What does it mean for a spot to be discovered. It's a theme I have covered before, tourists are a group who in certain situations hate to be around each other.
Perhaps this can be described using a wonderfully torturous analogy with the concept of critical mass (slightly more geeky readers may prefer the better analogy of the instability of large nuclei). At lower masses attractive forces dominate and tourists gather together to exchange Higgs Bosons, Gluons and perhaps a few travelling stories. Past a certain critical mass however, some of the tourists become agitated by the density of tourists. It's as if in each direction the mean free path terminates with another tourist and the local culture is no longer visible. Energetic adventurous tourist neutrons then collide repeatedly with their blogs before they fly off and irradiate the surrounding country in search of fertile nuclei. Here they can share their tales, mostly cliché relating to the 'overrun' (depleted) state of the town they've just left, and may induce such adventurous states in other travelers.
Perhaps this can be described using a wonderfully torturous analogy with the concept of critical mass (slightly more geeky readers may prefer the better analogy of the instability of large nuclei). At lower masses attractive forces dominate and tourists gather together to exchange Higgs Bosons, Gluons and perhaps a few travelling stories. Past a certain critical mass however, some of the tourists become agitated by the density of tourists. It's as if in each direction the mean free path terminates with another tourist and the local culture is no longer visible. Energetic adventurous tourist neutrons then collide repeatedly with their blogs before they fly off and irradiate the surrounding country in search of fertile nuclei. Here they can share their tales, mostly cliché relating to the 'overrun' (depleted) state of the town they've just left, and may induce such adventurous states in other travelers.
Sorry, if you're not big on physics you were probably happy to use the phrase critical mass without any indulgence. If you are, then stop explaining the flaws in the analogy to your computer screen that isn't listening.
Still, I like to think there is more to it than a bunch of pretentious clichés who can't see themselves as one of the crowd. Myself I see three alternative reasons, the depersonalisation of large groups, the different types of tourist, and the chosen illusion of adventure.
Still, I like to think there is more to it than a bunch of pretentious clichés who can't see themselves as one of the crowd. Myself I see three alternative reasons, the depersonalisation of large groups, the different types of tourist, and the chosen illusion of adventure.
The first point is closely related to a question I asked this free spirit some time ago:
http://wishfortherainbow.wordpress.com/. Can people ever be happy living in cities. There seems to be a rule that the fewer people the closer the relationships which form. The example is quite simple, if only two people lived in a town you would think it strange if they did not know each other very well. The same goes for tourists, if you ignore the apparent transparency of the local population. If there are only two tourists in town the chances are you will talk. But what if the town grows. Well then you have a community, and this in the historical fantasy is the natural state of a bygone small village. Everyone just about knows the other residents, and can interact with them as individuals. But if you grow even more the change is disproportionate. At the point it becomes unlikely that we will see a person again we just don't bother knowing anyone. People become their relationship to you: customers, commuters, crowds. What incentive is there to get to know someone you are unlikely to see again. The London effect develops. You can smile and be polite but for god's sake never talk to a stranger. Instead of knowing a subset of the whole we know nobody beyond a small pool of friends. This is the oft lamented loss of 'communities'. The same effect occurs with tourists, as the numbers grow it becomes harder to interact. We see others as members of the crowd.
http://wishfortherainbow.wordpress.com/. Can people ever be happy living in cities. There seems to be a rule that the fewer people the closer the relationships which form. The example is quite simple, if only two people lived in a town you would think it strange if they did not know each other very well. The same goes for tourists, if you ignore the apparent transparency of the local population. If there are only two tourists in town the chances are you will talk. But what if the town grows. Well then you have a community, and this in the historical fantasy is the natural state of a bygone small village. Everyone just about knows the other residents, and can interact with them as individuals. But if you grow even more the change is disproportionate. At the point it becomes unlikely that we will see a person again we just don't bother knowing anyone. People become their relationship to you: customers, commuters, crowds. What incentive is there to get to know someone you are unlikely to see again. The London effect develops. You can smile and be polite but for god's sake never talk to a stranger. Instead of knowing a subset of the whole we know nobody beyond a small pool of friends. This is the oft lamented loss of 'communities'. The same effect occurs with tourists, as the numbers grow it becomes harder to interact. We see others as members of the crowd.
Tourists are not homogeneous, and the different styles of travel add to the friction. For some the illusion of adventure is spoiled by the arrival of crowds following a standard route. A simple reason for 'discovery' is the addition of a place to the guidebook, although this can also happen when it spreads by word of too-many-mouths. However it's not as simple as an us and them division, there are many shades of adventure, and we each have to recognise that we're just part of the spread. While I may avoid package and piecewise package (organised activities but independent travel) I'm not myself adventurous. I stick to countries which are themselves distinctly on the beaten trail and largely interact with established businesses. There is also a separate spectrum of the level of cultural respect different tourists show. Again divisive, though again I hope I lie somewhere in the middle. Perhaps I should avoid this one given my ideological disagreement with sacred status of the concept of preservation of culture.
To return to the main point, the adventure is an illusion. In a country which accepts vast numbers of tourists with open arms you must accept this. But it's an illusion that you can enjoy. You know there have been others before you, but without hearing about them in graphic detail it need not spoil the fun. If there is no official tourist map with 'the sights to see' marked on it you can explore again just as the first. If there are too many tourists or the going has become too easy, the illusion is broken. It's business now.
As a bonus to any diligent readers, taking bets on the first mosquitoe borne disease I catch first. The key runners are malaria and dengue fever, but I'll include sandflies to widen the field.
As a bonus to any diligent readers, taking bets on the first mosquitoe borne disease I catch first. The key runners are malaria and dengue fever, but I'll include sandflies to widen the field.
No comments:
Post a Comment