I read yet another post today on the subject of travellers’ snobbery. It got me thinking about the age-old traveller vs tourist debate. Which am I? And does it matter?
There are many debates online on this topic (and indeed I have overheard them in many cafes, airports and stations around the world). Almost everyone outside of the mainstream resorts likes to think of themselves as a traveller. Call the backpacker in rural China a tourist, and it is probably the worst insult you could lay on him. Yet I do think, IMHO, that the backpacker can be the most classic tourist of them all, going from major city to ancient monument to next city. And what’s more, not only can a person often be deluded by their smell, hunger and poverty into believing themselves to be a superior travelling being, but a self-proclaimed traveller “going native” is often less welcomed by their native hosts (the ones they are “mixing with”) who would much prefer the $$$$ that comes with the tour bus of Japanese camera-wielding tourists.
I am often a backpacker. I have been one this year. And at times I have smelt; especially on the fifth day without a shower, having camped in the mountains of central Asia with no access to anything other than an ice cold river. Even at that time, I considered myself a tourist. I had come to this part of the world to visit, observe, experience, photograph, and then leave. Whether I did this in tents or in 5 star hotels wouldn’t change the fact that I was touring. I tried to be sensitive towards the local culture, I used my very limited Russian to try and get to know our hosts and was truly amazed by the history and politics of the region. But that didn’t change the fact that I was a tourist.
How would I define being a traveller? For me, and it is only a personal view, I am a traveller when make a journey for a purpose, other than purely visiting cities, beaches, attractions through interest. When I travelled to Uzbekistan I was a tourist in the old Silk Route cities, and a traveller when I went to a small town to hunt around for my grandfather’s grave and learn about his final days. Someone attempting to cycle from Alaska to Argentina is a traveller – their purpose is to reach a destination, a goal, a personal objective.
I don’t know the answer to this question, but I want to stick up for the tourist. Being a tourist is not something to be ashamed of. Being ignorant and intolerant is. But these traits do not always come in the shape of a big camera, a bulging wallet and a 50 seater luxury bus. They can just as easily be contained within a rucksack and a grimy hostel. That is why I disagree so much with those who use the tag tourist to describe anyone who doesn’t do it like they do.
I like comfort when I travel if it’s available, and will indulge in the odd splurge of luxury if the mood takes me and the budget permits. Does that make me a tourist or a traveller? Does it matter? You tell me.
I wholeheartedly agree with your assessment, Andy. I do find myself put off by this notion that if someone has a backpack and an open-ended schedule, they're somehow less of a nuisance to the local population than "tourists". I'm currently reading/flipping through the pictures of Mo Willems' "You Can Never Find a Rickshaw When It Monsoons," and he clearly believes in the travellers – good, tourists -bad snobbery. Which is disappointing, to say the least.
But I like the definitions you're using here, and may start applying them, myself.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts Candace! I have to admit to not knowing about Mo Willems before you mentioned him but have had fun looking up his work! (sadly his work hasn't made it over to Britain yet)
I'm with you – let's just all enjoy our own most comfortable way of exploring the world and let others enjoy theirs, be it with a backpack or a supersize red Samsonite suitcase. Vive la difference!
Well said.
Glad you re-tweeted this post. Love your descriptions in the second paragraph. The more I travel the less I see a distinction between the two. It's fun to be both and the truth is it is impossible to travel and not do at least some tourist activities. I mean, if you go see a famous monument or museum that is a tourism activity. I simply don't get the snobby pride that often accompanies traveling for some.
I've stayed in resorts, live abroad now and have gone off the beaten path. All is great and has enriched my life and my travels.
I agree! Sure a traveler is a tourist and there a bad travelers and bad tourist and nice traveler and nice tourists.
At the end it doesn't matter at all, as long people not only tolerate, but also accept each other.
But I've met more open minded travelers, than open minded tourists. For me a typical tourist is someone lying at the pool of a 5 star all inclusive hotel in… anywhere exotic and coming back and telling around how nice that country is without having seen it really.
I like the following quote:
Tourists don't know where they've been, travelers don't know where they're going. – Paul Theroux
But I think that everyone got his/her own definition of a tourist.
Thanks for your comments guys!
You're so right Lori, wherever we visit it is inevitable that we will want to see the attractions of that area, whether natural, cultural or other – and that's tourism. There's no shame in it, so let's enjoy our travels and not worry about labels.
Melvin, I think you hit the nail on the head. It's about tolerance and acceptance, however we travel. I like your point that everyone has their own definition of a tourist. It's so true! It is always interests me that almost every definition I've read defines a tourist as the opposite of how the writer perceives themselves. (But then I have stayed in posh hotels in off-beat parts of the world and heard people talk dismissively of tourists – their definition being those who go to mainstream destinations!)
