If You Are A Tourist........
Aug 16th, 2005, 05:20 AM
#2
GoT...I was amused the other day to read someone saying they were warned against staying in a Fisherman's Wharf hotel because the area was touristy. Well...that's what they were and why they were there--to tour. You would rather stay in the financial district? Embarcadero?
If people refused to stay in or go to San Antonio's Riverwalk area because it was touristy, there would be a lot of employees in a lot of big boxes out of work and SA tourism would fade away. That's where the majority of our hotels are...because it's pretty, it's what people want to see, nad that's where they want to be. Ditto Savannah. Ditto New Orleans, and on and on.
And what about not wanting to eat at touristy restaurants? They became popular for a reason...and locals eat there right along with the tourists. Once the locals find them...the tourists will come too. Websites like this one insure that!
If people refused to stay in or go to San Antonio's Riverwalk area because it was touristy, there would be a lot of employees in a lot of big boxes out of work and SA tourism would fade away. That's where the majority of our hotels are...because it's pretty, it's what people want to see, nad that's where they want to be. Ditto Savannah. Ditto New Orleans, and on and on.
And what about not wanting to eat at touristy restaurants? They became popular for a reason...and locals eat there right along with the tourists. Once the locals find them...the tourists will come too. Websites like this one insure that!
Aug 16th, 2005, 05:24 AM
#3
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 57,890
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It seems to me that a visitor is visiting a specific person or company or something.
IMHO a traveler implies someone in the tradition of the Victorian explorers (ie staying in a yurt in Mongolia or going up the Amazon in a canoe).
Everyone else I classify as a tourist - which isn;t a bad thing - just someone who is visiting and learning about a place as a vacation. But most thing that tourists do are not "touristy" (I hope).
To me - something that is "touristy" is something inauthentic - primarily for tourists rather than an intrinsic part of the society (tacky souvenir shops, restaurants with menus in 14 languages in which you will never see a local, Madame Tussaud's anything or the London Dungeon).
IMHO a traveler implies someone in the tradition of the Victorian explorers (ie staying in a yurt in Mongolia or going up the Amazon in a canoe).
Everyone else I classify as a tourist - which isn;t a bad thing - just someone who is visiting and learning about a place as a vacation. But most thing that tourists do are not "touristy" (I hope).
To me - something that is "touristy" is something inauthentic - primarily for tourists rather than an intrinsic part of the society (tacky souvenir shops, restaurants with menus in 14 languages in which you will never see a local, Madame Tussaud's anything or the London Dungeon).
Aug 16th, 2005, 05:41 AM
#4
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stimulating but unanswerable question. Nobody wears signs. I separate the categories differently: there are non-residents and there are residents. Some non-residents can be from the same country, some from distant countries. If they are in a location that is not their home, they might be tourists to you and visitors to someone else. Playing with the word difference between all three terms is pointless.
I live in an area frequented by tourists, visitors, and travelers. No one knows the difference, and no one really cares. I see a visitor and call him/her a tourist, and my wife sees the same person as a traveler passing through. Let's face it, neither you nor I nor anyone else can specifically define the difference in those terms, because there is no rigorous definition.
And how do I know if some place is touristy? It's easy. If a large percentage of the people in a locale (a restaurant, for instance) are non-residents, then the place must be touristy. If you see non-residents wandering all around, then it's touristy. It doesn't matter what you call them.
I live in an area frequented by tourists, visitors, and travelers. No one knows the difference, and no one really cares. I see a visitor and call him/her a tourist, and my wife sees the same person as a traveler passing through. Let's face it, neither you nor I nor anyone else can specifically define the difference in those terms, because there is no rigorous definition.
And how do I know if some place is touristy? It's easy. If a large percentage of the people in a locale (a restaurant, for instance) are non-residents, then the place must be touristy. If you see non-residents wandering all around, then it's touristy. It doesn't matter what you call them.
