8 ms·
Travel locally, where you are
- m1rsh0 4mo agoWhat's the next place in your list?
- jerf 4mo agoIt isn't the same as travelling to truly remote cultures, of course, but odds are, your area has more stuff going on than you realize. My wife and I have taken to planning our occasional 2 week vacations with 2-4 days that we have plans for, and then plan to just use local resources to figure out what to do from there. And we always find things. Sometimes literally just driving down the road on the way to something else we found online and there's a little park on the side of the road or something dedicated to some interesting little thing. If you're just traveling as the wind takes you, it's not a problem that maybe that little park is only 10 minutes of "interesting". It's not a bad way to travel.
- zazuke 4mo agoI find it also much more relaxing if you just go, with less planning, and more surprises. Travel as the wind takes you, that's it.
- snicky 4mo agoI usually prefer to make a detailed plan for my trip, but I allow myself to break free from it anytime I find something more interesting to do. This way I'm more sure that I won't waste too much time or money staying in wrong places, choosing wrong means of transport and falling for some tourist traps or common scams.
- geekasm 4mo ago+1. failing to plan is planning to fail
- deleted 4mo ago[deleted]
- boznz 4mo agoTraveled the world in my youth and regretfully did not visit several notable locations when I lived close-by. Now I'm partially retired I am making up for it big time - though it helps having a great starting point. Last week I hiked the Paparoa trail (West coast NZ) for 4 days through old mining trails with one of my friends who was a local historian and gold prospector, the whole experience was fascinating, and great inspiration for my next novel.
- outime 4mo agoFunnily enough, the country where I'm from is so touristic that if you're a local (with a typical local salary i.e. miserable) you get much more value for your money by going abroad.
- wxw 4mo agoI recently found out about a tiny room in the local public library that resells books (most for $0.25-$1). I've lived here over a decade. Overreliance on echo-chambering platforms like Reddit/IG/Google Maps limits one's ability to explore. There's still lots to discover. And re-discover as you grow up.
- oulipo2 4mo agoI agree. In Europe we're particularly lucky that, after only a few hours in a train, we can be in a totally different culture, speaking a different language. But even without this, traveling in the country side, getting to learn the history of those places, with the "small history", not the big battles, but the local inventions, the local specialties, etc, is so enriching and rewarding
- TFNA 4mo agoI'd argue that that diversity you claim for Europe has declined greatly in the last couple of decades. Wherever you go, local young people have been following the same global social media for long years now, which has had a leveling effect. Even among the language diversity, what people are saying in their own languages is often calqued on English. In the 1990s and early millennium, opposing globalization (especially Anglo-American influence) and advocating for local culture was a common position on the European Left. Today that has disappeared almost completely, so much that people are likely to perceive it as a stance of the far-right.
- fluoridation 4mo agoI mean, it is quite literally a conservative position (a refusal of change), and the right is typically conservative.
- graemep 4mo agoI think right equals conservative has not been true for a long time. It is the right that promoted globalisation. In many countries it was the right that privatised formally state owned industries. In the UK in the 70s the right wanted to join the EEC (and Conservative Party governments supported greater integration for decades afterwards), and the left opposed it. All big changes. The current US government seems to want to change a lot of things.
- oulipo2 4mo agoRight = "let me do this thing for myself to get ahead, and then forbid everyone else to do the same"
- oneneptune 4mo agoThis is great unless you live in an area of almost absolute geographic and social homogeny in a 100 mile / 160 km radius. "Yo friends, want to drive an hour and see if the fast food in a strip mall is the same as our fast food in a strip mall" just doesn't quite land or "Want to drive 45 minutes and walk in a park that was built in the early aughts and lacks proper shade and had all it's benches removed just like ours?"
- eastof 4mo agoWould you mind sharing the general region where you are? Based on your criticisms it sounds like the US, but my experience is quite different. I have only lived on the West coast though, and we're quite spoiled with amazing natural beauty around every corner here. I had a great time road tripping around small towns in the northeast around Vermont and Maine though.
