The Tourist/Traveler Argument

Though I was tempted to weigh in on the Cathy L thread (+1000 posts
and counting), PTravel made a very nice post about his definitions of
tourist and traveler. I'd like to break out that discussion.

From PTravel, paraphrased:

Traveler: independent minded soul equipped with a guidebook and a
sense of adventure.

Tourist: Someone who has overcome their xenophobia only enough to
permit riding around in an hermetically-sealed tour bus, with
occasional excursions outside to McDonalds or KFC.

I generally agree with his assessment, as the word "tourist" to me has
always meant "someone on a tour", and a tour is a guided visit to a
place. To me, a "traveler" is someone who "travels" - a person going
from point to point by various means with various intent. They may be
on holiday, going to a new work place, moving to a new home or just
drifting. But their interface with their journey is close to what
PTravel described with such brevity.

I've never been on a guided tour, so I can't say whether they are
stupid and dreadful, though I suspect they are. The idea of being
cooped up on a bus with a bunch of unadventurous dorks while some paid
circus barker describes the history of a cathedral into a cheap bus PA
system is enough to make me want to burst out of my skin and start
screaming. To be "let out" to spend a few hours on my own is, to me,
humiliating and demeaning. Because of this, I've never had any
interest in guided tours or their evil sister, cruise holidays. I
would consider taking a ship to a destination, but I would never stay
cooped up on some floating Las Vegas casino with 800 perfumed hogs. My
friend Dave just got back from his first cruise (Alaska) and hated it.
A good portion of the guests got sick with flu, including his wife and
father-in-law, who were both miserable the whole week. He enjoyed the
few day excursions on land and enjoyed views from the ship, but the
overall experience left him unsatisfied. Can't blame him. I'd have
gone bananas.

I don't want to start a war of defined terms, but I do think that
tourists are not travelers, and travelers are not tourists. Tourists
have every right to cruise around in their buses and eat McDonalds
crud at every exotic location on Earth. I won't deny them that. In
fact, I encourage weak-willed folks who prefer such tours to stay on
their buses and lock into their international hotels, eat at KFC and
buy stupid trinkets outside cathedrals. This way, I'm less likely to
bump into their pasty, fat asses when I'm traveling.

Thank you.

- TR

On Thu, 01 Jun 2006 18:22:24 -0700, Citizen Ted
wrote:


Though I was tempted to weigh in on the Cathy L thread (+1000 posts
and counting), PTravel made a very nice post about his definitions of
tourist and traveler. I'd like to break out that discussion.

From PTravel, paraphrased:

Traveler: independent minded soul equipped with a guidebook and a
sense of adventure.

Tourist: Someone who has overcome their xenophobia only enough to
permit riding around in an hermetically-sealed tour bus, with
occasional excursions outside to McDonalds or KFC.

I generally agree with his assessment, as the word "tourist" to me has
always meant "someone on a tour", and a tour is a guided visit to a
place. To me, a "traveler" is someone who "travels" - a person going
from point to point by various means with various intent.

So we have the problem of what you, and some others, think
"tourist" means and what dictionaries record it as meaning, to
wit: someone who travels for pleasure. A "tour" was once just a
journey, e.g., the "Grand Tour" of Europe once taken by titled
young Brits and lasting months or even years, but the existence
of organized guided tours weems to have co-opted the word.


I don't want to start a war of defined terms,

Too late ...

but I do think that
tourists are not travelers, and travelers are not tourists.

No. Tourists travel for pleasure, while travelers may be
traveling on business.



************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

On Thu, 01 Jun 2006 18:22:24 -0700, Citizen Ted
wrote:


Though I was tempted to weigh in on the Cathy L thread (+1000 posts
and counting), PTravel made a very nice post about his definitions of
tourist and traveler. I'd like to break out that discussion.

From PTravel, paraphrased:

Traveler: independent minded soul equipped with a guidebook and a
sense of adventure.
If you are going around with a guide book in a strange place,
you are a tourist. The locals will assess you as such, they may
differentiate you from the Escorted Guided Tourists following their
guide, but you are still a tourist.

Traveller in the UK anyway is used to define those gypsy and other
types that cannot abide being in one place for more than a few
days or weeks. In the USA they are called transients.



Tourist: Someone who has overcome their xenophobia only enough to
permit riding around in an hermetically-sealed tour bus, with
occasional excursions outside to McDonalds or KFC.

Bit of a snotty description, there some people too old to travel
alone, but still like to see other countries, also some others
like young people on their first visit.