Aug 16th, 2005, 05:44 AM
#5
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 9,050
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with nytraveler's assessment -- the negative type of "touristy" is anything that exists solely to attract tourists, as contrasted with genuine local phenomena that *attract* lots of tourists.
That's why a place can be full of tourists, yet not be "touristy". It's all in how you define it.
I think the difference between a tourist and a traveler is depth. The tourist wll look at highlights and famous stuff, whereas the traveler will look a little deeper at local culture (making an effort to eat where locals eat and otherwise share the local life experience) and will more often be found in places that tourists don't bother with.
It's like the difference between playing a sport and just being a spectator: travelers are players, tourists are lookers.
That's why a place can be full of tourists, yet not be "touristy". It's all in how you define it.
I think the difference between a tourist and a traveler is depth. The tourist wll look at highlights and famous stuff, whereas the traveler will look a little deeper at local culture (making an effort to eat where locals eat and otherwise share the local life experience) and will more often be found in places that tourists don't bother with.
It's like the difference between playing a sport and just being a spectator: travelers are players, tourists are lookers.
Aug 16th, 2005, 05:44 AM
#6
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,963
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How can you tell if people in a restaurant are residents or non-residents? During the day, you can spot people with cameras and maps, but when eating out at night, I think everyone kind of blends together.
Aug 16th, 2005, 05:46 AM
#7
Guest
Posts: n/a
OO, I agree.
Living in a tourist area, the visitors/tourists/travelers always seem to think we hide the good restaurants from them.
Truth being they probably couldn't make it on local business alone.
My friends in NYC once told me I was a frequent visitor not a tourist or traveler.
Can anyone anwer my question?
By the way, the locals need the tourists.
Living in a tourist area, the visitors/tourists/travelers always seem to think we hide the good restaurants from them.
Truth being they probably couldn't make it on local business alone.
My friends in NYC once told me I was a frequent visitor not a tourist or traveler.
Can anyone anwer my question?
By the way, the locals need the tourists.
Aug 16th, 2005, 05:54 AM
#8
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,711
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tourist: One who travels (tours) for the sole purpose of pleasure.Once you enter the pearly gates of DisneyWorld, you are a tourist.The minute you board your Las Vegas bound flight, you are a tourist headed for America's largest and most famous Tourist Trap.
Traveler: One who travels from Point A to Point B.In 99% of my travels, I am a traveler.For the sole purpose of conducting business.If on a given Friday afternoon, with said business concluded in downtown Miami, I head for the Delano Hotel,I will self convert into Stephen the Tourist.And I'll enjoy those $15 Mojitos.
Visitor: One who visits, either for business, pleasure,gratitude,grief, or a multitude of reasons.
Traveler: One who travels from Point A to Point B.In 99% of my travels, I am a traveler.For the sole purpose of conducting business.If on a given Friday afternoon, with said business concluded in downtown Miami, I head for the Delano Hotel,I will self convert into Stephen the Tourist.And I'll enjoy those $15 Mojitos.
Visitor: One who visits, either for business, pleasure,gratitude,grief, or a multitude of reasons.
Aug 16th, 2005, 06:01 AM
#9
Guest
Posts: n/a
So my husband operated two very successful restaurants in a beach location (which he sold last almost a year ago).
The clientele from March thru mid November was 75% tourists and 25%locals. The rest of the year was 95% local and 5% tourists.
Was it a tourist trap?
The clientele from March thru mid November was 75% tourists and 25%locals. The rest of the year was 95% local and 5% tourists.
Was it a tourist trap?
Aug 16th, 2005, 06:04 AM
#10
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 16,253
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, I agree with nytraveler on all. And the word "touristy" as applied to an area or special shop/exhibit etc. would denote a negative aspect, IMHO; something phony or unauthentic to the realistic entity or history of the place itself. This almost universally includes lots and lots of shopping arenas for do-dads that are supposed to relate to the famous authentic features of the location.