Great point regarding the travel tourism dollars. I think that does some places much better than someone bringing an ego instead! Can't build a town or place's needs with an ego.
Great post – I agree that the designation doesn't always have an outright black and white answer. I consider myself a traveler as I backpack around…but when I am in a city, seeing the sites and being a tourist…well, I am a tourist.
Though I don't necesarily take offense to the term tourist, I also think that there is a perspective with which you approach the travel that defines your category – as you said, purpose changes things. Tough call…but I think, in the end, I would call myself a traveler
I love the tourist/traveller debate and I like your post and most of all I like the intelligent replies it’s recieved, and I like the way you regularly respond to them. When I “travelled” in India and Thailand it was an issue that often came up, but when I “travelled” in Mexico, Costa Rica, Cuba, Hong Kong, Australia and New Zealand it was something that rarely came up. Curious that the destinations themselves can even lead to you being seen as a tourist or a traveller. I now live abroad in Spain and that opens up a whole host of new debates!!!
Thanks for sharing. I don’t think the differentiation matters much, keeping in mind that even if you think you are a traveller, in a foreign land you are often considered the tourist anyway. It has happened to me a few too many times- after having lived in France for years and speaking the language fluently, just because of my Asian heritage it’s hard to wave off the “tourist” label.
I think what’s most important is as you said, staying free from ignorance and avoid putting stereotypes on the people and places you have met/visited. No matter how well-inversed you are in the culture, traveller or tourist, we are new to the place and respect is what matters the most.
Thanks Sarah. Yes, it’s a old debate but still brings out some wonderful prejudice. Great point too about how the subject is more pertinent in the traditional backpacker destinations. I am looking forward to going to SE Asia this winter and will enjoy overhearing these discussions. I might just be tempted to join in too!
Well said Rita, it’s about respect, and that is not dependent on how you travel. It must be frustrating to still be perceived as a tourist in a place you’ve lived for years. We had the same when we lived in NYC, but at least we knew not only the scams that go on but recognised the people who were scamming the tourists after a while.
Most people are both. Either they’re simultaneously a traveler and tourist – as when taking the time to do a drawing the Eiffel Tower instead of taking a photo and moving onto the next site; or they flip flop between the two, morphing from one to the other even in the same day – as when checking out Hanoi’s water puppet show before tucking into a bowl of sidewalk bun cha, perched on a little plastic stool.
A tourist is also trying to escape. Trying to escape the stress of work, escape from home’s daily grind. They’re where they are to forget. And they’re the same person once their vacation is over.
A traveler is trying to learn. Trying to learn a new language. Trying to learn even something more about themselves. Ideally, a traveler is different once the travel is over. Travelers may not feel very different, but other people probably notice.
Cooking classes, art classes, and many museums are the ultimate mashup of tourist-traveler experiences. They’re touristy, but at the end of the experience you hopefully understand a place or a people a little bit better.
I felt more like a traveler than a tourist during my recent year-long round-the-world when I reached a critical tipping point: the moment I was no longer homesick. Because the road was home. But so much of what I did was touristy. I accept I am both.
To be a tourist, you also have to go somewhere, reach a physical destination, and your experience is externally-determined. To be a traveler, you can just stay where you are and read a book, because the destination is mental, and your experience is internally-determined. Controversial idea, I know.
Shoot. I like what I wrote so much I’m going to need to refine this comment as a future post for my website (http://www.ephemerratic.com). Thanks for the inspiration!
Wow, thanks Lauren for a great comment and yes, it’s worthy of a post in its own right! I enjoyed reading your distinctions, and I think you have described two groups really well. I would only quibble about the terms used for the two types of person you descibe. I would argue both groups are tourists; just different types. A dictionary defines tourist as “a person who makes a tour, esp. for pleasure” and I like that – it doesn’t attempt to create a hierarchy among those who travel.
Whether we travel with a backpack or a suitcase, and whether we stay in a 5 star hotel or a hostel, I don’t think it dictates the mindset with which we go. I like your comments about physical vs mental destination. It’s so true that people don’t need to travel to gain wisdom from the world around them.
Thanks a lot for posting your thoughts. I like your site by the way!
Happy travels
Andy
You know what would be the worst with the “traveller vs. tourist” complex? Feeling like a tourist after long period of travels abroad. that’s how i feel about canada now after some years in Europe. Somehow your values changed and you are re-discovering new things about a city that you might think you know like the back of your hand. Obviously there’s a huge plus side to it too- discovering new things and seeing your city with a new light.
Rita, I find the same thing when I return to my home town (Nottingham). I knew it so well as a teenager, and having not lived there for over 20 years I now look at it through the eyes of a curious stranger (tourist). It makes for a great time wandering through the streets, admiring things and thinking “I can’t believe I never noticed that before”.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts.