If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Worth staying in a classy hotel?
Tchiowa wrote:
It bothers me whenever one of them posts that unless you live on $5 a day you can't experience the local culture. That, of course, implies that everyone is poor and that any local who has any level of financial success automatically loses his culture. I think the point is more about the Hiltons, Marriotts, ... are more or less similar all over the world. It's a bit like going to a McDonald's in Nova Scotia, ordering a McLobster, then saying you've 'experienced local food delicacies'. |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Worth staying in a classy hotel?
Miguel Cruz wrote in message ...
Tchiowa wrote: It's kind of like saying that unless you sleep in the doorway of a department store and urinate all over the BART entrances and eat in a soup kitchen you can't experience the true culture of San Francisco. Wait - what's wrong with that? Michael Moore will put you in one of his films and say it's Bush's fault. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Worth staying in a classy hotel?
Madonna wrote in message m...
Tchiowa wrote: It bothers me whenever one of them posts that unless you live on $5 a day you can't experience the local culture. That, of course, implies that everyone is poor and that any local who has any level of financial success automatically loses his culture. I think the point is more about the Hiltons, Marriotts, ... are more or less similar all over the world. It's a bit like going to a McDonald's in Nova Scotia, ordering a McLobster, then saying you've 'experienced local food delicacies'. 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. 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. John W. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Worth staying in a classy hotel?
Madonna wrote in message m...
Tchiowa wrote: It bothers me whenever one of them posts that unless you live on $5 a day you can't experience the local culture. That, of course, implies that everyone is poor and that any local who has any level of financial success automatically loses his culture. I think the point is more about the Hiltons, Marriotts, ... are more or less similar all over the world. It's a bit like going to a McDonald's in Nova Scotia, ordering a McLobster, then saying you've 'experienced local food delicacies'. 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. 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. John W. |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Worth staying in a classy hotel?
"Madonna" wrote in message ... Tchiowa wrote: It bothers me whenever one of them posts that unless you live on $5 a day you can't experience the local culture. That, of course, implies that everyone is poor and that any local who has any level of financial success automatically loses his culture. I think the point is more about the Hiltons, Marriotts, ... are more or less similar all over the world. That may be true in the US, but, at least with respect to Marriotts, is not true internationally. Many international Marriotts were formally individually-owned grand hotels. In Rome, the Marriott is the Grand Flora, which is quite unique (and quite nice). In London, it's now called Grosvernor Square -- I don't know the original name -- but it has a completely unique character. Same for the Champs Elysees Marriott in Paris. Not only is it the only hotel on the Champs Elysee, but it has a unique Parisian character not at all like any of the other international Marriotts. The same is true in Milan. The JW was, to my knowledge, built specifically as a Marriott, but it is quite spectacular and has nothing in common with the American implementations except the name. 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. |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Worth staying in a classy hotel?
"Madonna" wrote in message ... Tchiowa wrote: It bothers me whenever one of them posts that unless you live on $5 a day you can't experience the local culture. That, of course, implies that everyone is poor and that any local who has any level of financial success automatically loses his culture. I think the point is more about the Hiltons, Marriotts, ... are more or less similar all over the world. That may be true in the US, but, at least with respect to Marriotts, is not true internationally. Many international Marriotts were formally individually-owned grand hotels. In Rome, the Marriott is the Grand Flora, which is quite unique (and quite nice). In London, it's now called Grosvernor Square -- I don't know the original name -- but it has a completely unique character. Same for the Champs Elysees Marriott in Paris. Not only is it the only hotel on the Champs Elysee, but it has a unique Parisian character not at all like any of the other international Marriotts. The same is true in Milan. The JW was, to my knowledge, built specifically as a Marriott, but it is quite spectacular and has nothing in common with the American implementations except the name. 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. |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Worth staying in a classy hotel?
Tchiowa wrote:
Miguel Cruz wrote: Tchiowa wrote: It's kind of like saying that unless you sleep in the doorway of a department store and urinate all over the BART entrances and eat in a soup kitchen you can't experience the true culture of San Francisco. Wait - what's wrong with that? Michael Moore will put you in one of his films and say it's Bush's fault. Free soup AND a part in a movie - it's hard to find anything about this not to like. miguel -- Hit The Road! Photos and tales from around the world: http://travel.u.nu |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Worth staying in a classy hotel?
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. 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. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Worth staying in a classy hotel?
PTRAVEL wrote:
That may be true in the US, but, at least with respect to Marriotts, is not true internationally. Many international Marriotts were formally individually-owned grand hotels. In Rome, the Marriott is the Grand Flora, which is quite unique (and quite nice). In London, it's now called Grosvernor Square -- I don't know the original name -- but it has a completely unique character. Same for the Champs Elysees Marriott in Paris. Not only is it the only hotel on the Champs Elysee, but it has a unique Parisian character not at all like any of the other international Marriotts. The same is true in Milan. The JW was, to my knowledge, built specifically as a Marriott, but it is quite spectacular and has nothing in common with the American implementations except the name. Interesting. I should add a visit to the local Marriott whenever I go somewhere. 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... |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Worth staying in a classy hotel?
PTRAVEL wrote:
That may be true in the US, but, at least with respect to Marriotts, is not true internationally. Many international Marriotts were formally individually-owned grand hotels. In Rome, the Marriott is the Grand Flora, which is quite unique (and quite nice). In London, it's now called Grosvernor Square -- I don't know the original name -- but it has a completely unique character. Same for the Champs Elysees Marriott in Paris. Not only is it the only hotel on the Champs Elysee, but it has a unique Parisian character not at all like any of the other international Marriotts. The same is true in Milan. The JW was, to my knowledge, built specifically as a Marriott, but it is quite spectacular and has nothing in common with the American implementations except the name. Interesting. I should add a visit to the local Marriott whenever I go somewhere. 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... |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Rome Hotel recommendation help | spunge411 | Europe | 8 | February 3rd, 2004 01:45 PM |
Tobago and Barbados | [email protected] | Caribbean | 8 | December 29th, 2003 02:26 PM |
Staying in Amsterdam in May, Park Hotel, Crown Plaza Hotel? | Matt | Europe | 12 | November 28th, 2003 09:49 PM |
Bago- Mandalay - Monywa - Bagan, Popa - Kalaw - Pindaya - Inle -Yangon | Asia | 0 | November 14th, 2003 08:09 AM | |
GMT 10th Anniversary Sonny's Special | Asia | 0 | November 14th, 2003 04:22 AM |