RE: FainaAgain

Poor thing - somebody is posting silly, ignorant statements under her name. You know its fake since the comments are so over-the-top!

The Rick Steves phenomenom is exactly why I despise American public broadcasting (PBS). The American taxpayer subsidises the creation of many poor programs, and a few good ones. The bad ones no one watches are a complete waste of the public's money.

The successful program becomes a 30 to 60 minute infomercial (commercial that pretends to be a real program) every week, so that the host can hawk (sell) his books and other merchandise. The idea that such a host, after achieving such commercial success, should pay back the money invested in his program by the American public, was once proposed. It was unfortunately dismissed out of hand (immediately).

Such is the case with Rick Steves. He deserves a little credit for inspiring tourists to travel on their own. But his idea of "back doors" is ridiculous. His programs concentrate on France, U.K., and Italy. Surprise! That is where most Americans went before R.S., as if it isn't bad enough that so many Americans are lemmings. Apparently they need someone to tell them exactly which hotel to stay in, which restaurant to eat in, and which attractions to visit. They also need a special guest appearance on "What Not to Wear" (either the BBC version, or the American copy.)

I guess that his idea of blending in with the locals is to bring a camera crew everywhere you go, and try to get discounts under implied threat of a bad review.

He is also a pitchman for railpasses, which are usually a rip-off. Notice that every episode, right after the credits, is the "plug" for Rail Europe.

doctor lorenzo, you say:
"as if isn't bad enough that so many Americans are lemmings"

Where did you get that wordly, sophisticated view of things? Very classy. Hope you're proud opf yourself that you can insult a large group of people on the internet. Like that's hard. You da man.

Anyhoo, about Rick Steves....I like his Europe Through the Back Door book for basic travel advise on how things work and how to get along and get by. However, his recommendations don't really work for us, as we're usually in Europe for business trips, so we're not staying at cute little inns and such, and really want to focus on art and the major sights.

And that's where I lose him--with the art he's good, but when people have never been to Europe before or to a particulaar country with major sightseeing, it's criminal to send them to an out of the way town because he finds it "charming" and it gives you ample opportunity to meet the locals and expnad your cultural knowledge.

Now I'm totally for those things, but not at the expense of seeing the Colosseum, or the chance to travel to another spectacular sight. Not that he's ever said those things directly, but he seems to imply that "very touristed" means "worthless" when in fact many sights are very touristed becasue they are something spectacular!

Just to follow up and maybe close out this thread before it becomes too repetitive, I appreciate all the inputs. Many of the comments have made me rethink the way I expressed my opinion about RS.

Perhaps what I should have said, and what a lot of others have said, is that his guidebooks are OK as an introduction to the various areas of Europe, but the "secret places" or the "discoveries" he describes should almost universally be ignored---or at least taken with a grain of salt.

And for a first-time traveler to Europe, I would have to say that a RS book is good if taken along with one or two other reputable guides. I should have understood that there are a lot of people who watch his TV programs and read his books who haven't ever gone to Europe, and so his comments are indeed useful. By the way, as TV travel programs go, I think the Rudy Maxa (savvy traveler) programs are pretty good. Thanks to all for the comments.

Doctor Lorenzo, as an apparent "lemming" let me follow you and your interesting point regarding PBS and commercialism is interesting: RS definitely uses his show to peddle for-profit offerings, as do (in effect) the "Barney" and "Sesame Street" people. Such shows are strong enough to stand on their own (I prefer RS' to SS and Barney!) If those shows are subsidized through PBS in one manner or another, while someone is making a profit on the other side, I question the wisdom of and need for those subsidies.

"Nobody goes there anymore; it's too crowded." -- Yogi Berra

Be balance, and fair. Steve has a great haircut - his shirt is spiffy - he's so swifty sticking his head out of moving train windows. He eats standing up, always. He's a stand-up guy.

I wasn't planning on replying to this post, but the comments about PBS really got to me. It is not my understanding that PBS subsidiezes the creation of Rick Steves' programs, Barney or Sesame Street (PBS may, however, produce some of its own documentaries/programs).

I believe Rick Steves produces and pays for his own shows. PBS pays for the broadcast rights. Rick clearly benefits from this exposure. However, Rick also participates in fund raising events for PBS and is a HUGE draw. He really helps them raise a lot of money.

It's the "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" system at work.
Diane

I think it's clear Rick pays for his own clothes and hair do.

Rick pays for that haircut? THAT is a crime!

I don't know about Rick Steves, I'm still looking for the thread about lesbos and baseball caps.

Why is this guy so fond of the "backdoor" scene?

maybe his name and style was teazed alot during childhood

>)

I don't see the harm in Rick Steves...he's a guy trying to make a buck...so what? Heck I wish I had thought of that. Seems like a shrewd businessman to me.

Rick Steves is hardly the only person who has ruined his own "discoveries" by publishing them. Look at what has happened to Cortona since Under the Tuscan Sun was published.

Just a thought: how can anyone outgrow a travel guide, which amounts to a cookbook? "Joy of Cooking" by Rombauer and Becker is one of the best selling cookbooks of all time. James Claiborne, author of the NYTimes cookbook, admits to having a copy. Or take the Larousse Gastronomique, which has recipes for just about everything (including a 'back door' recipe for, wait for it, CROW.)

Does one outgrow what amounts to a dictionary or reference?

OOps. That should be Craig Claiborne, not James.

Wayne,
My hero was Frommer's Europe on $25/day and then $35/day.
After my retirement, we followed his advice to the letter. In those days, we traveled extensively by train using his advice regarding places to stay and things to do.
For the first five years or so, I never had a reservation when arriving in Europe. Luckily, train stations are not in the worse part of town(as is the case in the states)
I would just tell me wife-wait here, I'll be back.
It always worked.
Then all of a sudden, the whole world stated to travel, and that became a problem.
Now we make reservations in advance, lease a car and see Europe that way.
I do agree with bobthenavigator, that I have outgrown and probably predated Rick Steves.
We do annual trips of six weeks at a time and hope to be able to do so until
God willing, I die in Europe.

Rick Steve found many underrated and forgotten places in the 1980s, but now he has made them overrated.

I went to Cinque Terre in 1982 after I found an article about the Ligurian coast in an issue of the National Geographic Magazine from the 1960s (Riomaggiore on the cover, if I remember correctly).

The attraction of 5'Terre in 1982 was that this was a forgotten and therefore authentic part of the otherwise famous "Italian Riviera".

Bellagio and Lake Como was very fashionable 100 years ago or so, but then the place became forgotten. Until Rick Steves came along.

Brugge anno 1982 was interesting just because it was a forgotten and melancolic Belgian town. 20 years later, the town is neither forgotten nor melancholic.

Good for you Gino and well said.