Worth staying in a classy hotel?

Madonna wrote:

John W. wrote:

But... most locals wouldn't stay in some of the places I've stayed, so
I'm not sure if a shabby, run-down hostel in the backstreets of Seoul,
for example, count as experiencing local culture. I'd say if a
person's going to 'experience' a culture they'll do it regardless of
where they're staying.

If you stay in a 5-star hotel or resort, eat at their restaurant, take
organized tours, and shop around tourist traps the experience is more
about sightseeing than a cultural one.

I, for one, am fed up with the attitude some backpackers exude about
their holiday experience being a "cultural one". It's bull**** IMO.
These same people seemingly spend the bulk of their time necking
imported beers, smoking pot, watching DVDs and arguing about the price
of t-shirts and toe rings in maxxed out backpacker haunts like Khao San
Rd and Hat Rin. Great insight into the culture that is.

And even if they do manage to eat a couple of meals "where the locals
eat" and ride the same buses "that the locals ride", it's still surely a
mile from "learning the culture" (whatever that precisely
means).....Think about it - 2 bus rides on my 428 bus and a counter meal
at my local pub hardly qualifies you for Australian citizenship, at
least in my eyes.

Don't mistake this as some sort of attack on backpackers, drinking
imported beer, smoking pot, Khao San Rd, riding local buses or anything
else I ranted about in the above paragraphs. Personally I have
done/still do many of those things and enjoyed it immensely. I just hate
it when people produce on some holier than thou crap about how their
trip was so much more rewarding becuase of x, y and z. Travel is an
immensely personal thing, and people are looking for different things
from the experience. If they want to see the country from a 5 star hotel
and air conditioned bus tours, good for them.

Besides, you can't really do that without
spending a good bit of time in a place; I know lots of people that
consider themselves 'learned' about a culture after only a week in
country.

That's true. For people with a fixed budget, staying in a less
expensive hotel means being able to stay a lot longer and have more time
to learn the culture. 1 week is just barely enough to get over the
culture shock and jet lag.

********. You can see, eat, do and experience loads in 7 days if you
want to.

Greg

(Greg Pankhurst) wrote in message news:1ggz49u.1n022d41kw2zmcN%g.pankhurst@spambloc k.cfi.unsw.edu.spamblock.au...
Madonna wrote:

John W. wrote:

Besides, you can't really do that without
spending a good bit of time in a place; I know lots of people that
consider themselves 'learned' about a culture after only a week in
country.

That's true. For people with a fixed budget, staying in a less
expensive hotel means being able to stay a lot longer and have more time
to learn the culture. 1 week is just barely enough to get over the
culture shock and jet lag.

********. You can see, eat, do and experience loads in 7 days if you
want to.

That is certainly true. You can also take a one-week intensive
training course that puts people through a US Navy SEALS-like training
week. But that doesn't make you a US Navy SEAL....

John W.

Madonna wrote in message m...
John W. wrote:

But... most locals wouldn't stay in some of the places I've stayed, so
I'm not sure if a shabby, run-down hostel in the backstreets of Seoul,
for example, count as experiencing local culture. I'd say if a
person's going to 'experience' a culture they'll do it regardless of
where they're staying.

If you stay in a 5-star hotel or resort, eat at their restaurant, take
organized tours, and shop around tourist traps the experience is more
about sightseeing than a cultural one.

Nonsense. If you stay in a guest house and hang out with backpackers
and spend your days hunting for ectasy then your experience is more of
a ....., well, it's not really an experience, is it?

I stay in a 5 star hotel in Bangkok. The staff is Thai. Everyone I
encounter is Thai. I go out to nice restaurants and the people there
are Thai.

You're right about "organized tours, but it's a wild misconception
that people who stay in nice hotels go on "organized tours". It's far
more common for people staying at "middle class" hotels to be on
organized tours because it's all part of the tour package.

I've been on an organized tour exactly once in my life and that was
from Hong Kong to southern China because at that time it was difficult
to get in to China any other way.

Besides, you can't really do that without
spending a good bit of time in a place; I know lots of people that
consider themselves 'learned' about a culture after only a week in
country.

That's true. For people with a fixed budget, staying in a less
expensive hotel means being able to stay a lot longer and have more time
to learn the culture. 1 week is just barely enough to get over the
culture shock and jet lag.

Culture? Nonsense. You are doing what I pointed out in a different
post. You are equating "poverty" with "culture". You go to a country
that is poorer than your home country and you have the mindset that
only the poorest of the poor there are "real (Asians, Thai, Lao, what
have you)".