- packetlost 4mo agoThe Midwest in particular is extremely homogeneous and flat, mostly plains and farmland for hundreds of miles. The West cost has more in 15 miles than the Midwest has in 100, on average. There are pockets here and there, but not enough to warrant the several hour drive it will take to get there. Honestly, most of the US is like this. It's huge and very, very sparse.
- eastof 4mo agoYeah that makes sense, that's too bad. The coasts are the most interesting places for local travel, but the elites living there don't seem to have the time of day for it. More for me I guess.
- allknowingfrog 4mo agoI've hiked in the mountains and I've swam in the ocean, and I'm perfectly content to live amongst the hills and streams of the Midwest. I suppose it's relative. I live on the east end of the state, and I find the west end pretty flat and boring. :)
- dewey 4mo agoI like the name that Alastair Humphreys uses, it's not 100% the same but the same direction: Microadventures https://alastairhumphreys.com/product/microadventures/ https://alastairhumphreys.com/product/microadventures/
- deleted 4mo ago[deleted]
- zazuke 4mo agoamazing, thanks for sharing. I was curious if there's already a name for this local travel. Micro-travel or planless-travel are close. Mini retirements are another term I like to use. I heard from the Pathless Path book (I think), which is traveling for up to 4 weeks - it's not 100% related, but it is what came to mind when I heard Microadventures.
- eastof 4mo agoI am a huge proponent of this. I find it shocking how many people I talk to in California have never even heard of so many amazing parts of the state outside of a few urban bubbles of SF/LA/San Diego and major attractions like Yosemite. Such a better experience in nature when you aren't surrounded by tourists in places like the Mendocino forest or the Inyo mountains. I also learn so much about our history and how regular people live in small rural towns, they often put effort into preserving it, and the locals love to talk about it. I also love seeing all of the huge mines, factories, infrastructure projects, etc. that support our cities, but people rarely think about.
- parpfish 4mo agoall around me in the northeast are decaying little towns and attractions that used to be vacation getaways for the first half of the twentieth century. they say that airtravel killed the catskills resorts (ala dirty dancing) because why spend a few hours in teh car when you could go someplace so much more exotic with a few hours on the plane? and now there's a second-wave killing it with social media travel photos. everybody feels like they need to travel to the same handful of farflung locales that have been deemed 'the best'. basically, people with the means to travel have decided that regional travel isn't cool enough to impress their friends, so they let it die. i think that's a terrible mistake for everybody. people dont have a fun, affordable place to go on a little weekend jaunt. towns that could scrape by on their natrual beauty have been left to decay (and once there's no way to monetize the natural beauty, local development sees no reason to preserve it).
- legerdemain 4mo agoNotably: > here in Switzerland
- ngruhn 4mo agomight as well be in Skyrim
- daemonologist 4mo agoI admit I snorted when that was mentioned. It's frequently ranked as the most desirable place to live on earth. Not to say the message of the article is completely without merit - there are things to see and do almost everywhere. But if I just get in the car and start driving I will 95% of the time find only strip malls and cornfields. Perhaps a suburban park with some trees.
- qurren 4mo agoSwitzerland is not unique in that aspect. Pick any mountainous, desert, or coastal part of the world and you are guaranteed scenery for ~95% of the drive. Pick any historic part of the world and you are guaranteed nice-looking buildings anywhere you walk. A sizeable fraction of the world fits into either of the above. Yeah, if you live in cornfields and strip malls, you aren't going to find much interesting. But in fact, most of the world isn't like that. Arguably the cornfields and strip malls are the minority. Throw a dart anywhere on Kyrgyzstan, Japan, Indonesia, Norway, China, India, Turkey, Uzbekistan, Argentina, Namibia, the southwestern US, northwestern US, or Mexico. You'll find lots of interesting things wherever your dart landed. These aren't very cherry-picked countries, I just named a few off the top of my head that come to mind where the "dart anyhere is interesting" is true. My point is that the world is full of "Switzerlands".