I do not relate the word touristy to tours at all. In fact, the most "touristy" places may not offer any tours, but convey that you can "see it all" in one area by buying or partaking in that locale's products right on the spot or by experiencing their largest marketed feature at that "unique" location.
When traveling outside of your own country or continent it may be quite hard for you yourself, as a tourist, to determine if something is touristy. And maybe so in any region if you don't know much about the residents' demographics or enterprises of that particular state or geographic area.
But IMHO, and maybe this sounds like sour grapes from a non-shopper, but I can almost always tell anywhere I go by the level of shops and the kinds of goods sold in those shops. It isn't the only index, but it's one large factor.
Tourist or tourist activity does not relate that negativity, touristy does. And there really are some very "artificial" places / locations that are set up only for the tourism profits that really do not relate well to the natural environment or population of the locale.
I am allergic to touristy locations. That's why I do not like the Dells, Branson, Navy Pier, the area outside the Vatican, etc. etc. etc. I always graduate to where the residents live and only rarely stay in the spots most others seem to prefer. For example, I always stay in Pacific Heights in SF.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with being a tourist or in visiting only touristy locations, if that's what rings your bell. I've done hundreds I guess over my lifetime, but no so much any more. And I bet the average Fodorite will study up enough info ahead of time to know which traps to avoid for the most part, or ones that do not interest as much.
But as I age, in the sense of nytraveler's definition- I am more and more the traveler and less the tourist.
My "touristy" antenae goes up every time I see locations where there are more "junk" souvenir stores, novelty stores, restaurants that are named with the motif of the area, crowds, etc. and then I almost 90% of the time explore the opposite way. That's why I cringe sometimes on the Chicago suggestions for restaurants etc. There are so many and so much better just a block or 3 away and off the beaten, beaten path.
I do not relate the word touristy to tours at all. In fact, the most "touristy" places may not offer any tours, but convey that you can "see it all" in one area by buying or partaking in that locale's products right on the spot or by experiencing their largest marketed feature at that "unique" location.
When traveling outside of your own country or continent it may be quite hard for you yourself, as a tourist, to determine if something is touristy. And maybe so in any region if you don't know much about the residents' demographics or enterprises of that particular state or geographic area.
But IMHO, and maybe this sounds like sour grapes from a non-shopper, but I can almost always tell anywhere I go by the level of shops and the kinds of goods sold in those shops. It isn't the only index, but it's one large factor.
Tourist or tourist activity does not relate that negativity, touristy does. And there really are some very "artificial" places / locations that are set up only for the tourism profits that really do not relate well to the natural environment or population of the locale.
I am allergic to touristy locations. That's why I do not like the Dells, Branson, Navy Pier, the area outside the Vatican, etc. etc. etc. I always graduate to where the residents live and only rarely stay in the spots most others seem to prefer. For example, I always stay in Pacific Heights in SF.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with being a tourist or in visiting only touristy locations, if that's what rings your bell. I've done hundreds I guess over my lifetime, but no so much any more. And I bet the average Fodorite will study up enough info ahead of time to know which traps to avoid for the most part, or ones that do not interest as much.
But as I age, in the sense of nytraveler's definition- I am more and more the traveler and less the tourist.
My "touristy" antenae goes up every time I see locations where there are more "junk" souvenir stores, novelty stores, restaurants that are named with the motif of the area, crowds, etc. and then I almost 90% of the time explore the opposite way. That's why I cringe sometimes on the Chicago suggestions for restaurants etc. There are so many and so much better just a block or 3 away and off the beaten, beaten path.
Aug 16th, 2005, 06:06 AM
#11
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,711
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GoT...To me, the word "trap" has a totally "loser" connotation....If the tourists were happy and the locals were happy, then it was a win-win and IMHO, not a "trap".Las Vegas is a trap....most people don't "win".
Aug 16th, 2005, 06:07 AM
#12
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you are a tourist, how do you know if something is touristy? I think something that is touristy is usually screaming at you tourist attraction. Shops that hold memorabilia with your destination plastered over everything in the store which is located in an frequented by more tourists than locals.
