What to wear

Old Apr 21st, 2014, 08:22 AM
  #121  
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,057
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
[[ Well, there is a negative side to tourism. Google can show you the relevant articles and papers. ]]

Every human activity has a negative side. You can only try to minimize your negative impact on the places you go and the people you meet. No one can afford to think he's a benign presence on the earth.
bvlenci is online now  
Old Apr 21st, 2014, 10:16 AM
  #122  
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,057
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
http://www.theguardian.com/travel/20...27/travelbooks

Is that what you meant?

I've read practically everything Newby wrote, and own most of his books. "A Short Walk in the Hindu Kush" is the first I read, over twenty years ago, and it has the same story about meeting Thesiger.
bvlenci is online now  
Old Apr 21st, 2014, 11:06 AM
  #123  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 16,907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
"when you get into trying to differentiate between people who pre-plan and pre-book an itinerary and people who do not pre-plan"

people who preplan and prebook: people who work for a living with limited travel time and money

people who do not: people who do not/no longer work for a living with unlimited travel time and money

"You are not free to write, 'a pretentious, self-serving'..." Dul, sure I am.
Try to figure it out: adjectives written on a public forum, used to describe, for example, self-aggrandizing opinionated bullies.
Please also feel free to read the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Please also feel free to look up the phrase "playing with semantics" and explore the meaning. Be concise and show your work.
sylvia3 is offline  
Old Apr 21st, 2014, 12:09 PM
  #124  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 5,656
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 1 Post
Yes , that's what I meant. The last sentence of <i>Short Walk</i> is <i>"God, you must be a couple of pansies," said Thesiger.</i> I've read that book a couple of times.

A funny and classic line, imho, along with the one-line cable on the third page of chapter one:
CAN YOU TRAVEL NURISTAN JUNE?

Would it have the same ring if he had written:
CAN YOU TOURIST NURISTAN JUNE?
Nelson is offline  
Old Apr 21st, 2014, 01:03 PM
  #125  
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,057
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I first discovered Newby when I sublet a house in the Hague from someone who had left A Short Walk there. I suppose I was a traveler, because I had a job there, but I spent every weekend and national holiday, as well as my annual leave, joyfully being a tourist.

Have you also read "Slowly down the Ganges"? Another one of his best. And "The Last Grain Race". And "Love and War in the Apennines". They're all good.

I read half of one book by Theroux, and it's not often that I put a book down before I finish it. I just couldn't take his pontificating.
bvlenci is online now  
Old Apr 21st, 2014, 01:24 PM
  #126  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 5,656
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 1 Post
Nice way to discover Newby, bvlenci. I found "Short Walk" in the library after developing an interest in the Himalaya following the American ascent of Everest in '63. I've read "Slowly down the Ganges" years ago, but not the others. Will keep an eye out for them.

A few years ago I posted a three-sentence review of Theroux's "Dark Star Safari", and opened with "He can sometime be annoyingly self-righteous...". I finished the book but struggled with that.

I believe I have experienced both traveling and tourism, the former mostly in my youth. They are objectively different, but equally rewarding.
Nelson is offline  
Old Apr 21st, 2014, 01:35 PM
  #127  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 5,656
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 1 Post
BTW, bogarts, did you ever figure out what to wear?!
Nelson is offline  
Old Apr 21st, 2014, 01:56 PM
  #128  
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
"I believe I have experienced both traveling and tourism, the former mostly in my youth. They are objectively different, but equally rewarding."

Well at least you acknowledge they are differnt nelson. Something the tourists simply can't seem to do.

I do disagree with your last remark about them being equally rewarding though.

Sylvia3, you really are amazingly simple in your thinking.

No it is not against the American Constitution to write what you want. But this isn't America, it is Fodors. It is against the Fodors Terms of Use to write what you wrote. Duhhh.

Nor do you have the difference between people who pre-plan and those who don't right. Whether you work for a living or a member of the leisure class makes no difference.

Somewith with 2 weeks to play with can just as easily hop on a plane to A with no plan beyond buying that ticket to A, just as easily as someone with 2 months or 2 years and bottomless pockets.

Your suggestion that those who work must do one and those who don't work must have limitless money is hilarious.
dulciusexasperis is offline  
Old Apr 21st, 2014, 04:18 PM
  #129  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 16,907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Golly, I am devastated! Please do not address me again; I find you tedious and annoying in the extreme. Your deliberate obtuseness is mind boggling, and your sheer ego is giggle inducing. Run away, and find someone with whom to play word games.
sylvia3 is offline  
Old Apr 22nd, 2014, 07:02 AM
  #130  
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
dulci: I don't think it's necessary to label people based on how much planning they do before a trip. For me, such distinctions aren't really important. Everyone is different, and has different needs or desires when it comes to travel. I don't think planning a lot OR not planning at all make someone an inferior traveler. The experience of travel can be enhanced by lots of pre-planning in some circumstances (for instance, if you don't have much time, or if it's just what you like to do) and NOT planning can also enhance a trip (perhaps one where the traveler has more time, or has been to the location before, for instance).

Planning can be a lot of fun in and of itself. Anticipation is part of the fun of travel, if you ask me! Often, too, it's good to plan things out, even if you don't end up doing everything you'd like, because with a well-planned trip, a traveler will be more aware of what there is to be seen and what he or she is looking at, and can pick and choose as they go. Some people feel better with a very structured plan every day.

Other people like to just go where the road takes them; it can be nice to just wander aimlessly, with no specific intent. It's fun to be spontaneous, and in this way you can often come across things that you might otherwise never have found, and experiences you might not otherwise have experienced.

