Trudaine |
Dec 28th, 2006 06:00 AM |
I am from the Dordogne, but I would add it's difficult to compare two relatively vast areas in general terms. It depends on where in the Dordogne, and where in the LR. I believe that what English speakers refer to by "Dordogne" far exceeds the territory of the current Dordogne département, that is more or less the ancient province of Périgord. Besides, the Dordogne proper is more than the now heavily touristed Sarlat region, and includes and a lot of quite ordinary, non touristy countryside, which has its delights but is not necessarily worth crossing the Atlantic for.
The Languedoc-Roussillon (if the original poster means the administrative region) is a vast and varied place. There are few common points between the mostly sandy, flat coastline and the adjacent flatlands, and the rugged highlands of the hinterland. In my view, the LR coast is not highly attractive outside selected locations (1960's -1970's seaside resorts with a lower middle-class feel, unsightly urban sprawl around the larger coastal cities, especially Montpellier). The mountainous interior is much more interesting both in terms of scenery and architecture, such as the eastern Pyrenees, the Corbières, the southern Massif central (which extends to the Cévennes, the Larzac Plateau, the Tarn Gorges, therefore beyond the limits of the LR, and offers some of the most stunning landscapes in France).
Another consideration is time of the year and weather. The "Dordogne" has a maritime-Atlantic climate with a relatively short tourist season. The LR has a primarily mediterranean, dryer climate with warmer summers.
|