I don't think you can really tell the difference between a tourist, a traveler, or a visitor. Do I think they have different meanings Yes... however I have been one of all 3 and I don't think I could perceive myself as looking any different.
I don't think you can really tell the difference between a tourist, a traveler, or a visitor. Do I think they have different meanings Yes... however I have been one of all 3 and I don't think I could perceive myself as looking any different.
Aug 16th, 2005, 06:11 AM
#13
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GoT I agree with Beachboi regarding your husbands restaurant. It's not a tourist trap unless your spending more than it's worth. The reason for the change in clientele is because the locals stay away from the touristy spots during high season. My cousin grew up in Northern Michigan in a touristy town and stayed away from the downtown area during the summer months even her favorite restaurants except when my family was "visitin".
Aug 16th, 2005, 06:33 AM
#14
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,963
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Regarding your husbands restaurants - if the tourists leave happy and satisfied with their meals, it isn't a tourist trap. If they leave unhappy and feel like they were tricked/swayed into eating there because they were tourists, it is a tourist trap. Basically, if a place is enjoyed, then it's not a tourist trap. Of course, that is sometimes a matter of opinion.
Aug 16th, 2005, 07:22 AM
#16
Guest
Posts: n/a
I'll give it a shot:
I'm a traveller when I'm in a place that's between where I started and another destination. I'm a visitor when I'm staying in a place (other than home) to see some people or to conduct business. I'm a tourist when I'm in a place I've traveled to for the sole purpose of seeing that place. (I can even be a tourist "at home" when I'm exploring the area the way a non-resident would.)
A place is touristy when the establishments' entire reason for being depends on non-residents' spending money there -- and particularly for things that are not truly indigenous and may very well have been manufactured, caught, or processed somewhere else. Also there's a good chance the things for sale (souvenirs or food) imitate something indigenous but with much, much worse quality.
I'm a traveller when I'm in a place that's between where I started and another destination. I'm a visitor when I'm staying in a place (other than home) to see some people or to conduct business. I'm a tourist when I'm in a place I've traveled to for the sole purpose of seeing that place. (I can even be a tourist "at home" when I'm exploring the area the way a non-resident would.)
A place is touristy when the establishments' entire reason for being depends on non-residents' spending money there -- and particularly for things that are not truly indigenous and may very well have been manufactured, caught, or processed somewhere else. Also there's a good chance the things for sale (souvenirs or food) imitate something indigenous but with much, much worse quality.
Aug 16th, 2005, 07:26 AM
#17
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,963
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I guess I wasn't clear . . .
If the tourists are happy with their meal and enjoy their experience at the restaurant, it isn't a trap. If they had a bad time and feel like they had a subpar meal because they were led astry due to being tourists, it is a tourist trap. Seems pretty simple.
If the tourists are happy with their meal and enjoy their experience at the restaurant, it isn't a trap. If they had a bad time and feel like they had a subpar meal because they were led astry due to being tourists, it is a tourist trap. Seems pretty simple.
Aug 16th, 2005, 07:28 AM
#18
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,052
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GoTravel, I don't think that having a high volume of tourists in his restaurant necessarily constitutes it as a tourist trap. I think it mostly depends on where it is and how it is marketed. For instance, when traveling to Rome I think that most of the restaurants around the more popular piazzas (such as Piazza Navona, Rotunda, etc) are more geared towards tourists. However, there are also great restaurants that a tourist may find off the beaten path and then, for example, rave about it in their trip report here on fodors. This will obviously lead to many of us trying that particular restaurant when we visit and thus spread the word to others. Basically I think there is a difference between a "tourist trap" restaurant that is strategically placed in a tourist destination and one that gets business from tourists based on their great service, food and word of mouth.
