Should I hire a guide?
 

I've travelled a fair bit and have never felt that hiring a guide was necessary, but having just read a reply to a post on here, I'm wondering if I may need to re-calibrate my opinion.

The post said that despite having visited a particular city previously (this is the Fodor's Europe forum, I'm sure you can guess which one) they hired a guide for two full days and gave their reasons for doing so. The reasons make perfect sense and it got me questioning whether I could break the habit of a lifetime and hire a guide on a personal trip.

I've used and experienced guides whilst organising and supporting school trips, and they've ranged from the incredibly mediocre to the life altering (a French resistance fighter who ran away from home at 15 to fight the occupation), but can't see myself ever inviting one to join me on a family holiday.

I'm not looking for recommendations per se, but would genuinely like to hear Fodorites' opinions on using guides on a personal trip and maybe convince me that I've been missing something all these years...

I've used guides where I realise my own education cannot fit the gaps, so Libya, Indian Goa, Dominican Republic etc and I've enjoyed the experience but never to the point of saying "what a wonderful experience". The only time I have realised I had done better with a guide is when I did a day Golden tour of Iceland. The guy just talked about the culture, the law and the 2007 crash fascinating.

Thanks bilbo.

If I had to use a guide where my education didn't fill the gaps I'd have to have one on permanent tender...

Regarding Iceland, I had a similar experience when I was there, but it was a group of locals I met in a pub that told me all about the finer (and not so fine) points of their culture and history. The evening ended with one of them giving me a cigarette lighter with an Icelandic flag on it that he'd shoplifted earlier (he had a pocket full of them so I had no reason to doubt him), so I even got a free souvenir.

Sometimes just a local tour will do the job. To the average person, the Roman forum is just a jumble of broken columns and pieces of marble. A tour guide makes you understand what's there.

Other times it's really nice to have a guide to yourself. You can fit the guide into your own schedule. And ask all the questions you want, get more of a feel for the local culture. We had just a morning in Split so picked up a guide who took us around Diocletian's palace.

I think a really good guide can add immensely to your experience. But it costs. So keep an open mind. As usual, it depends.

We generally prefer to do it ourselves.

Partly because guides, IMHO, are often mediocre at best. Granted there are some good ones - but as we are touring sights we often hear parts of the talk given by guides - and as far as I can tell they are mostly a waste of time.

I have heard a couple that were excellent - but suspect that those are very pricey.

We have enoyed small scale walking tours that we have taken with credentialied guides (not as guides but as professors or experts) and found those worthwhile.

But IMHO the average guide doesnt give any more than the few paragraphs in the most general guide book and I already know more than that.

Caveat: My degree was in european history - so I'm probbly starting from a differnt place than the average tourist. But - anyone can do the reading before a trip and get most of it themselves.

IMHO, you are not missing out. Sometimes, it is fun, but I don't actually remember enough of what the guides say to make it worth while. I prefer a good guide book for places like Pompeii.

In about 20 years, three exceptions: once in Florence, I did meet an Art historian who was great and in Cappodocia in the underground city, we lucked out and met a very old man who had actually lived in the underground as a small child. He made life there very real. In Madrid, loved hanging out with historian, Stephen Drake Jones, for the experience more than to learn anything.

In general, I find a personal guide way too expensive for a solo traveler. I have had two good experiences with one, but in both cases it was specifically for Art Nouveau buildings (Prague and Budapest). I wouldn't use one for a more general visit. I have had experiences with guides on tours, but more and more I'm finding I already know most of what they're telling me, or else it's stuff I'm just not going to remember. I'd rather read a guidebook in comfort in a cafe, and then go look at whatever it is in peace.

Wow, you guys remember everything you read in a guidebook (which mostly don't go very deep)? And require that you must remember everything a guide says?

I want to add that if you have a special interest, like Art Nouveau buildings or fashion or Roman mosaics, a guide who's knowledgeable in this area can really help you see more of what you're interested in.

If you don't remember it, what's the point in hearing it? At least if you're using a guidebook you can look it up again.

"you guys remember everything you read in a guidebook (which mostly don't go very deep)?"

You are right about general guide books which don't go very deep into specific places, churches, etc., but the info is available.

I buy or take or make guidebooks specific to the place so I can take it with me, stop and read about what I am seeing, etc. while I am looking at it. I try to read a lot before I go and make notes on what to see and what to look for.