- zazuke 4mo agoThis is so true, and also what I thought reading these comments. Love the "the world is full of "Switzerland". I added it to the note, thanks for the comment!
- 4mo ago
- bwestergard 4mo agoBirding is also a great way to discover interesting environments in your home locale.
- squidsoup 4mo agoPhotography also works, or hell you can even photograph birds.
- HoldOnAMinute 4mo agoThe Merlin bird ID app is eye-opening
- ngokevin 4mo agoPotentially geocaching too
- technothrasher 4mo agoI ended up with an interest, since I was a toddler my parents tell me, that I cannot stay local for- wild cats. Unfortunately, I have to travel the entire globe to be able to see them in their natural habitats. But no matter where I go, there are always local birders, and locally to me there are tons of different birds. The only wild cats here are bobcats, which are very cool, but I've seen and photographed them a lot already. I wish I was interested in the birds.
- wiremine 4mo agoThis is great advice, and I appreciate the opening sentence to frame it as a "yes, and" sort of situation. We took our teenagers to London and Paris last year (we're from the upper midwest in the states) and it was a joy to see them experience a) a different culture and b) art and architecture they never would have experienced otherwise. But visiting local destinations is also such a joy. I'm a mile from one of the best BBQ joints in Michigan, in a "blink and you miss it" village. I try and make sure I don't take it for granted.
- koyote 4mo agoI've done this wherever I lived. In a large city, you can often just walk in one direction, (or take transport in one direction), find yourself in a new neighbourhood and discover loads of interesting things (culture, food, shops, parks, ...). In London there are hundreds of walks/hikes around and beyond the green belt, all within an hour train from central London. I do agree that there are some places where this is more challenging.
- graemep 4mo agoI used to explore central London just by walking around. I discovered all sorts of things: small museums, interesting architecture (London looks a lot more interesting when you look above the ground floor), canals and parks, odd little shops...).
- gradstudent 4mo agoSo, summarising the OP. Switzerland is awesome. News at 11.
- webdood90 4mo agoThis, but take a bike ride or a bus instead of driving.
- tschwimmer 4mo agoSwitzerland is probably the most densely interesting and scenic place in the entire world. Try telling this to someone in Iowa.
- fumeux_fume 4mo agoI couldn't help reading this article in the voice of Ted Flanders. It's such an insipid point and the writing is so bad. Not the writers fault, but when you find out he lives in Switzerland it's kinda hilarious.
- Havoc 4mo agoI like that about Europe - you really don’t need to go far to experience something very different. Not quite as local as OP has in mind but 50 bucks can still take you to Italy or Sweden
- deleted 4mo ago[deleted]
- throw98226 4mo agoWe live in the Pacific North West, and have travelled in a similar fashion. Visit Vancouver BC, then out to Squamish, Whistler. On different trips we then venture out further to Prince George, Edmonton, Jasper, Banff. We've then expanded to different provinces and states, staying in each town or city for one or more days. At first we did this by car, staying in hotels at night. But then we bought a large van, outfitted with a simple mattress and kitchen and toilet, and traveled more into the mountains and forests to enjoy nature. From there we crossed Canada from the extreme west coast to the east coast of Newfoundland in our van. We did the same in the northern States and the entire west coast down to southern California. It's a good way to travel and explore our own backyard before venturing out to other countries. Currently doing similar in South East Asia. We have a home base, travel slowly from our home, outwards. Then to different countries nearby. A good life!
- deleted 4mo ago[deleted]
- ljsocal 4mo ago“because we found it randomly” reveals the importance of mindset. So much of the travel experience (hell, life itself!) is influenced by a positive attitude and openness to really see what is around us.
- ensocode 4mo agoI get the point and I’m thankful for the article. I just find “middle of nowhere” and Switzerland a bit hard to reconcile.
- ablation 4mo ago> Fraser calls it “staycation”, which is a more accurate term and hasn’t been heard before. Hasn't been heard before? Major newspapers use the phrase "staycation" nearly every year when talking about travel habits. It's in about as much regular use as "vacation" is.