Hacker News Reader

Comment by telesilla | Hacker News Reader

A Parisienne friend of mine said last night when we discussed the fact that I never went inside, while she had: "Actually it was a horrible experience. Loud Americans everywhere taking pictures with their flashes."

Cities like Venice, Barcelona, Paris and Amsterdam need to address how we can preserve history while also considering how unfettered access makes it unappealing to participate as a local.

[Edit: I don't mean to single out Americans! That was just her comment. I know it applies to all unruly tourists of all countries]

View on HN

This is one of the most beautiful cathedrals I’ve been in, but one of the worst experiences. And the time I went it wasn’t the Americans who were being loud, it was people from another top-5 world population country.

If you're trying to say China, just say it. No point trying to be politically correct when everyone knows the controversial thing you're saying.

And yeah, generally Paris and its touristy sights are way overrated. Crowded with annoying tourists. Touristy Paris totally blows (and so does Rome). I much prefer to spend time in the Netherlands, Ireland, and Germany myself.

There's even a term for the utter dissapointment people feel when the reality doesn't match expectations in Paris: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_syndrome

I think China is in the awkward transition between “post-colonial country doing well for themselves” to “global hegemon”. I’m sure at some point it would have come across as arrogant scoffing to gripe about Americans, too.

I work in the travel industry. I'm always amazed that people are still flocking to those traditional tourist destinations in such huge numbers. Sure, before the internet, travel research was much harder to do and going to places like Rome or Barcelona was a safe bet. But now, with Kayak and TripAdvisor making trip planning easier, Instagram and blogs making it easier to find destinations, cheap flights becoming more common.. it's just so easy to find cool destinations that are a little more off-the-beaten path, not to mention, they're much cheaper! And yet, Paris and Venice are still absolutely flooded with tourists year-after-year.

That's probably making the assumption that "a little more off the beaten path" is on most people's selection criteria. The evidence suggests it's not and the Internet (and cheap flights) just makes it so easy to pick the obvious "best" places. And, if anything, social media like Instagram probably increase the desire of people to visit the iconic places so that they can share them online.

TBH though, for a lot of places like Paris, going outside of peak times--assuming you have the flexibility--go a long way towards decreasing the crowds factor, at least away from the "must see" sites.

I love getting off the beaten path, but there are one of a kind things to see in those popular destinations. That's why they are popular.

Venice for example stinks, is crowded, and covered in bird shit. I would never go back, but I'm happy I visited before it sinks into the water at some point.

I'm amazed that you're amazed. It's the bucket listing isn't it. Somehow we all want to experience Paris, New York or Switzerland before we die. I wonder why. There was another HN thread about tourism and travel once, and someone argued, at least with "tourist traps" you know you'll be having an experience, if you do your own thing (that's never been done before) you might end up being disappointed. And travel/free time is limited.

But yeah, the thing promised (e.g. Paris: a magical romantic city) vs the reality (a metropolitan with people who can be rude, plus other obnoxious tourists) differ, I guess your standard tourist lies to themselves saying they're having a great time. Which is easier with Instagram, you curate your own memory, and as a bonus you get validation from other people while doing it.

Life is weird...

One of my favorite memories from traveling in Mexico was visiting cathedrals or churches and seeing them full to brim with church goers.

Don't worry - we kind of deserve to be singled out a bit. I'm an American and I was recently in Amsterdam with a bunch of my coworkers and everywhere we went we were definitely the "loud, obnoxious Americans". It's fine. I accept who I am.

There are loud, obnoxious tourists from just about EVERY country.

As if there weren't loud Parisians, or French, all over the place as well, taking pictures with their flashes.

As a french person who travelled a bit in the US and lived in Paris for years, I noticed there's a huge cultural difference between americans and french people regarding what is acceptable noise or not.

It's very noticeable in churches, but also in theatres, libraries, restaurants, pretty much anywhere where a lot of people gather.

This being said, I don't think one culture is any better than the other, but they seem noticeably different to me.

I'd like you to consider this:

Every time you hear a loud tourist, you reinforce your bias/opinion of their nationality.

But every time you don't hear a loud tourist, you can't really know their nationality, so your opinion of them can't improve.

I considered it, and that's why I based my observation on what I observed when I was myself a tourist in the US, where I assumed (safely in my mind) the vast majority of people were americans, in restaurants, at the movies...

Once again, I don't think the "american style" is worse or better than the french one, but I maintain it feels different.

>unfettered access makes it unappealing to participate as a local

Unappealing for many tourists too.

Rome was by far the worst tourist experience I've had, despite it having the most beautiful/interesting sites of any place I've been.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com