"And require that you must remember everything a guide says?"

No, I don't feel required to remember everything a guide says, but If I am paying a lot, I'd like to learn more than I could with a good guide book.

"If you don't remember it, what's the point in hearing it? At least if you're using a guidebook you can look it up again."

So true. Love reading and looking at pictures of things long after the trip.

There are some people I learned a lot from. Neither were hired to tell us anything, but on Santorini, a taxi driver told us a lot about crops, plants, changes in Santorini socially and economically due to several years of droughts; and in Cappodocia a driver showed us some farms and talked about similar things there. Both were better than most guides I've had. They were really sharing their local cultures with us.

In Europe, I 've hired guides for places that were extremly special such as the Acropolis. We learned so much more than we would have without them. I still remember what we learned from our guides but we chose them carefully.

They were highly exucated people and one said she refused to do cruise ships as they were mass tourism.

HappyTrvlr: What is an exucated person ? :)

To Jay_G:

It all depends how much time you have and what your memory is like.
How much homework do you do before a trip.

Personally I do enough homework that I never need a guide BUT I have used a guide in many places.

1.The guide I had in Paris was terrific, I made note on key things he said.

2. Although I knew Copenhagen almost like the "back of my hand". I still took a guide for one full day and saw much more with the guide.

3. I could say the same for Berlin,Prague or Helsinki etc., however, a good guide/driver will get you from point A to point B, quicker than ride a bus or subway.

4. Let me give you an example:
When I was in Stockholm ( off a cruise ship),the guide/driver had booked in advance came to pick me up.

I said to him, "Peder,let's go to the Vasa Museum first before it gets too busy and then head out of town to Drottingholm Palace ( Royal Family)... then let's do the City Hall Hall tour and then be at the Royal Palace for the changing of the guards, then we can have lunch and I can walk around Old Town ( Gamla Stan) on my own ( I knew all the places there).. then we can meet at ( we set a time/place) and have enough time to get back to the ship . "

So you see ,I did not just hop in his car car and let the tour guide drive me around aimlessly pointing places out.

So again, how much research work do you want to do, how much time do you have and what are your interests.

(if all I wanted to do was walk around Gamla Stan , then I would not have needed a guide.)

Thanks for your feedback everyone.

Percy - your guide in Stockholm sounds more like a driver than a guide. Other than speed, did he add anything to your visit? Would renting a car not have given you the same experience, albeit a little more slowly?

I think my opinion is being re-inforced that (in a similar way to nytraveler) if I have a decent guidebook (and more focussed books on anything I'm particularly interested in) I'll learn and experience more than if I hired an average guide.

Sassafrass - your experiences with locals in various locales are exactly why I love to travel. It's that sort of experience that I assume (possibly wrongly) that I just wouldn't get from a guide.

I can't imagine a guide buying me drinks all night whilst discussing the differences between Denmark and England (it was a looong night), or inviting me for dinner with three generations of their family to show me "real Italian food". Unless I was paying what seem to be incredibly high rates for the service provided...

Hi Jay_G:

Yes he was my guide and has been guiding for 18 years in Stockholm.

But because I did my homework well,I wanted to see my key interest places first.

For example he took me to some lovely lookout areas, that I did not know about and would have never gone to.

I had a whole list of places I wanted to see, his information about places was very much appreciated.

I could have read all I wanted to but I realize it can never replace , the first hand knowledge of a tour guide/driver .

So like I said it depends how much you want to see and in what depth.

A lot of people are assuming that the only guide books available are the basic ones that cover most sights in a page or two. there are much more comprehensive books available - often at the sight - that may have 30 or 40 pages on that particular sight. We buy ALL of those. We use them at the sight and take them home as souvenirs. And we generally have also read some specialist books before the trip - as well as deredging info out of our memories.

We once took a tour of the Vatican Gardens. On the way back down from the top we encountered a bride emerging from a very small chapel in the grounds. When I went to check it out the guide tried to call me away-saying - this is nothing.

It turned out it was one of the original buildings from the 5th century. And it was the actual building in which in 800 Charlemagne - who was accepting Pope Leo III as his overlord in return for being named the Holy Roman Emperor - at the last minute grabbed the crown from the hands of the pope and crowned himself. Thus getting the title without making himself a papal vassal. A brief version of the information was on a plague next to the door and I remembered the rest from my early european history course. And the "guide" was trying to drag us away to look at some big yellow bush!

