My tips for anyone who wants to visit Venice: please don't support the cruise ships destroying this beautiful city, just use the train. Come for at least 5 days. Try to slowly walk through every quarter of the city (you will need 5-10 days for that). Buy a week ticket for the vaporettos and ride the vaporetto up and down canal grande in the evening. Don't dress like a stereotypical tourist. Please behave. If you are American or Chinese, actively try to lower your voice. Leave your smartphone and/or your camera at your apartment / hotel, everything you will be photographing has been photographed, painted or drawn at least a million times already. And, most importantly: don't ride the gondolas, you will get screwed financially.
But the more I thought about it, the less comfortable I was with that line of thinking. What IS wrong with taking a picture that isn't 100% original? Is taking a picture of Piazza San Marco just as bad as a landscape photographer getting that "perfect shot" of Antelope Canyon? or Mesa Arch? [1][2]
What if you are an American with very limited vacation time each year? Or you just want an "easy" vacation? Why is one style of travel better than the other? Does a place having a ton of visitors make it worse to visit? Or is there still value to going?
I'm just rambling at this point, but I'd love to hear anyone's thoughts since I'm not sure what to feel.
[1] https://media-cdn.tripadvisor.com/media/photo-s/0f/1b/ec/c6/... [2] https://www.johntrotto.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/IMG_27...
that seems odd to say the least. it seems highly probable to me that popular tourist attractions are popular because they're desirable to go to. sure, there's some marketing drum up in there but there's something seriously weird about going to less desirable places solely to get away from the crowds. it's almost as if you're signaling you're somehow superior or better by doing something other people aren't doing, even if that thing is objectively worse. value signaling made manifest via tourism or something.
This is why the "traveller" (vs tourist) holy grail is to find places that are genuinely impressive and spacious enough to still be enjoyable.
so yeah, while certainly only limited to a few places, i think there's a class of spots that one cannot necessarily reproduce in a lite version. so especially if one has limited travel opportunities, i think they're worth going to. venice is probably one of those although admittedly i haven't been.
I also drink coffee without milk. I drink matcha with milk. I wear a garish array of brightly-colored button-down shirts. I cross my z's when writing. None of these choices is correct. They are my choices.
No version of tourism is wrong unless it's contributing to a documented problem in which case it's obviously wrong. Tourism is recreation, no matter how eagerly it pretends to be education.
And there’s absolutely nothing wrong with taking the same picture other people took. If you liked it, you like it. You’re not harming anyone by taking a damn picture. Obviously as a tourist I try to be respectful and to learn a subset of the language while I’m there.
But hey, if you only have a week off there’s nothing wrong with going to the same place in Antelope Canyon as others went. It’s popular for a reason!
Do whatever makes you happy.
Man, they are taking the piss. If they did that to an Italian, there would be fisticuffs.
As for the gondolas, that's a hard pass for me. I've been to Venice twice, and was definitely not there for the gondolas. Not even for 'great Italian food' - it's not really that great at my price point, unless I travel 15-20 min away from the usual tourist sights. I'm simply there for Venice. For the canals, for the layout, for the architecture, for the history. Canal-side, I can see all I need to see from the vaporettos.
What's always funny to me is that tourists who are part of the derided "masses" always seem to have a lot more common with locals than the "elite traveler" types who preoccupy themselves with finding an "authentic local experience." It's hard to truly connect with the common people when you look down on the common people in your own culture.
You're in town for just a few days, specifically to see the scenery, the locals aren't. This is the part where you're best off being more like a tourist.
One of these things is not like the others! I think better advice to the advisor would be to not judge people for how they are dressed.
This would be strange advice, because you clearly would judge someone going to a high-end restaurant in a bathing suit, to a funeral in nothing but underpants or to a wedding wearing a SS uniform. These are ridiculous examples, of course, but they appear so ridiculous because one of the fabrics of any society is that on certain occasions, you should try to tune down your individuality as best as possible and try to blend in with others. In my opinion, visiting a foreign country as a guest is one of these occasions.