I guess what I'm saying is that there really isn't a need to label any of it; as long as you enjoy your trip, see some beautiful things, eat a good meal or two, and look back on the trip with pleasure, I think you're doing it right.
ahiddenbird is offline  
Old Apr 22nd, 2014, 09:21 AM
  #131  
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Ahiddenbird, I don't think I have ever said everyone should forget planning or researching. I agree it can be a great deal of fun in and of itself.

I also don't think I have ever said everyone should travel without a plan. I have said I believe that winging it is more rewarding. But that isn't the same as saying everyone should do it. I realize some people in fact would be very uncomfortable doing so.

Even though I think winging it is preferable, I don't think I have ever said anyone who doesn't is an inferior traveller. I'd just say the experience may be inferior. NOT the person.

The reason to label the difference is so that you can discuss the differences. How else can you do so?

Let's say, you have the choice of pre-planning or not pre-planning a trip and I want to try and convince you that pre-planning is preferable. That isn't saying you must, or you are inferior if you don't or that it is the best way for you. It's no different than someone trying to convince you that staying in Portovenere is better than staying in a Cinque Terre village.

But I can say to you, 'Portovenere is preferable because....' and 'Cinque Terre is not as good a choice because.....' How do I say that unless we have the two names to refer to?

I happen to use 'tourist' and 'traveller' to denote two types of travel that's all. One pre-plans and the other does not.
dulciusexasperis is offline  
Old Apr 22nd, 2014, 11:20 AM
  #132  
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Sorry Dulci, I didn't mean my comment as a challenge to you. You asked me a bit up thread, "what names would you choose to use to differentiate HOW people travel for pleasure, in terms of pre-planning vs. winging it?"; I was just responding to that. I didn't think you made any of those claims you mention, I was just answering your question. To be honest, I haven't really read every comment on this thread. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

Personally, I don't think it's necessary to label different types of travelers in order to discuss their styles, but that's just me.

I don't think I understand how your example relates to calling someone a traveler or a tourist. What I mean is, in the situation you describe, I think we could just talk about logistics without having to call each other anything in particular, other than maybe our names. But maybe I'm misunderstanding your meaning.

I will say, though, that your denotations of 'tourist' and 'traveler' are fairly unique. The common definitions of those two words are quite different. Assuming the situation arises where you're having a chat with someone on this subject, doesn't it cause confusion when you think you're talking about someone who pre-plans, and the person you're talking to thinks you're talking about someone who travels for pleasure?
ahiddenbird is offline  
Old Apr 22nd, 2014, 11:51 AM
  #133  
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 4,510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Sometimes you have to make a day by day agenda. I did this a few years ago, travelling around Australia. I had a detailed plan of distances that I would travel, towns that I would sleep in, all that sort of detail.

So probably I was a "tourist".

The thing was, I was travelling by bicycle, and I knew that if I did not achieve the distance or arrive in that town, then I would run out of water.

Traveller vs Tourist is meaningless.

Ed Hillary climbed Everest. A goal in mind. A plan. So he was just a tourist.
Peter_S_Aus is offline  
Old Apr 22nd, 2014, 02:02 PM
  #134  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 5,656
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 1 Post
Peter_S_Aus, In 1972 my friend and I got on our bicycles in New York City. The only plan was to get to San Francisco. We were naive enough to not fully understand the implication of a prevailing westerly wind.

Each day we looked at those free gas station maps, picked the smallest roads and wound up somewhere. Maybe we slept in a city park, a cemetery, a patch of farm or forest, or someone's home. It was America and, for the most part, we were not going to run out of water.

Were we travelers, or does this illustrates your point?
Nelson is offline  
Old Apr 22nd, 2014, 02:49 PM
  #135  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 57,091
Received 5 Likes on 3 Posts
Even though I think winging it is preferable, I don't think I have ever said anyone who doesn't is an inferior traveller. I'd just say the experience may be inferior. NOT the person.>>

that's kind of you.

to sum up:

dulci is a traveller who likes to wing it therefore winging it is preferable and delivers a better experience [though how he can judge whether his experience is better than is a mystery to me - the most he can surely say is that for him, winging it is better than pre-planning]

the rest of us are tourists who pre-plan which delivers an inferior experience and therefore "travelling" is better than `'tourism".
annhig is offline  
Old Apr 23rd, 2014, 07:15 AM
  #136  
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
More or less correct annhig.

I can judge having done both. Someone who has not done both however cannot judge. I'd venture to say that most posting in defense of pre-planning have not done any real amount of winging it for any real length of time.

It's a simple question annhig. Has someone experienced both planned and unplanned travel for a period of even a week or more. If not, how can they comment on both without having experienced both?

I can say that having done both, in my experience unplanned is the better way to go. If anyone else wants to say, 'I have done both and prefer planned', they are free to say so. That's simply a difference of opinion and everyone is entitled to their own opinion IF they have the experience on which to form an opinion.

Of course there are plenty of people who have opinions about something without any real first hand knowledge of the subject. Their opinions aren't worth much however.
dulciusexasperis is offline  
Old Apr 23rd, 2014, 09:21 AM
  #137  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 16,907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I have done both and prefer planned
sylvia3 is offline  
Old Apr 23rd, 2014, 09:25 AM
  #138  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 15,430
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 4 Posts
I have done both and they both have their merits.
Nikki is offline  
Old Apr 23rd, 2014, 10:54 AM
  #139  
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I've done both and prefer a mix of the two styles
ahiddenbird is offline  
Old Apr 23rd, 2014, 01:03 PM
  #140  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 57,091
Received 5 Likes on 3 Posts
clearly irony, like some here, doesn't travel well.
annhig is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Your Privacy Choices -