I have been reading a few journal articles on tourism (when a person like me in academics takes to tourism as a hobby, this was bound to happen). I came across the article ‘A Theory of Tourism’ from a database. The article has been written in German by Hans Magnus Enzensberger in 1958. It was translated into English in 1996 and published in New German Critique.
Some of the passages in this article are so hard hitting, I thought I have to blog about it. The author of the article quotes two critiques of tourism, I am presenting part of the arguments here.
“Occidental tourism is one of the great nihilistic movements, one of the great western epidemics whose malignant effects barely lag behind the epidemics of the Middle and Far East, surpassing them instead in silent insidiousness. The swarms of these gigantic bacteria, called tourists, have coated the most distinct substances with a uniformly glistening Thomas-Cook slime, making it impossible to distinguish Caior from Honolulu …”
Nodding your head already? At least I was, when I was reading it. Remember this was written sometime before 1958 but it rings so true even today. Now, I quote part of the second critique as given in the article:
“Forty years ago, there were cozy hotels but no unruly masses … In those days tourists were comparatively rare, and there were no cheap trippers …”
Nodding your head again (well, I was shaking it vigoriously)? Well, here goes the response of Hans Magnus Enzensberger (from the same article) to both the criticisms.
“In social terms, both voices are reactions to a threat to their privilaged positiopns. Implicitly, they both demand that travel be exclusive, reserved for them and their like. They never say exactly what it is that distinguishes them from … the cheap trippers. The luxury they appropriate without a second thought is considered sinful when consumed by the mob.” (emphasis mine)
Now what do we say to this one? I think I am guilty of the thought (like the two authors quoted above) that ‘travel is my thing’ and when many others go to the same spot (like Manali), it looses its charm for me. I have to learn to be less snooty!
There are many more interesting arguments in the article and I will surely write about it in a furure post.
Very perceptive of the author to have seen this way back then eh?
Right Sanjay.
Yes Agree to your comment….Sometimes too many people, gathering to have just fun irritates. I enjoy my travels when it involves a lot of exploration, new routes and trails off from what most people have taken.
I too am of the same view Ajeya but I also liked the autor’s argument that a place is for everyone and who am I to think it should be exclusive for me!
Wow. Talk about reading my thoughts!
I am glad you liked it Skye Frontier.
Another interesting quote from the exile Tibetan writer Jamyang Norbu´s review of Tibet handbooks : ” None of these can of course ever hope to attain the heights of travel guide writing as exemplified in the works of Kathok Situ or Palden Yeshey. But in this dark age of Kali Yuga, they suffice in providing mundane information ( e.g. the black market rate for dollars in Lhasa) to the hordes of snooping , diarrheic, yidag-like toursts. ” (Yidags are a imaginative form of suffering in Hell , creatures being reborn with wast bodies , ravenous appetite … and a pencil-thin esophagus. ) Anyway , I thought you might like me find it an interesting article , since he changes perspective repeatedly thru it, from insider to outsider. Can be read at : http://tibetan.review.to/art_jn_1986_12.html
Vistet, thanks a lot for the link and your comment, I really enjoyed the article. You seem to know a lot about Tibet. So when are you going back there?
I am not against tourism, as long as it does not destroy the tourist spot, through excessive littering for instance. Even Mount Everest has not been spared from this malaise!
I know Sidhu, the issue is a complex one.