6 ms·

I actually found his talks of Maine and travel in general very interesting. I really liked this from one of the footnotes: "To be a mass tourist, for me, is t

I actually found his talks of Maine and travel in general very interesting. I really liked this from one of the footnotes: "To be a mass tourist, for me, is to become a pure late-date American: alien, ignorant, greedy for something you cannot ever have, disappointed in a way you can never admit. It is to spoil, by way of sheer ontology, the very unspoiledness you are there to experience. It is to impose yourself on places that in all noneconomic ways would be better, realer, without you. It is, in lines and gridlock and transaction after transaction, to confront a dimension of yourself that is as inescapable as it is painful: As a tourist, you become economically significant but existentially loathsome, an insect on a dead thing."

tspiteri 12y ago
I find that quite a conceited view of mass tourism, borne of the fact that the author has a "fantasy of being a real individual, of living somehow outside and above it all." Sometimes it is fun to be a tourist at a place where there are other tourists around. And I hate that he says tourists are "economically significant but existentially loathsome". If it weren't for tourists, many tourist attractions would be neglected because firstly there would be no point in maintaining them, and secondly, there would be no money to maintain them.
- klodolph 12y ago
  > If it weren't for tourists, many tourist attractions would be neglected because firstly there would be no point in maintaining them, and secondly, there would be no money to maintain them. Or, in other words, they are economically significant.
  - tspiteri 12y ago
    The whole quote I am contesting is "economically significant but existentially loathsome", and my point is that not only are tourists not existentially loathsome, but they give purpose to the maintenance of attractions.
    - cturner 12y ago
      Near Reykjavik there's a site called something like the Golden Falls. It's a pretty waterfall. I joined a busload of retirees and other holiday-makers on a tour of sites. We stopped there, went for a walk along the concrete, saw the waterfall, photos, spent five minutes in the tourist shop, and then got back in the bus. I considered the golden waterfalls as they would have been to hikers for centuries: a visual oasis that people stumble upon or towards after hiking for days. That would have been glorious. But - apart from these thoughts - it was otherwise meaningless. You can't appreciate such a thing from the comfort of a bus journey and concrete walkways. The presence of the trappings of tourism would significantly deplete the value of the thing if you had hiked to it like the ancients had. Unless you were thirsty. Or injured.
      - JoeAltmaier 12y ago
        And food tastes much, much better if you work hard and abstain for hours beforehand. But few of us get to do that. Maybe that's why we demand ever-more-vivid food experiences as we age? Bored of chicken soup and good bread, we want McCheese with curly fries or ultra-hot-sauce wings.
        tptacek 12y ago
        Whoah, McDonalds near Reykjavik has McCheese and curly fries? What's McCheese like? Does it go on the fries? Sorry. Some people gape at the majesty of a waterfall. Some people find... other... wellsprings for inspiration.
        JoeAltmaier 12y ago
        :) But what's this about Reykjavik? How on earth could you know that?
        glurgh 12y ago
        There should be guides like that for the world's great sights. http://goo.gl/maps/n9dGc http://goo.gl/maps/n9dGc Reward: Chicken Maharaja Mac
waterlesscloud 12y ago
"It is to impose yourself on places that in all noneconomic ways would be better, realer, without you." This is one of those sentences that sounds insightful, but in reality is pretty surprisingly shallow. The entire problem underlying such a viewpoint is a focus on yourself and not the place. On your experience of the experience and not the experience itself. If you stand at the edge of the Grand Canyon and all you can think about is how it's spoiled by the presence of tour buses plowing through for half hour visits, you're missing the significant part of the experience. Hell, just one layer of thought deeper and you're thinking about the slow-moving timescale of the canyon vs the almost instantaneous visits of the tourists. The mass tourists are a source of perspective, and to treat them as some sort of spoiler of the experience is in a way a denial of reality. In very real ways, they're an essential part of the experience. What is the Mona Lisa without an adoring (but very transitory) throng?
- coldtea 12y ago
  Not every destination is a dead rock like the Grand Canyon. Tourists spoil places with living cultures in all kinds of ways. >What is the Mona Lisa without an adoring (but very transitory) throng? An even greater work of art.
  - waterlesscloud 12y ago
    Right. Living cultures are alive, pretty much by definition. Which means they change, they react, they interact. Indeed, that's how those cultures formed in the first place. No culture has ever formed in a vacuum. Instead of some imaginary culture, one that you somehow think would be "more real" (a total fallacy on several levels) without tourists, you have a real, live, thriving culture in front of you, around you. In fact, as a mass tourist, you're a part of it. The more insightful take is not to bemoan that the culture isn't some platonic ideal of itself locked in amber, but experience it for what it is- living, breathing, changing around you. Because of you. Paris wouldn't be Paris without centuries of travelers and visitors behind it. You're a part of that evolution, see that for what it is and enjoy it.
    - 12y ago
TheMagicHorsey 12y ago
DFW always came across as a wanker to me because of these sorts of thoughts. There is a lot more to life than DFW's conception of what constitutes a "pristine" or "authentic" experience. Lifestyles and ways of making a livelihood are always coming and going in this world. DFW would make a religion out of a a particular time/place and way of living. That is essentially what his philosophy boils down to.--nostalgia raised up high like its the most holy and pure of feelings. His command of English was so good, and his way of phrasing things so beautiful, that a whole generation of readers was seduced by his pretty simplistic view of the world.
TeMPOraL 12y ago
This is art. I share this exact sentiment, but never could, and never have seen it so beautifully expressed.

