BellaOnline Forums Travel and Culture Solo Travel Travel vs. Tourism?

Oh goodness, I'm so honoured. <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> Jk. Case closed.

Ha! Just when you think the whole thing is settled, I'm going to jump back in here with a different slant.

How's this?

Tourism is anything you can pick up a brochure on, even online.

Travel is the process of trying to reach into the real place, the place where the real people live. Travel is the process of meeting locals, of walking the earth at this point of geography, of noticing how people live, how they celebrate, how they ARE in this place.

Lisa, while I don't often agree with Edward Said, the Palestinian professor who wrote Orientalism, I do see his point when he says that we so often approach a place TEXTUALLY, that is, with our readings about it so much in our heads that we don't REALLY see the place itself.

So I actually try to do as little research about a place as possible. If I'm going to visit a tourist site, I want it to be something a local has told me, "You've gotta see this. I'm proud of this. This is important about my place."

I think I've found this topic too late, but if you wnat to write a really critical/academic article, you might want to read The Language of Tourism - A Sociolinguistic Perspective by Graham M S Dann (1996). This is such a fascinating book on the way different types of tourism are sold through the type of language used, and on the differences between travel and tourism.

If you have already written the article, I'd love to read it, if you could let me know where to find it!

Jennimoth

I've written a couple of pieces about the topic here at Bella, but I appreciate the heads up about the book. Always looking for new, in-depth books on my favorite topic.

Six Tips for Independent Travelers and Approaching a New Place both deal with the issue of becoming a traveler rather than a tourist.

You might also want to check out my Maybe Future Travel Book over on my LiveJournal blog.

What's your take on the question, jennimoth?

Also, check out a more detailed analysis of seeing through the lenses of the books and brochures we read here: Seeing through Lenses

I'm Spanish and to us a tourist is a person who books everything, everything is planned and they don't mix with the locals (they don't have much time). A traveller is someone who improvises, he sightsees but also tries to understand a culture talking to the locals.

obaya. Una tourista y uno viajero. Hay una gran diferencia, verdad? <img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Bob. Absolutely. Un turista (tourist) y un viajero (traveller) are radically different to us. To us, it's a question of attitude.

This is coming in way overdue, but I am writing a paper regarding the above topic. However, I would like to look at it from a geographical perspective.

I remember reading somewhere before about the rapid rise of tourism in South East Asia. The writer questioned whether tourism really lets you explore new things, and find out about more about the place you've visited. He mentioned that bringing your lifestyle to the destination without interacting with the locals, or moving about on your own basically removes the locality of the area. (In this case, the article described the booming luxury travel to Cambodia and Vietnam - 6-star hotels, resorts and fully serviced and planned trips)

In rebuttal to this, one of the hotl managers said (roughly in these words): It does not matter by what means you move about - even if you are travelling in a Benz from the luxurious hotel to the tourist spot, what you see and what you feel would sufficiently allow you to experience what the place is like.

The writer could not understand though, how looking through a window without actually stepping out to interact with the locals and find out about other things which makes the place what it is, could make the experience local.

What I think is, travelling in a nice car through a dirt road along a local street actually keeps the individual within his own space, and comfort zone. Without crossing that border, what he knows of the place is what he has been conditioned to understand - from what he has been told, what he has read, and what bias he may have about the place.

This seems to differentiate the traveller fro the tourist in that the tourist is still looking out from the bubble that he has brought along from home, while the traveller takes the effort to break down certain pre-existing boundaries. Of course, I did not take into account what sort of feelings the locals may have towards foreigners coming into their country at will, since this is not the main focus of the paper.

I would very much appreciate it if someone could give me some comments, ideas or even criticism about this.

Oh, it is a complicated problem. I don't konw how to distinguish them. I just follow my own policy, that is to travel for fun, no fun no travel.