I see a lot of comments that folks want to eat "where the locals eat". Or we don't want to go "there" because it is too "touristy"
I remember that expression my grandmother had--"Don't cut your nose off to spite your face"
Isn't good food--good food--isn't good service yada yada

But if it's good food and good service, you can pretty much bet that the locals will frequent the place too!

I think the word "touristy" gets used two different ways: To mean that a place atttracts a lot of tourists (as well as locals) OR that a place was designed specifically to attract tourists (rather than locals). And I think it's the latter type of place that travelers often try to avoid.

For example, in the Lancaster, PA, Amish country area there are restaurants that local families flock to but there are others whose customers are almost exclusively tourists.

Good food is good food. But, the last thing I want when I'm in Paris is to be surrounded by the same people I'd be sitting near in NYC.

Or eating the same thing that you would be eating if you were in NYC!

Exactly! That's why I rarely eat on the main strips, but tend to find the smaller/ local neighborhood places that run off of the main drag by 2 or 3 blocks. We found one of those in Ft. Lauderdale and it was the best meal we had in the three days there. Local traffic going into it made me take notice- especially their sushi/make pick up side building lines never stopped.

A couple of "touristy" places pop to mind: Margaritaville and Sloppy Joe's in Key West - everyone raves about Margaritaville's cheeseburgers but I've heard they were awful, lol, and I can attest to the fact that the sloppy joe at Sloppy Joe's is so bad it's virtually disgusting. Another tourist trap is Bubba Gumps.

However, I agree with the poster who's amused by people looking for good restaurants that only locals use. We tourists are pretty cagey: we have a way of finding good food, whether it's being eaten by locals OR tourists!

As a New Yorker, I think "touristy" describes a place that New Yorkers generally avoid because, well, there are too many tourists.

Quality and value are often issues as well, but not always (e.g., many midtown restaurants that are "highly rated" in travel guides).

When I travel, I like a good mix of touristy and non-touristy experiences.

To me touristy is a label infrequent visitors give an attraction that attracts newbies to that location.

Visitor snobbishness.

Living in a tourist location as a local, the only thing I avoid are certain roads at certain times.

I sort of have a problem with someone labeling avoiding something they deem 'touristy' for no other valid reason.

Example, I will not eat at Tavern on the Green for no other reason than the food is bad.

Good guide to what's touristy = what's listed in the free guides planted in the hotel rooms and lobbies. "What's Happening on the Coast" will inevitably list all the restaurants with restrooms marked "buoys" and "gulls" frying things in recycled fat.

Along this line: Another guide is in-your-face thematic places, esp. touting themselves as regional specialties.

Not all touristy places are bad but it's rare that they provide anything original or a particularly good value.

On the other hand, when you are in terra incognita, sometimes going to an obviously tourist-oriented place may spare you having to eat something unexpectedly bizarre or unappetizing.

Finally, not sure anyone should count on any place the locals eat. They aren't there for special-occasion eating, probably, just something inexpensive and familiar to THEM. They might all have a real taste for grease-soaked cheeseburgers and mealy puddings. If you're going for atmosphere and authenticity, fine. But if you are going for haute cuisine or careful preparation, maybe not.

Amen GoTravel!

However I do avoid The Monday after New Years when all the folks from "THE NORTH" come to Gulf Shores Walmart. As my wife says All the geezer stuff is gone--ie Metamucil LOL

Touristy means something that exists primarily to make money from tourists. One non-example of this would be Cuba.

FH and jor,
Great calls.
M

Touristy is a place that is designed to attract tourists and does. Gatorworld (or similar) is touristy. Disney is touristy. Las Vegas Boulevard is touristy. The entire Wisconsin Dells area is touristy. Heck, Yellowstone, Niagra Falls and the South Rim are touristy.

I think it is much harder to call a restaurant touristy since most are not designed specifically in order to attract tourists.

This reminds me of a thread when someone said to avoid Hyman's Seafood in Charleston because it is touristy.

How do you know it is touristy? Do you poll the people waiting in line? Do you poll the people eating there? Why does touristy make it bad?

Tourism has put two of my stepchildren through college, it will put another one through and has provided a wonderful life for my husband and myself.

Tourism puts roofs over the heads of many and to avoid something just because you think it is touristy is stupid.

I will say that I will avoid tourist attractions during peak times.

Why does touristy make it bad?

A place deemed "touristy," whether it's a restaurant or an attraction or an area, is certainly not automatically or necessarily "bad." It may be great!

But "bad" is in the eye of the beholder. A touristy restaurant, for example, may serve fine food, but if one's definition of "bad" includes the type of clientele or ambiance, than a touristy restaurant may be bad, for that reason and that reason alone.

How many posts does this forum see asking about "hip" restaurants? I'd suggest that these people are more interested in the clientele and ambiance than other factors. Basically, they don't want to be surrounded by a bunch of hapless tourists or boring stiffs or screaming children. Fair enough.

Finally, certain destinations, like the Metropolitan Museum of Art, transcend "touristy." I'll even go on a crowded weekend if I need to get my aesthetic fix.

Interesting debate. I do agree that the term touristy is subjective.

No one can claim that the Cafe Du Monde in Jackson Square isn't a magnet for tourists. However, that doesn't make it less enjoyable, even for some locals I know in NOLA.

On the flip side, I was eagerly anticipating a drink at the famous Long Bar in the Raffles Hotel in Singapore. Much to my dismay, the Singapore Sling is premade and sold to you in a souvenir cup.

Therefore, I guess I'd define touristy as a place that has lost the original charm that caused it to be popular in the first place. It's now popular not for what it is, but for what it used to be and for what people THINK it is.

Gekko, I am strictly speaking when someone uses the term touristy meaning 'bad'.

When people use the adjective "touristy" as a synonym for "bad," I'd guess they usually mean crowded, cliched, low quality, low value, with lots of tourists present. Who knows? It's a subjective term.

But I don't think you should assume that when people say "touristy" they mean "bad." They just may be looking for something different, particularly if they're repeat visitors.

"I guess I'd define touristy as a place that has lost the original charm that caused it to be popular in the first place. It's now popular not for what it is, but for what it used to be and for what people THINK it is."

I like that definition, Ryan. I have seen it happen so many times (having had the good fortune to live in a few different tourist destinations). And it always makes me sad. I read on another thread that Jacques Imo's in New Orleans may be following that path. When I lived in NOLA, you went to Jacques Imo's because it was the type of place where they might put a table in the back of a pick-up truck parked out front when it got too crowded. It becomes too touristy (in a bad sense) when people come expecting to see that pick-up truck out front.