tspiteri 12y ago

I find that quite a conceited view of mass tourism, borne of the fact that the author has a "fantasy of being a real individual, of living somehow outside and above it all." Sometimes it is fun to be a tourist at a place where there are other tourists around. And I hate that he says tourists are "economically significant but existentially loathsome". If it weren't for tourists, many tourist attractions would be neglected because firstly there would be no point in maintaining them, and secondly, there would be no money to maintain them.

klodolph 12y ago
> If it weren't for tourists, many tourist attractions would be neglected because firstly there would be no point in maintaining them, and secondly, there would be no money to maintain them. Or, in other words, they are economically significant.
- tspiteri 12y ago
  The whole quote I am contesting is "economically significant but existentially loathsome", and my point is that not only are tourists not existentially loathsome, but they give purpose to the maintenance of attractions.
  - cturner 12y ago
    Near Reykjavik there's a site called something like the Golden Falls. It's a pretty waterfall. I joined a busload of retirees and other holiday-makers on a tour of sites. We stopped there, went for a walk along the concrete, saw the waterfall, photos, spent five minutes in the tourist shop, and then got back in the bus. I considered the golden waterfalls as they would have been to hikers for centuries: a visual oasis that people stumble upon or towards after hiking for days. That would have been glorious. But - apart from these thoughts - it was otherwise meaningless. You can't appreciate such a thing from the comfort of a bus journey and concrete walkways. The presence of the trappings of tourism would significantly deplete the value of the thing if you had hiked to it like the ancients had. Unless you were thirsty. Or injured.
    - JoeAltmaier 12y ago
      And food tastes much, much better if you work hard and abstain for hours beforehand. But few of us get to do that. Maybe that's why we demand ever-more-vivid food experiences as we age? Bored of chicken soup and good bread, we want McCheese with curly fries or ultra-hot-sauce wings.
      - tptacek 12y ago
        Whoah, McDonalds near Reykjavik has McCheese and curly fries? What's McCheese like? Does it go on the fries? Sorry. Some people gape at the majesty of a waterfall. Some people find... other... wellsprings for inspiration.
        JoeAltmaier 12y ago
        :) But what's this about Reykjavik? How on earth could you know that?
        glurgh 12y ago
        There should be guides like that for the world's great sights. http://goo.gl/maps/n9dGc http://goo.gl/maps/n9dGc Reward: Chicken Maharaja Mac

waterlesscloud 12y ago

"It is to impose yourself on places that in all noneconomic ways would be better, realer, without you." This is one of those sentences that sounds insightful, but in reality is pretty surprisingly shallow. The entire problem underlying such a viewpoint is a focus on yourself and not the place. On your experience of the experience and not the experience itself. If you stand at the edge of the Grand Canyon and all you can think about is how it's spoiled by the presence of tour buses plowing through for half hour visits, you're missing the significant part of the experience. Hell, just one layer of thought deeper and you're thinking about the slow-moving timescale of the canyon vs the almost instantaneous visits of the tourists. The mass tourists are a source of perspective, and to treat them as some sort of spoiler of the experience is in a way a denial of reality. In very real ways, they're an essential part of the experience. What is the Mona Lisa without an adoring (but very transitory) throng?

coldtea 12y ago
Not every destination is a dead rock like the Grand Canyon. Tourists spoil places with living cultures in all kinds of ways. >What is the Mona Lisa without an adoring (but very transitory) throng? An even greater work of art.
- waterlesscloud 12y ago
  Right. Living cultures are alive, pretty much by definition. Which means they change, they react, they interact. Indeed, that's how those cultures formed in the first place. No culture has ever formed in a vacuum. Instead of some imaginary culture, one that you somehow think would be "more real" (a total fallacy on several levels) without tourists, you have a real, live, thriving culture in front of you, around you. In fact, as a mass tourist, you're a part of it. The more insightful take is not to bemoan that the culture isn't some platonic ideal of itself locked in amber, but experience it for what it is- living, breathing, changing around you. Because of you. Paris wouldn't be Paris without centuries of travelers and visitors behind it. You're a part of that evolution, see that for what it is and enjoy it.
  - 12y ago

TheMagicHorsey 12y ago

DFW always came across as a wanker to me because of these sorts of thoughts. There is a lot more to life than DFW's conception of what constitutes a "pristine" or "authentic" experience. Lifestyles and ways of making a livelihood are always coming and going in this world. DFW would make a religion out of a a particular time/place and way of living. That is essentially what his philosophy boils down to.--nostalgia raised up high like its the most holy and pure of feelings. His command of English was so good, and his way of phrasing things so beautiful, that a whole generation of readers was seduced by his pretty simplistic view of the world.

TeMPOraL 12y ago

This is art. I share this exact sentiment, but never could, and never have seen it so beautifully expressed.