Reversing that argument, you'd probably feel that French tourists wearing monokinis (or kids not having a full on bathsuit) on the beach in the US don't respect your culture, even though that's perfectly acceptable back home.
Usually the weird rules we have for ourselves are never visible to us so I’d be somewhat hesitant to make the claim of being open to things.
In fact, if I think about it, you’d probably be stared at and feel like a spectacle and probably unwelcome with a toga, a kilt, or a lungi (even the formal variant). I don’t even think you could wear the top end of some of those clothing varieties and go to many places in SF (generally a downmarket place for clothes).
The other guy put it really well. It will increase the friction you experience.
Actually, I'm purely merit based in my judgments. You can wear a leaf on a string and water wings for all I care. Then again, I also don't much care what prejudiced people think of me. I just go about my business feeling sorry for them.
I'll also add that the reason that you wouldn't want to dress like a tourist is to mislead locals about what you actually are, which is a tourist. Judging you substantively would mean judging you as one of the tourists that makes them want to leave the town they grew up in.
What does this mean? How do tourists dress? How would it differ from a non-tourist?
The gist of it is, tourists typically are carrying way more shit than they need and look silly more often than not. It's also nice to just walk around with the same amount of shit as you would if you were walking around your home city.
I’m only kind of kidding. That is to say tourists look like tourists everywhere because they are different. The better advice than “don’t dress like a tourist” is “don’t expect where you are traveling to be the same as where you are from. Take some time to see if you can pick out what they are.”
In Europe at least, nine times out of ten, that tourist is not American. We just aren’t very numerous compared to Europeans in Europe (don’t you know most of us don’t even have passports). Russians on the other hand....
What I meant was that: if you are visiting a town in a foreign country, it would at least be polite to research beforehand how locals dress and what is considered rude, inappropriate or simply tasteless.
That said, all of these measures you describe are a bit much. There are a million ways to tell that somebody's a tourist, are you going to pretend you're there to raise VC?
Edit: Parent's editing their comments a lot so mine makes no sense now, but they linked to https://img.budgettravel.com/_facebookShare/tourists-in-spai... as an example of tourist attire.
People don't want to do laundry on their vacation. And unless you're rich and have porters lugging around massive luggage with carefully packed fashionable clothes, people are also space-constrained
So, they optimize for comfortable, quick-dry, wrinkle-free clothes so they can maximize exploration and energy.
That's......what you have to do when you are spending your limited vacation time to see the world.
Part of this is definitely a snobby european mindset. Europeans get 5-6 weeks of vacation a year, and burn 4 of those on August so they are used to LOONG consecutive getaways, and structure their lives accordingly.
The rest of the world (And I don't mean America, I mean the entire rest of the non-European world) doesn't have that luxury.
My relatives from Canada are constantly complaining how they have only 10 days of vacation per year yet every year entire family takes road trips that last 5-6 weeks. Every second year they come to visit Europe.
I'm not speaking for myself, I'm speaking for the vast majority of the world.
Do you seriously think that tourists from China, Japan, India, and the US have 5-6 weeks of vacation every year?
To be so blind to your own privilege...befuddling..
Also, this is a nice indicator as well... https://www.timeanddate.com/holidays/china/ https://www.timeanddate.com/holidays/japan/ https://www.timeanddate.com/holidays/india/
compared to this: https://www.timeanddate.com/holidays/croatia/
Only American and Chinese? If you're Dutch, you can still talk as loudly as you want to?
Again, I am not saying this applies to every American or Chinese, and of course there are German / British / French / Italian / Indian / Arabic / [...] tourists who do this.
[0] https://www.quora.com/What-percentage-of-the-American-popula...
[1] https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php...
But from what I understand, Dutch tourists also have a reputation for being loud and/or rude. Maybe more rude than loud, but I tend to see them as going together.
Curious, as an American who lived in Lausanne (kind of touristic town) for a couple of years and China for ten, I rarely encountered American tourists at all. I’m sure they exist, but they don’t travel in huge groups like Chinese do, so are pretty impossible to pick out.
This is good advice and it applies to any touristy destination.