It is why you find most on this site do not go on tours..other than local day tours. I went on one group tour, a pricey one, to....didn't like anything about it. Since then I do my own thing. Actually, half the fun is in the planning..getting all the info etc. Some, as you have found even doing their own thing move at a very fast pace, hardly stopping long enough to smell the flowers! I go to an area and get to know it. I have been to Paris many, many, many times, as it changes all the time. Never can see enough of Paris. I don't like to rush and area..next is east of Paris on the edge of champagne country, following that will be 2 weeks in the Dordogne with an additional few days in the San Sebastian area.
We all have our choices of ways that suit us best. Enjoy.........

How about combining the two? Get a place to settle in for a week or so and then take day trips from there. This way you get the best of both worlds.

I'll admit to being a "one week, one place" sort of person, but it does depend on where you are.

I didn't "get" Venice for the first few days - I fixated on the crowds, the expence and the fact that I'd seen photos of everything. Around day 4 or 5 , it finally clicked, I began to really appreciate the place and it would definitely rate as one of my favourites.

On the other hand, I immediately fell in love with Lucca, but felt after 5 days that maybe I had "done it all" and it was time to move on.

you are not alone! i never rush around. i love to BE in a new place, but actually "traveling" isn't my favorite thing to do. shortest i will visit anywhere is 5 days. and most cities in any single trip, 3 (and that was with almost one month's time).

also i never plan daily itineraries. most often i don't use a guidebook rather pick up free maps & information after arrival.

I don't recall ever bragging that to be a nomadic traveller was somehow a more industrious way of travelling than any other type. Actually, it's been my experience that more criticisms are voiced on this board for people trying to exceed some arbitrary standard of 'muchness' as in 'you are doing too much' - and with no qualifiers as to what reference standard is being used.

I don't think you're really as worried about being the only one or even just a member of a select and small elite as you are trying to make me believe. If you have found what works for you, then hey, that's great. However, can you really claim that people who spend only a couple days in a place don't 'linger' in museums? Do you know for a fact that they aren't relaxed, wandering the streets, or familiar with the public transport? How do you know? As for 'enjoying' the cuisine, what are you suggesting is the alternative for all those whom you dismiss as 'rushing around' - do we regurgitate the boeuf bourgignon, as opposed to savouring it?

It's not my intention to stop people from being pleased with themselves for having found what works for them. I only wish to dispute the claims that they need 'reassurance' for being such a sensitive, cultivated traveler - as opposed to all us physically and emotionally exhausted automatons.

Um, did I miss something? I don't recall my purposely using any language that would cause you to be insulted, but since I obviously did, I apologize. I was just wondering if I was the only one who liked to stay in one place. I believe that is what I said. I also don't recall accusing anyone of being an automaton, or claiming that I am more sensitive or more culturally sound.

In fact, I don't really know how to respond. My bad, apparently.

I don't understand Sue_xx_yy's reaction either. It seemed quite over-the-top to me. And needlessly confrontational and argumentitive or nothing.

Ahhhhhh Faredolce,

Welcome to the dark side of Fodor's.

No need to pay it any attention, it will go away if we don't see it.

It does not ever make any sense, so don't even try to figure it out.

Only embrace the happy ones that embrace you and forget the ugliness.

:)>- Tiff

Faredolce, We've always been rather nomadic but we are going to Venice this fall and spending an entire week there (partly because of my "delicate state" which prevents me from lugging my luggage around so much!). I'm looking forward to a slower pace of travel this time.

You are not alone. We are going to Paris for 3 weeks this summer. Of course, we will tak a few side excursions, but the purpose is to live there and become familiar and comfortable. Have fun!

faredolce: i didn't see anything critical or negative in your post so don't worry about it. All you were doing is saying how YOU liked to do it and wondered if anyone else felt the same way. Well, I feel the same way. Last trip I had a week in London and a week in Paris...NOT enough time but I had time to stop and smell the roses and SHOP!!!!!!! Fun, fun. Anyway, ignor some other posts..I don't get a couple of the responses.

I am content to stay in one or two cities at most. As well, my favorite city to spend a couple of weeks would be Rome, followed by Vienna. Anywhere else, I've had enough after about 3 days. On my first several trips, I did hop and skip every two days.

One of the big perks of staying put is the nicer treatment you're bound to receive during subsequent visits to the same businesses. This is especially noticeable in Italy.

My parents go to Italy about every year and a half for at least eight weeks. They spend at least six weeks of every trip at Villa Rosa in Montemelino (Umbria). I've given up asking them over the years why they park themselves in one spot for such a long time--though it is very lovely--because every time they give me the same answer as you've given! So I would have to say that there are many, many kindred souls to you.

My husband and I have never stayed more than one week in one place. We always hope to stay longer, in theory, but get restless for new experiences and find ourselves moving on. I rather envy your ability, and my parents', to be so content in your travel experience.

I'm with you, as are many of us. But it's purely a matter of personal style and taste. Frankly, I hate to travel -- that is, I hate the getting-to-place-to-place business, and what I love is getting familiar with a particular place and the local people. At this stage in my life I keep returning to central Italy -- hey, I've met the love of my life, why keep dating? I stay in a few treasured small villages and take exploratory trips out -- or fly into a different airport and stay in that city for a few days before slowly making my way toward "home" in the hills of Umbria or Abruzzo. Last year,much as I love Rome, Bologna turned out to to be molto simpatico. One beauty of slow travel is, as someone mentioned before, getting to know the locals a bit. By our second or third trip we've usually had invitations to come and stay in homes, and whether we might take them up or not, we make a point of nurturing relationships through emails between trips. I still leave every place feeling sad and regretful, but that's part of the beauty of falling in love, no?

Keep ambling,

Mara

Our minimum is usually a week in one place. We've rented a house in Normandy for a month this fall. It's nice to relax and fit into a groove. You can go out and visit sights, take a two-day trip if you are in the mood, stay in and amuse yourself if the weather is bad.

It's relaxing! ((@))

Faredolce,

No, you're not the only one. There's a whole community of travelers just like you at slowtrav.com

The only reason I made it to Venice (the first time) was because the girlfriend I was visiting in Switzerland told me I should quit drinking wine & sunning myself all day long every day on her garden lakeview terrace... and go do something!

faredolce,
No you are not lazy.I'll never forget the first time I went to Paris;it was a business trip and I was on my own for 3 days in Paris before my sister joined me.I walked and walked and got lost.And discovered charming bistros and shops.I can honestly say it was joyful, even thinking about it now I can feel the mist on my face and smell the pasteries... pure bliss.I spent ten days there total and could have been there a month.I got married in Italy almost 2 years ago, we hit three cities in three weeks.I think it was too much .I won't do more then 2 cities again.
Happy trails
Fluffy

Hi. We do some of both - but more of the changing hotels frequently type. I prefer seeing a lot, but my husband is getting tired of the changing hotels every night type of vacationing.

I think it depends on where you go. I've spend one happy week in Paris, NYC, San Diego. But part of the fun in western US is the scenic driving - driving for 3 hours through the red rock country goes a lot faster than driving on Interstate 95. I have a low boredom threshold and like to relax, but after a few hours of say, sitting on beach, I'm ready to go do something. People who don't feel this way aren't lazy - just different!

I've done trips both ways and found that so far, one place I'd travel your way (1 base for extended time) is in the Berner Oberland region of Switzerland. I'm still trying to figure out a way in h*ll I can, on a teacher's salary, retire there one day! Anyway, I think when one has "done" the main tourist must-sees, future ventures to that same spot can be best done from one base.