I generally agree with his assessment, as the word "tourist" to me has
always meant "someone on a tour", and a tour is a guided visit to a
place. To me, a "traveler" is someone who "travels" - a person going
from point to point by various means with various intent. They may be
on holiday, going to a new work place, moving to a new home or just
drifting. But their interface with their journey is close to what
PTravel described with such brevity.

I've never been on a guided tour, so I can't say whether they are
stupid and dreadful, though I suspect they are.

Have been on quite a few, but prefer the go it yourself approach.
There are advantages, more free time as travel and hotel arrangements
are taken care of. Disadvantages like having to follow the set
itinerary of the tour.

he idea of being
cooped up on a bus with a bunch of unadventurous dorks while some paid
circus barker describes the history of a cathedral into a cheap bus PA
system is enough to make me want to burst out of my skin and start
screaming.
Actually some of the local guides can be very well educated
people doing it to eke out a living. They certainly know their
stuff in lots of areas.

ecause of this, I've never had any
interest in guided tours or their evil sister, cruise holidays. I
would consider taking a ship to a destination, but I would never stay
cooped up on some floating Las Vegas casino with 800 perfumed hogs. My
friend Dave just got back from his first cruise (Alaska) and hated it.
A good portion of the guests got sick with flu, including his wife and
father-in-law, who were both miserable the whole week. He enjoyed the
few day excursions on land and enjoyed views from the ship, but the
overall experience left him unsatisfied. Can't blame him. I'd have
gone bananas.

There are cruises like you describe, but the small boat experience
can be quite different. The Clipper Sailing ship we went on from
Singapore to the Andaman Islands and Thailand was very educational,
and very informal. Not a slot machine in sight, and you could help
with manning the ship, if so inclined.

I don't want to start a war of defined terms, but I do think that
tourists are not travelers, and travelers are not tourists. Tourists
have every right to cruise around in their buses and eat McDonalds
crud at every exotic location on Earth. I won't deny them that. In
fact, I encourage weak-willed folks who prefer such tours to stay on
their buses and lock into their international hotels, eat at KFC and
buy stupid trinkets outside cathedrals. This way, I'm less likely to
bump into their pasty, fat asses when I'm traveling.

Thank you.

- TR

Citizen Ted wrote:

... PTravel made a very nice post about his definitions of
tourist and traveler. I'd like to break out that discussion...

I suspect an elegant piece of trollery.

It's not the words that are the problem: it's the tone in which they
are used.

I don't care what other people do for enjoyment, so long as they do
not interfere unreasonably with my life.

--
PB
The return address has been MUNGED
My travel writing: http://www.iol.ie/~draoi/

Hatunen wrote:
On Thu, 01 Jun 2006 18:22:24 -0700, Citizen Ted
wrote:


Though I was tempted to weigh in on the Cathy L thread (+1000 posts
and counting), PTravel made a very nice post about his definitions of
tourist and traveler. I'd like to break out that discussion.

From PTravel, paraphrased:

Traveler: independent minded soul equipped with a guidebook and a
sense of adventure.

Tourist: Someone who has overcome their xenophobia only enough to
permit riding around in an hermetically-sealed tour bus, with
occasional excursions outside to McDonalds or KFC.

I generally agree with his assessment, as the word "tourist" to me has
always meant "someone on a tour", and a tour is a guided visit to a
place. To me, a "traveler" is someone who "travels" - a person going
from point to point by various means with various intent.

So we have the problem of what you, and some others, think
"tourist" means and what dictionaries record it as meaning, to
wit: someone who travels for pleasure. A "tour" was once just a
journey, e.g., the "Grand Tour" of Europe once taken by titled
young Brits and lasting months or even years, but the existence
of organized guided tours weems to have co-opted the word.


I don't want to start a war of defined terms,

Too late ...

but I do think that
tourists are not travelers, and travelers are not tourists.

No. Tourists travel for pleasure, while travelers may be
traveling on business.

Look, the point isn't whether you like my shorthand definitions, but
whether there is a real distinction between those who favor the tour
bus experience and those who prefer to explore on their on. Obviously,
I think there is and, clearly, a number of people agree. I didn't coin
"tourist vs. traveler" in this context, but if you're not happy with
it, then either come up with other terms or, better yet, address the
substance of the distinction.





************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

ptravel

Are you: http://www.ptravel.com/ ?

Gerrit

The so called traveller snobism

"Citizen Ted" a écrit dans le message de
news: ...

