3 ms·

I also find travel mostly unfulfilling, but one difference from the article is that I like doing things while traveling that I would also do in my hometown. For

by brvsft 3y ago

I also find travel mostly unfulfilling, but one difference from the article is that I like doing things while traveling that I would also do in my hometown. For instance, I will go to museums, and I have gone to museums at home before, including being a member at a particular one I visited monthly until I moved. But overall, traveling is a fun activity with centuries of marketing around adventure that doesn't tend to change people in any manner. It is just very expensive fun, and I can have about as much fun doing things at home. I just can't take photos of it to prove how much disposable income I have.

borski 3y ago
While you’re not completely wrong, one of my main reasons for travel is exploring and understanding other cultures. That requires immersion, granted, and concerted effort to avoid the “TripAdvisor lists” unless you have no other ideas at present, but the opportunity for spontaneous interaction with someone wholly different from yourself is something that is harder to get at home. That and the feeling of scale; every time I visit Iceland, I find it difficult to describe to others just what about it is so beautiful. The problem is that pictures can’t capture the feeling of scale, and feeling like a small speck on the planet when standing in front of a massive waterfall or inside or on a glacier, etc. That feeling is hard to capture.
- shocks 3y ago
  I had this feeling when I first saw the Nile. Holy shit is that thing HUGE.
- brvsft 3y ago
  I agree it is hard to capture that feeling. I've had it a few times, like being in Yosemite it felt majestic, I can't think of a better word for it right now. But there is beauty in nature everywhere. It is harder to find in populated areas, but it is still there. In some ways, viewing something majestic, while nice and awe-inspiring, is like being smacked in the face with a baseball bat. Do I really need to be awestruck to remember that nature can be beautiful? As far as cultures, I get it, but I find it uninteresting at this point. These people queue up different. Those people stop and chat different. These other people view time and lateness different. It is mostly surface level stuff you observe when traveling. Like you write, immersion is required to get a real understanding. IMO that's not travel any more, it's living somewhere else for several months and knowing the language. But I'll accept competing definitions of travel, I just don't think it's what people mean when reading an article like this one.
Gualdrapo 3y ago
That is my problem with so-called wanderlusters and how traveling is sold this days as a type of "solution" or "therapy" - people just assume traveling is a decision everyone can make, but not what it actually is - a possibility a few can take. And it's not that it actually does wonders.
- quickthrower2 3y ago
  It is easy to conflate too. Is it the travel destination, or just the simple break from working, different climate or the change of scenery. I think travel being good for “westerners” talks to how homogeneous towns and cities have become. Maybe if the next town was interesting, getting on an airplane for 8 hours would be less needed.
jltsiren 3y ago
I remember mentioning a decade ago that going to Antarctica is cheap, while living in Helsinki is expensive. Then I took an academic job in what later became one of the least affordable areas in the US. Now I think that travel is cheap, fancy tech gadgets are cheap, and living in Helsinki would have been cheap. Doing things at home, on the other hand, is now a way to show off your wealth, because it assumes that you have a larger home than you would strictly need.

by brvsft 3y ago

borski 3y ago

While you’re not completely wrong, one of my main reasons for travel is exploring and understanding other cultures. That requires immersion, granted, and concerted effort to avoid the “TripAdvisor lists” unless you have no other ideas at present, but the opportunity for spontaneous interaction with someone wholly different from yourself is something that is harder to get at home. That and the feeling of scale; every time I visit Iceland, I find it difficult to describe to others just what about it is so beautiful. The problem is that pictures can’t capture the feeling of scale, and feeling like a small speck on the planet when standing in front of a massive waterfall or inside or on a glacier, etc. That feeling is hard to capture.

shocks 3y ago
I had this feeling when I first saw the Nile. Holy shit is that thing HUGE.
brvsft 3y ago
I agree it is hard to capture that feeling. I've had it a few times, like being in Yosemite it felt majestic, I can't think of a better word for it right now. But there is beauty in nature everywhere. It is harder to find in populated areas, but it is still there. In some ways, viewing something majestic, while nice and awe-inspiring, is like being smacked in the face with a baseball bat. Do I really need to be awestruck to remember that nature can be beautiful? As far as cultures, I get it, but I find it uninteresting at this point. These people queue up different. Those people stop and chat different. These other people view time and lateness different. It is mostly surface level stuff you observe when traveling. Like you write, immersion is required to get a real understanding. IMO that's not travel any more, it's living somewhere else for several months and knowing the language. But I'll accept competing definitions of travel, I just don't think it's what people mean when reading an article like this one.

Gualdrapo 3y ago

That is my problem with so-called wanderlusters and how traveling is sold this days as a type of "solution" or "therapy" - people just assume traveling is a decision everyone can make, but not what it actually is - a possibility a few can take. And it's not that it actually does wonders.

quickthrower2 3y ago
It is easy to conflate too. Is it the travel destination, or just the simple break from working, different climate or the change of scenery. I think travel being good for “westerners” talks to how homogeneous towns and cities have become. Maybe if the next town was interesting, getting on an airplane for 8 hours would be less needed.

jltsiren 3y ago

I remember mentioning a decade ago that going to Antarctica is cheap, while living in Helsinki is expensive. Then I took an academic job in what later became one of the least affordable areas in the US. Now I think that travel is cheap, fancy tech gadgets are cheap, and living in Helsinki would have been cheap. Doing things at home, on the other hand, is now a way to show off your wealth, because it assumes that you have a larger home than you would strictly need.