I basically agree with nytraveler. I think that there are places that are considered "tourist traps" but they are touristy for a reason. I went to San Francisco and visited Alcatraz. Tourist trap? Sure, probably. Was it worth it? Absolutely. I thought it was fascinating. Same thing for the Coloseum, Neuscwanstein, Tower of London, etc. I wouldn't avoid these places. They are touristy for a reason.
I personally like to visit both touristy and non-touristy destinations while on vacation. I appreciate visiting touristy destinations that are of interest to me, but I also like to seek out areas that more locals visit, stay in apartments in small towns, etc.
Tracy
I basically agree with nytraveler. I think that there are places that are considered "tourist traps" but they are touristy for a reason. I went to San Francisco and visited Alcatraz. Tourist trap? Sure, probably. Was it worth it? Absolutely. I thought it was fascinating. Same thing for the Coloseum, Neuscwanstein, Tower of London, etc. I wouldn't avoid these places. They are touristy for a reason.
I personally like to visit both touristy and non-touristy destinations while on vacation. I appreciate visiting touristy destinations that are of interest to me, but I also like to seek out areas that more locals visit, stay in apartments in small towns, etc.
Tracy
Aug 16th, 2005, 08:10 AM
#19
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 8,586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I also think that a tourist trap indicates that people are lured to a place which they find is not worth the money.
But, GoT, you are asking a question that really has no answer b/c it is too subjective. What one person considers a tourist trap another might find worthwhile. I think Disney is a huge tourist trap and others think it is a great vacation value.
We can't answer the question about your husband's ex-restaurant (unless, of course, we've eaten there). Only his customers could answer that. A large repeat business of locals and tourists/visitors/travelers would seem to indicate that it is not a tourist trap.
OO is so right - where are tourists to stay and go? If you are coming to Phila., don't come out here where I am in the suburbs - you're wasting your time. Go where the tourist sights are!
And there can be a bit of snobbishness in the definitions of tourist v. traveler. And not that I don't fall into that as well. When we were in Glacier NP last week, my husband witnessed a women come in and ask a grocery clerk where she could see "the bear". He gave her a puzzled look and she told him her friend told her that there a place in Glacier she could go and definitely see a bear. After the woman left the store, my husband rolled his eyes and the clerk laughed. Now, I'd like to think that this sort of "stupid" question could be avoided by doing a little bit of reading beforehand. When we were leaving Glacier, we saw a "tourist trap" that has a caged live bear that you can go visit. We agreed that this woman would probably visit a place like that! (In fact, maybe that's the place she was referring to?!)
Maybe the definition is that *I* am a traveler and the rest of you that ask questions I think are stupid are merely tourists?!
But, GoT, you are asking a question that really has no answer b/c it is too subjective. What one person considers a tourist trap another might find worthwhile. I think Disney is a huge tourist trap and others think it is a great vacation value.
We can't answer the question about your husband's ex-restaurant (unless, of course, we've eaten there). Only his customers could answer that. A large repeat business of locals and tourists/visitors/travelers would seem to indicate that it is not a tourist trap.
OO is so right - where are tourists to stay and go? If you are coming to Phila., don't come out here where I am in the suburbs - you're wasting your time. Go where the tourist sights are!
And there can be a bit of snobbishness in the definitions of tourist v. traveler. And not that I don't fall into that as well. When we were in Glacier NP last week, my husband witnessed a women come in and ask a grocery clerk where she could see "the bear". He gave her a puzzled look and she told him her friend told her that there a place in Glacier she could go and definitely see a bear. After the woman left the store, my husband rolled his eyes and the clerk laughed. Now, I'd like to think that this sort of "stupid" question could be avoided by doing a little bit of reading beforehand. When we were leaving Glacier, we saw a "tourist trap" that has a caged live bear that you can go visit. We agreed that this woman would probably visit a place like that! (In fact, maybe that's the place she was referring to?!)
Maybe the definition is that *I* am a traveler and the rest of you that ask questions I think are stupid are merely tourists?!