Though I was tempted to weigh in on the Cathy L thread (+1000 posts
and counting), PTravel made a very nice post about his definitions of
tourist and traveler. I'd like to break out that discussion.

From PTravel, paraphrased:

Traveler: independent minded soul equipped with a guidebook and a
sense of adventure.

Tourist: Someone who has overcome their xenophobia only enough to
permit riding around in an hermetically-sealed tour bus, with
occasional excursions outside to McDonalds or KFC.

I generally agree with his assessment, as the word "tourist" to me has
always meant "someone on a tour", and a tour is a guided visit to a
place. To me, a "traveler" is someone who "travels" - a person going
from point to point by various means with various intent. They may be
on holiday, going to a new work place, moving to a new home or just
drifting. But their interface with their journey is close to what
PTravel described with such brevity.

I've never been on a guided tour, so I can't say whether they are
stupid and dreadful, though I suspect they are. The idea of being
cooped up on a bus with a bunch of unadventurous dorks while some paid
circus barker describes the history of a cathedral into a cheap bus PA
system is enough to make me want to burst out of my skin and start
screaming. To be "let out" to spend a few hours on my own is, to me,
humiliating and demeaning. Because of this, I've never had any
interest in guided tours or their evil sister, cruise holidays. I
would consider taking a ship to a destination, but I would never stay
cooped up on some floating Las Vegas casino with 800 perfumed hogs. My
friend Dave just got back from his first cruise (Alaska) and hated it.
A good portion of the guests got sick with flu, including his wife and
father-in-law, who were both miserable the whole week. He enjoyed the
few day excursions on land and enjoyed views from the ship, but the
overall experience left him unsatisfied. Can't blame him. I'd have
gone bananas.

I don't want to start a war of defined terms, but I do think that
tourists are not travelers, and travelers are not tourists. Tourists
have every right to cruise around in their buses and eat McDonalds
crud at every exotic location on Earth. I won't deny them that. In
fact, I encourage weak-willed folks who prefer such tours to stay on
their buses and lock into their international hotels, eat at KFC and
buy stupid trinkets outside cathedrals. This way, I'm less likely to
bump into their pasty, fat asses when I'm traveling.

Thank you.

- TR

....likle criticizing you ?

"Padraig Breathnach" a écrit dans le message de
news: ...
Citizen Ted wrote:

... PTravel made a very nice post about his definitions of
tourist and traveler. I'd like to break out that discussion...

I suspect an elegant piece of trollery.

It's not the words that are the problem: it's the tone in which they
are used.

I don't care what other people do for enjoyment, so long as they do
not interfere unreasonably with my life.

--
PB
The return address has been MUNGED
My travel writing: http://www.iol.ie/~draoi/

"Gerrit 't Hart" wrote in message
...
ptravel

Are you: http://www.ptravel.com/ ?

Nope -- not me. I have nothing to do with the travel industry, other than I
fly on planes and stay in hotels.


Gerrit

On Fri, 02 Jun 2006 04:01:18 +0100, Padraig Breathnach
wrote:

Citizen Ted wrote:

... PTravel made a very nice post about his definitions of
tourist and traveler. I'd like to break out that discussion...

I suspect an elegant piece of trollery.

It's not the words that are the problem: it's the tone in which they
are used.

I don't care what other people do for enjoyment, so long as they do
not interfere unreasonably with my life.

But Padraig, you great erudite sloth, I am talking about the subject
of travel, which represents the pillar of this NG's charter. I'm
inferring that "If It's Tuesday, This Must Be Belgium" tourists are
far removed from independent travelers in two meanigful respects: from
the first person and from the traveled community.

The traveler may well visit points of interest, but they do so in
deference to the place. They learn the rudiments of the native tongue
and make efforts to pad lightly. Tourists, OTOH, bumble about with
their cheap cameras and look constantly over their shoulders to see if
the bus is still in view. As a result, the tourist experience is
shallow and insulting to the locals, while the traveler experience is
broad and harmonious with the locals.

I speak as a person who travels and who lives in a picturesque town in
the Pacific Northwest of the US. Now that summer has arrived in all
its glory, I get to enjoy the travelers and endure the tourists.
Having traveled about, I see it from both sides. PTravel lives in SF
CA, so he knows, too.

The distinction between traveler and tourist may be slight at the
Sistine Chapel, but it becomes readily apparent in San Francisco,
Vienna or Paris. If you disagree, I'm all ears.

- TR
- up late, with a long day of work tomorrow. Urg.