He was really aggravated when I told my companions what it was and the rest of the group overheard and all came over to see the ancient chapel.

That's why I am very selective about using "guides".

Good guides will usually come from Fodorites who have used them and highly recommend them.

I don't think it is a simple yes, no, or I never use one so you don't need one either.

Probably you don't need one, but it is possible you might enhance your experience if you have the right one. I have rarely used them either, but have had some absolutely fabulous experiences when I did. Michael Osman in Paris, Jeremy Ginsberg in Berlin, Bill Jolly, Alan Gillanders and Carol Probst in Australia all made for truly special memories

I am having keyboard problems but will try to come back and explain why they worked for me. They may or may not work for you.

Okay, this seemed to work!

To elaborate, there is a difference in mind from a tour and a guide. And frankly, sometimes a tour can be a good thing too, it simply all depends on your circumstances, time allowances etc. I had all of a day and one-half in Zurich years ago and the walking tour I took from the main train station made a big difference in how quickly I oriented to the city, and I saw and noticed things I would not have on my own.

But, I think your question is really around a guide. And, I don't think you are referring to guides as in taking a guided tour, correct me if I am wrong.

So here is why the above experiences worked well for me. In Paris, did I need a guide? No, I was perfectly capable of navigating the city myself, I had been once, I read my guidebooks, I read books based in Paris. But I wanted to go deeper, and what better way than spending time one on one with someone who lived there, listened to the areas that interested me, and tailored the day for myself and my friend. Could I have gone to Pere le Chaise myself? Certainly. Could I have gone to Pompidou on my own? Certainly. But Michael added great color to the day, lots of backstories, and for an example, we watched people wander around the cemetery with their maps getting terribly frustrated and Michael took us straight to the spots we wanted to see, pointed out things that are not in every guidebook, and also allowed for the wander.

In Berlin, I had one day. I didn't know if I would ever be back. I knew only cursory history. Again, could I have taken my guidebook or hop on hop off buss and seen the sites? Yes. But Jeremy was like a walking history book, he brought it all alive. Possibly the best thing I can say is that he made me interested in reading more history when I came back. Yes, he was very expensive, and in my mind, he was totally worth it.

The guides in Australia were specialized. My husband is an avid birder, and in our own country he wouldn't need a guide, he knows the birds and he knows the places. But if you are visiting a place where you may have studied the birds but don't know them in the same way, you don't want to miss anything. But, each of these individuals added even more than that. All were fonts of information about the wildlife, the plants and flowers, and even though we didn't hire them for that, we learned a lot about daily life and history in Australia as we spent a lot of time in cars together. One afternoon we sat in a car with Bill watching a game of cricket as he explained the game to us (my husband remembers the details, I don't).

We weren't with any of these people 24 hours a day, every day. But for the time we did spend with them, it was absolutely worth it and really added to our trip. I'm sure our trips would still have been great. They were even better with these professional guides.

Thanks for all the further replies.

Percy - Thanks for the clarification regarding Stockholm. I was just genuinely interested as to what added value he brought.

Your point about 'recommended by Fodorites' is pretty much the reason I posted this question asking for specific examples.

Over the years I've been on this site, I've seen people recommend things (often repeatedly and sometimes very fervently) that I've experienced and wouldn't go out of my way to recommend, so wanted to hear some personal experiences.

nytraveler and toucan - thanks for sharing what encapsulates my problem. One guide at the Vatican who decided one of the seminal places in European history wasn't worth the time of day and others in Australia who add value at every turn.

And therein lies the rub. I like to experience things first hand in order to have an informed opinion on them, but I can't help thinking that if I used the (seemingly large amount) of money I would spend on a private guide to buy books and/or the odd drink for people in bars, my money would be better spent...

toucan - your experience with the guide watching a cricket match is similar to an experience I had in New York when I went to baseball game. The difference being that all it cost me was the price of the entry ticket (and probably a couple of years life expectancy due to the snacks) as after asking the chap in the seat next to mine to explain something that was going on, he proceeded to give me a potted history of baseball, the Mets [insert jokes here] and Shea stadium.