Is this sarcasm? The existence of guidebooks, in itself, ensures that multiple people will do what the guide says. A "better" guidebook will just ruin those "better" experiences too.
In there you have the contradiction of tourism, which really extends to a lot of our modern lifestyle: everybody wants to be first and original, but also to be led safely. The two concepts are fundamentally exclusive; trying to chase them is a fool's errand. Just be yourself and experience what you want to experience, damn the guides. As a famous comedian says closing his show, "drive fast and take chances".
That assumes the guidebook is the same for everyone. In today's world of smartphone apps it's not hard to imagine a "personalized" guidebook for each tourist. You could even take it a step forward and make it fully dynamic and "re-route" tourists based on site congestion - sort of like Waze for tourists.
Michelin guides are generally fairly comprehensive, obviously they also include the big tourist traps but they list too many places of interests to have all of them be swamped by tourists. If you follow a Michelin guide and ignore everything listed in the common "Visiting Europe 101" guides then you're probably off to a good start.
But it's the travel books that are the main problem, along with our extremely narrow collective obsession in a few specific experiences. Our need to meet expectations. The crowds of tourists gather in just the thinnest spider web of places. Usually you can escape them by walking a single block from the guidebook must-see.
The only way to be a traveler is to reject the fools gold the tourist industry has for sale. Traveling is risky. Time consuming. You could be embarrassed. Lost. Changed.
That's an adventure.
Don't take bad risks. Use your wits and common sense. Stay aware of your surroundings. Fear is the mind killer.
Thanks for this analogy. Made me chuckle.
Am I selfish if I put extra effort into maintaining friendships with foreign friends so I might end up visiting them?
I was lucky to work in a city full of expats - so I now have friends all over the world to lean on.
In return, they lean on me when they want to visit my home country and I happily oblige.
Anyway... there are nice alternative guides that do what you are asking, and for Venice the one of "Corto Maltese" is a good example. I managed to find this guide some years ago after some research. It is a bit rare, a friend had the first edition (I think only in italian), the second one was published by Lonely Planet, I think in 2008, and it is the one I found (in french, but I am guessing also the english version exists).
It is a very nice guide, full of drawings of Hugo Pratt's character Corto Maltese and his world. The guide takes you on a number of walks through the city and tells you a lot about history, people, buildings, and it does telling you also some stories about when Pratt lived there. Most importantly it points you to nice historic restaurants/bars (baccari and taverne :)) where venisians usually go. I used it last time there and the experience was really nice.
Amazon has it listed but only used and some times at a high price: https://www.amazon.com/Corto-Maltese-guide-Venice/dp/8817039...
On the same style I saw one on new york too, I think lonely planet published a few guides with this style.
Also, I find the New York Times 1/3/5 days guides also nice.
I understand you. But tourists are the only thing that keeps Venice a little bit afloat. It will sink sooner or later. Venice was once a former banking and trading center. They had some industry. All this is lost. They don't have the money to sustain the infrastructure anymore. Even the money from tourists won't be enough in the long run.
Belgrade instead of Prague
Visby instead of Copenhagen
Cork instead of Dublin
And the same applies in other parts of the world.
(I learned this the hard way)
But that still doesn’t change the fact that most tourists do not and the swarms of tourists do ruin things for the locals. I live in Williamsburg, Brooklyn and I basically don’t go out in my neighborhood anymore. The sidewalks are filled with tourists, so I’ve had to plan alternative (longer) routes to the subway. My favorite neighborhood restaurants I rarely go to anymore as they are filled with non-residents with waits routinely over an hour. And I’ve gotten used to drunk tourists urinating in front of my house as they come out of the bars down the block.
Ten years ago it felt like a neighborhood, even five years ago it wasn’t so bad, but now I’m considering defeat by moving and renting out this apartment on Airbnb.
I think it's more don't curate your trip. Don't have The Things That Need To Be Checked Off The List.
I have not traveled in Europe for a while, but in most places I have found it fairly easy to escape the crowds. Most of the crowds focus on the top spots; usually it seems like the crowds fade considerably even by walking a short distance a way.
It helps some to have some activity in mind other than "see stuff take pictures", something that fits your interest. Sure, some of these activities can also be crowded, but there is a better chance of much of the crowd being locals.
Somewhere like England is small enough that if you end up throwing your dart in Swindon[1] it's a short drive from a nicer place.
[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6KL8yc-AUuo&list=PLxx9HYDHVI...
[1] Just kidding. Swindon is awesome and has some nice industrial museums and is pretty close to amazing countryside.
I think that is the first positive statement about my birthplace that I have seen in years, and by far the most positive.
It's just a pity that so much of the centre is so run down. Hardly any real improvement in the last thirty years as far as I can see.