" dismissing a place, on very limited experience, as uninteresting or "not worth it". Like you I detest the "Five things I must see in.." way of travelling and find the taking the time to take in the atmosphere of a place rather than rushing around its "highlights" much more personally rewarding. Other people feel differently and that's great as long as they don't presume it's the only way to travel.

danon

If people do not wish the information or other people's opininons , why ask?
What doe it mean being an" expert" anyway?
One can only give one's own immpresion of a place.
Some travelers DO wish to see only a certainn "highlight" in any city , it does not make them
" hilarious" or their opinion worthless. Many
posters spend 2 days in
Venice, 4 days in Rome...or London.
Are they rushed? Probably.
Will they
see every church, painting and museum? Not in a million years.
No one "presumes" the way in which others like to travel. Posters ask for opinion, other posters answer. One should
research the destination based on their travel "style" and
follow their interest - not mock others who offered their experience as a courtesy.

No one here is a anyone's travel agent or a nanny.

Myer

We were in Brugges in 2006 and felt it's one of most beautiful small cities. Maybe things have changed.

Yes, there were a lot of people there.

Yes, it is touristy. After all, we're tourists as well.

We named one spot "the view" and made sure we kept passing it.

We were there two days before moving onto Amsterdam for a few days. We rented bikes and rode around the outside rim of the city on a bike path. We stopped at a few windmills and went up one.

We are not really museum goers in general and didn't go there either.

Just wandered around and enjoyed the views.

Thomas1836

TPAYT: I spent a week with the intro Pimseur CDs which were very helpful. I wanted to be able to ask for directions in Flemish, order meals, even buy things. It seemed hard at first but by the end of the week, the repetition lodged patterns and vowel sounds in my head to the extent that my hotel host was astonished when I spoke any Flemish (Pimsleur actually is for dutch, but it's easy to find variants explained on-line).

The CDs also tuned my ear to questions, and to the unusual Dutch/Flemish vowels. Not everyone would want to spend half an hour a day on language learning, but I found it fascinating--and fun.

I stayed at Hotel Cote Canal which was super quiet and comfortable and well located. Lovely breakfasts, good coffee, and best of all, a small gorgeous private garden overlooking a canal. I started my sightseeing with the Basilica of Holy Blood, which has two parts, one Romanesque and one Gothic. Both were very unusual and impressive and even awe-inspiring, though neither is big. I went back to soak up the atmosphere. I saw Saint John, Saint Saviour, Saint Walpurg, Saint Giles. All were fascinating in different ways. One has a Michelangelo Pieta, a possible Caravaggio. Others had lovely windows or statuary or polychrome Stations of the Cross. I enjoyed the Begijnhof (Béguinage in French, I think), and the 500-year-old pub Vissinghe. Many hours I just enjoyed sitting and enjoying views in squares or just strolling the canals and taking in the sweep of history.

We drink Belgian ales and beers at home anyway (Chimay, Leffe, Hoegaarden), but Bruges has its own Brugse Zot which was very good. The Belgian food was superb at Sint-Barbe, in a super quiet residential neighborhood. Terrific prices and quality, friendly multilingual staff. When my Flemish got tired, I switched to French, but they knew English and German, too.

Now, to critics: My intent was not to mock anyone, but to offer a different experience for a city that is routinely dismissed as Disneyfied, boring, and not worth much time. I never used the word "worthless," but that's the nature of boards. People take offense where none was intended and invent insults that aren't there.

As for where it would be in someone's list, I certainly wasn't saying see Bruges *first.* I've been to Paris, London, Florence, Venice, Brussels, Amsterdam all more than once (some half a dozen times) as well as to twenty different cities and towns in Germany. I've also been in a dozen other cities and towns in France, several cities in England outside of London, as well as Glasgow.

Would I go back to Bruges? Possibly. Mixing it with a trip to Ghent. I might base myself in Ghent and do a day trip or two to Bruges, with certain spots in mind for a return visit or to see places I missed. The great thing about Bruges is it's small and easily walkable. Bruges has made me more curious about Flanders, since I've only known the French-speaking part of Belgium.

DAX

With your travel mode, you can absorb and enjoy just about any place to the fullest extent, however most travelers don't travel like you do.

