Comments on: There is No Such Thing as “Must See”

By: Scott

Scott — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 04:31:20 +0000

Theresa, I have to agree with you on your last paragraph. I’m interested in WW2 history and the impacts that it’s had on our current culture, and have read quite a bit about the holocaust. But it wasn’t until I stood inside the gates of Birkenau 2 that I felt the reality of what happened, the immense scope of it all. Or walking the beaches of Juno beach where thousands of people died. Or walking up to the Eiffel Tower for the first time and being amazed at the sheer size of it.

Sometimes you can read everything there is about a subject, but once you’re in that place it all comes together in an emotional way. It’s less factual, less historical and more tangible.. real.

Of course this is for things that your interested in.. if you have no interest in the Pyramids then why bother going? Just to say “I’ve been there?” That seems a bit self-serving.

By: Mark H

Mark H — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 21:41:32 +0000

I kind of agree with you and your overall thinking. While there certainly is no such thing as a “must see” as travel is a very personal journey of your own tastes and interests, I do think that to travel a long distance and not experience some of the major sites/sights of a city can be a BIG mistake, and especially those related to significant elements of the world’s history. Certainly learning more and immersing yourself more in the culture is key to a good experience like you say. You almost need to visit some of the key sights once to make a judgement on whether you’d ever visit again. Visiting a location a second time often gives more chance to really select places of interest or getting out for short sidetrips. Saying all that, I think the world includes some things that must rate pretty close to “must sees” even if they end up as disappointments in some visitor’s eyes – go to Cairo but give the Pyramids a miss? Go to Beijing but give the Great Wall a miss? Go to Rome and give the Colosseum or St Peters Basilica a miss?

By: Steve

Steve — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 18:24:22 +0000

I agree with the relativity of a ‘must-see’ place — but concentration camps are too important to skip as a matter of taste. Just as in Paris we eat snails instead of McDonald’s, tossing ourselves out of our comfort zone, we should do the same in rural Poland or Germany, removing ourselves from that comfort zone and reminding ourselves that European history is not endless palaces and cafés.

Let us also remember that there are people everywhere from Tehran to Cincinnati that still deny these atrocities ever occurred — prove them wrong and become a witness yourself.

By: Abbie

Abbie — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 03:56:30 +0000

I totally agree that travel is personal, and about your interests, but I also think it’s important as members of the world to see some of the landmarks (i.e. popular tourist sites) of history.

By: Al

Al — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 22:14:10 +0000

This is something that I just had a conversation about with a good friend of mine. We are both fairly well traveled and we started talking about those “lists” — When I was much younger, I did have a list of places that I wanted to see. I wanted to see the 7 Wonders of the World. But, after a trip to Paris many years ago, I had a revelation. Yes, the Towel is nice, but after I took my picture, I was ready to move the hell on. The most fun I had there was being dubbed the unofficial tourguide of my friends guiding us around the town, getting lost, asking for directions, almost missing the TGV back to London; those are the things that I remember most about that trip. — At this point, when I think of travel, it’s about doing things …. Cooking lessons in Provence, learning Chinese in Beijing, a donkey ride in the Grand Canyon..

By: sara montour

sara montour — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 19:27:27 +0000

I was just talking about this exact same thing with some friends. They had just gotten back from Europe and did the whirlwind we-saw-500-cities-in-2-weeks trip that people tend to do to check places off their list.

I think there’s a difference between people who travel and people who experience. There’s that vagabond spirit that some of us can’t get rid of. The curiosity to know a place from the inside out and to let it absorb us, too.

By: Theresa

Theresa — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 16:18:51 +0000

I don’t think we’d make good travel partners! I love Berlin. I love to wander around Prenzlauer Berg, stop in the cafes, and just enjoy the feel of a city that has so much history. Maybe it helps that I speak German, I don’t know. I also loved Vietnam, by far my favorite country in SE Asia, while I didn’t care so much for Thailand.

Obviously, travel is personal, and what one person likes isn’t what another likes. It’s just as with books or whatnot. The must-sees are in some ways like the classics. They have some quality that makes them noteworthy; they aren’t however going to appeal to everyone.

But sometimes I don’t think we should go places because we like them, but because they give us a better understanding of the world, of people, of life. As you are a champion of people better understanding the world, I think you should reconsider your stance on visiting a concentration camp. I worked at the U.S. Holocaust Museum as a researcher, so I’d say I have pretty good knowledge of the Holocaust, as much as any museum or reading can give you. But I didn’t really understand the reality of it until I stood inside the gates of a concentration camp. It wasn’t fun. But, for me, it was necessary. I guess for some people it’s not. I’d just say be open minded about it.

By: Erin

Erin — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 13:02:45 +0000

I totally agree. To everyone’s shock we skipped the Taj Mahal on a three month trip to India, and surprisingly I didn’t really like New York.

Everyone has different interests and you’ll have a much better trip if you follow your own interests rather than the ‘must-sees’. They are often so overcrowded that they are ruined anyway, and less well known sites can be much more enjoyable.

By: Heidi Ahrens

Heidi Ahrens — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 05:02:03 +0000

I love this post. You are so right. I have traveled all over and sometimes I spend my days on the street or in a coffee shop and I have a great experience. When I miss something, other travelers don’t get it. That is something that happens a lot when traveling with children. Yet, you get to know yourself, your kids, your family and the culture of a place in the eyes of children.

I like your site by the way.

Heidi Ahrens outdoorbaby.net

By: Sonia

Sonia — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 19:43:03 +0000

I have to jump on the “I agree” bandwagon, having just traveled to Italy and completely skipped Rome in favor of staying a few extra days in another area. Ideally, traveling should be about being present and in the moment, and adjusting your itinerary as you see fit. This applies to taking time off when you’re sick (which you’ve recently written about) and it definitely applies to visiting/doing what you think you’ll most enjoy while skipping the rest. Yes, do your research and see what’s recommended, but don’t feel obligated to see those things just because everyone else has.

I will say that the opposite also holds true — don’t skip something just because it’s popular/touristy/on everyone’s must-see list. There’s often a good reason items make those lists!