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.