It seems that you have a more in depth interest in Flemish to want to learn a few sentences from Pimsleur CDs which is an exception to the rule, bravo! I am curious to know why you would bother learning such a minor language? I grew up with both parents speaking Dutch daily, but I try not to force my imperfect Dutch on the locals unless I am travelling with other Dutch speakers, perhaps because my parents used to correct my grammar all the time, it sort of robbed the joy of speaking it.

TPAYT

I agree that most people just rush from place to place and check it off their list. When we've been in a European city for only a day there were so many times that we wished we had stayed longer. Now we try to do so.

I appreciate the details of your adventure in Bruges. I hope we can add it to our itinerary in the future. I wish I had an ear for languages but that is a skill that passes me by.

trotters

Thomas, thanks for posting your Bruges trip. We've stayed in Bruges on 3 different trips, most recently in 2008. It's one of our favorite small cities. There are certainly more tourists now than we encountered on our first visit in 1991, but that's true all over Europe. As travelers, each of us has his/her own style of travel.

tailsock

Thomas,
glad you enjoyed your time in Bruges. Like you said, everyone has their own travel style. Most people i know here in the states around my age split time between locations when visiting Europe. The reason is that vacation time here compared to the rest of the world is a complete joke (unless you're a senior citizen or retired.) This isn't the case for everyone obviously but if one week is all you have to work with for example and you're in Belgium, then Bruges will get 2 days, Brussles 2 days, and Amsterdam gets the rest. A friend of mine just enjoyed this trip. Was Bruges beautiful? yes. Was it so fantastic that she'd trim one of the other locations? No. The problem with spending so much time in one place when it's limited in the first place is you won't get to see elsewhere. You can spend a full week in Venice but would you really want to? What about a full week in London? Churches might begin to run together as would the food, museums etc. I personally would not want to spend a large portion of my trip in one place no matter how intimate the location. Like you said, everyone has their own style of travel.

sf7307

Well, we'll be in Bruges for at most 2 days in June. In all of this, I only saw one recommendation for a restaurant (Sint-Barbe). Any others? We prefer small, bistro/pub, local, no need for Michelin stars and definitely no need for dressing up, and don't like to break the bank (because we're almost always disappointed when we do, whereas when we get a really good meal for a decent price, we're always thrilled).

danon

It is not only that most travellers don't have the time
to see every church and painting in town..
.that would take...what ? ... a year in Paris , London or Rome...,
but that one is not necessarily interested in doing so.
For some "absorbing the atmosphere" of a small city might be enjoyable and relaxing,
others could not think of more boring way to travel.

DAX

So true Danon. I normally stay 2 nights in any one place that I have no special connection with and I have to admit two days in Bruges was plenty long for me personally. However my wife & I were in Bruges & Ghent entertaining our kids so we did feel the touristy Disney effect. Had we gone by ourselves we might have enjoyed Bruges differently as we have enjoyed nearby Antwerpen, Brussels and Lille by lounging around, doing nothing, didn't even visit a single church but went to all the good cafes, restaurants, food stores and media stores just soaking the atmosphere as if we live there. We just enjoyed being there without having to see any amazing tourist attraction.

Scootoir

sf7307--you might start a new post on dining in Bruges.

Thomas1836

Americans have been rushing from one place to another in Europe for at least 150 years. Henry James wrote about in his early novel The American.

DAX, compared to many cities, Bruges really does not have amazing attractions. Even the Michelangelo is less than spectacular. It's the city itself, the whole ensemble that is most enjoyable, especially since it's such an unusual mixture.

Scotoir, I have to dig through my box to find the restaurant cards and will start another post ASAP.

danon

I have " tried" Bruges three times. - always in the summer. Perhaps, that is why the town was so
Incredibly crowded. I thought in very lovely, but could not stand the touristy atmosphere.
Many beautiful small towns have a similar feel - Toledo and Orvieto come to mind.

My criticism of the OP's
comments had nothing to do with his/ her approach to travel but the
tone in which posters' suggestions were dismissed without a word of thanks
to those who provided them . That would suggest the input from others was not
only " hilarious" but apparently worthless.


As noted before, that seems to be " the nature of the Board " .

Bitter

I've been to Bruges on two visits, each for probably 2 nights. It has tourists for a reason. The place is gorgeous. And the evenings are magical, at least when I've been there: the tour buses clear out and the place really becomes quiet. The lighting is amazing on the old buildings.

Not sure I'd want to spend a week there at a time, but I hope I get back there at some point.