Tchiowa wrote:

[..]

Nonsense. If you stay in a guest house and hang out with backpackers
and spend your days hunting for ectasy then your experience is more of
a ....., well, it's not really an experience, is it?

Did you ever try it? I guess not ...

You're right about "organized tours, but it's a wild misconception
that people who stay in nice hotels go on "organized tours".[..]

But is completely clear to you that people living in inexpensive
homestays are only interested in drugs and living on the cheap ...

Regards,
Manfred

(Greg Pankhurst) wrote in message news:1ggz49u.1n022d41kw2zmcN%g.pankhurst@spambloc k.cfi.unsw.edu.spamblock.au...
Madonna wrote:

John W. wrote:

But... most locals wouldn't stay in some of the places I've stayed, so
I'm not sure if a shabby, run-down hostel in the backstreets of Seoul,
for example, count as experiencing local culture. I'd say if a
person's going to 'experience' a culture they'll do it regardless of
where they're staying.

If you stay in a 5-star hotel or resort, eat at their restaurant, take
organized tours, and shop around tourist traps the experience is more
about sightseeing than a cultural one.

I, for one, am fed up with the attitude some backpackers exude about
their holiday experience being a "cultural one". It's bull**** IMO.
These same people seemingly spend the bulk of their time necking
imported beers, smoking pot, watching DVDs and arguing about the price
of t-shirts and toe rings in maxxed out backpacker haunts like Khao San
Rd and Hat Rin. Great insight into the culture that is.

And even if they do manage to eat a couple of meals "where the locals
eat" and ride the same buses "that the locals ride", it's still surely a
mile from "learning the culture" (whatever that precisely
means).....Think about it - 2 bus rides on my 428 bus and a counter meal
at my local pub hardly qualifies you for Australian citizenship, at
least in my eyes.

Absolutely. You're required to drink at least 3 VBs to qualify.

:-)

A few years ago when I was applying for a business visa to Australia I
used the old joke: When the interviewer asked me if I had a criminal
record I told him I didn't know you still needed one. He acted like he
had heard that maybe 6 billion times.

Madonna wrote in message m...
PTRAVEL wrote:

I'm sorry, but I completely disagree. I've stayed in 5-star "local hotels"
as well as the international chains, and there is nothing to distinguish the
two except that one will give me frequent stay points.

That's what I mean. 5 star hotels isolate you from the country you're
in, it's like a bubble isolating you from the country you're in.

???? Where do you get that? Apparently you have never stayed in one.
There is no more insulation in a 5 star hotel than a backpacker flop
house. What you have is more "creature comforts".

It brings home to a foreign land. Sacrificing the princely comfort will
give you more of a local flavour,

Nonsense.

you may have to eat rice with chopsticks instead of steak with a fork,

You can eat rice with chopsticks in a 5-star hotel and you can eat
(what passes for) steak in a backpacker restaurant.

the waiter may not speak perfect english,

Which has what to do with anything?

the train ride will show more of the country than a plane over it...

Which has what to do with culture? And a train ride sitting in First
Class shows just as much of the country as a train ride sitting in
Third Class.

Manfred Aigner kirjoitti:

Tchiowa wrote:

[..]


Nonsense. If you stay in a guest house and hang out with backpackers
and spend your days hunting for ectasy then your experience is more of
a ....., well, it's not really an experience, is it?


Did you ever try it? I guess not ...

You're right about "organized tours, but it's a wild misconception
that people who stay in nice hotels go on "organized tours".[..]


But is completely clear to you that people living in inexpensive
homestays are only interested in drugs and living on the cheap ...

He is famous about describing patterns of behaviour and practices of
tourists. His true home is in s.c.thai, however. When I was young in
1980's and did train travelling a lot in Europe, I typically had a
budget of FIM 4000-4500 ~ 700 euros for 30 days. Once I met a gang of
Spanish youth who were riding like me by a budget of 300-350 euros each
for 30 days. I felt rich at that moment. My desicions on choosing
accommodation, restaurants and so on was much dictated by the
limitations of my thin wallet. Who gives a **** where you straighten
your legs for a night's rest during your holiday. I understand this
being meaningful when one is very young or very old or very sick or
anyhow weak.

If one wanted to imply from this that I am a negro moslem with
homosexual tendencies harrassing women and small boys, spitting and
urinating on streets and smoking pot, one is naturally all free to do
so. I suppose Asians do not mind what Europeans do think of their
culture and how superficially they know about Asian culture.

On 15 Jul 2004 06:48:33 -0700, the renowned
(Tchiowa) wrote:

Madonna wrote in message m...
PTRAVEL wrote:

I'm sorry, but I completely disagree. I've stayed in 5-star "local hotels"
as well as the international chains, and there is nothing to distinguish the
two except that one will give me frequent stay points.

That's what I mean. 5 star hotels isolate you from the country you're
in, it's like a bubble isolating you from the country you're in.

???? Where do you get that? Apparently you have never stayed in one.
There is no more insulation in a 5 star hotel than a backpacker flop
house. What you have is more "creature comforts".

Personally, I've noticed that I'm less motivated to get out on the
streets if I'm staying in a plush $200 hotel with CNN/ABC on a big TV
vs. a $5 hotel.

In a big hotel, services such as laundry are always very expensive
compared to what you can get outside, sometimes they are more
convenient or of higher quality, sometimes not. I often find their
pickup and delivery times for laundry to cause problems.

The big plus of a classy hotel is if there is a good concierge who can
help arrange transportation, suggest places to go if you have special
interests etc. You might get that in a small hotel, but you're more
likely to get it in some large hotels. Depends on your interests, of
course- for example if you want decorator fabrics for upholstery it
might be hard to find an appropriate wholesale outlet. OTOH, some
small places, such as the place I stayed in Cambodia will not only
give you advice about illegal drugs but also sell them to you. His
Thai wife also cooked some great food and he was an excellent source
of information for visitors, so I didn't much care.

It brings home to a foreign land. Sacrificing the princely comfort will
give you more of a local flavour,

Nonsense.

you may have to eat rice with chopsticks instead of steak with a fork,

You can eat rice with chopsticks in a 5-star hotel and you can eat
(what passes for) steak in a backpacker restaurant.

the waiter may not speak perfect english,

Which has what to do with anything?

If you want advice on the food it might make a difference.

the train ride will show more of the country than a plane over it...

Which has what to do with culture? And a train ride sitting in First
Class shows just as much of the country as a train ride sitting in
Third Class.

You meet different local people in first class vs. lower class vs.
flying. All are interesting. Why not try each way?

Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

Madonna wrote in message m...
PTRAVEL wrote:

snip


It's a bit like going to a McDonald's in Nova Scotia, ordering a McLobster,
then saying you've 'experienced local food delicacies'.

I'm sorry, but I completely disagree. I've stayed in 5-star "local hotels"
as well as the international chains, and there is nothing to distinguish the
two except that one will give me frequent stay points.
That's what I mean. 5 star hotels isolate you from the country you're
in, it's like a bubble isolating you from the country you're in. It
brings home to a foreign land. Sacrificing the princely comfort will
give you more of a local flavour, you may have to eat rice with
chopsticks instead of steak with a fork, the waiter may not speak
perfect english, the train ride will show more of the country than a
plane over it...

I'm sorry, but you're completely and totally wrong. The 5-star hotels
I've described ARE hotels of the country in which they're in -- they
are run by nationals, staffed by nationals, decorated by nationals,
and stayed in by nationals. They are NOT Americanized. The
restaurant at the JW Marriott in Hong Kong, which is acknowledged as
one of the best in that city, serves their meals with chop sticks, not
knives and forks (as does room service). If you want western
utensils, you'll have to ask for them.

Either you're one of those people who subscribe to the mistaken idea
that, unless you're eating food from street vendors, you're not
getting local flavor, or you simply have no idea what a world-class
5-star hotel is like (I suspect probably both). I've travelled at
both ends of the economic spectrum. You get no more "local flavor" at
a 2-star hotel than at a 5-star. You just get a lower level of
service, smaller room, less sumptuous bathroom (if a private bathroom
at all), a harder bed, and no air conditioning.

It's fine to have an opinion but, clearly, you have no basis for
yours.

Spehro Pefhany kirjoitti:


In a big hotel, services such as laundry are always very expensive
compared to what you can get outside, sometimes they are more
convenient or of higher quality, sometimes not. I often find their
pickup and delivery times for laundry to cause problems.



This pretty trivial. There are lots of services you partially or fully
pay for regardless of whether you actually do use those services or not.
In public laundry you wash 3 kg by 150 bahts. At fancy hotels laundry
cost 1000 bahts.