Worth staying in a classy hotel?

Miguel Cruz wrote in message ...
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.

Did I mention the part about the movie being a prison movie and your
part involves soup, Ralph Nader and the shower?

"Madonna" wrote in message
...
PTRAVEL wrote:

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.

Allright I concede I haven't been to Marriott's so they may be a
different kind of hotel than the rest of the chains.

I've stayed in a number of Starwoods and Hiltons, and could say the same
about their international properties.


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).
There are lots of restaurants in a category between the one in a 5 star
hotel and street vendors.

That's not the point. You assume that a restaurant in a 5-star hotel will
serve American food to Americans. You're incorrect.


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.
If the hotel you're staying at doesn't have 3 restaurants, you'll
probably eat out more often, see more of the place.

Now you're making assumptions about me. Sorry, wrong again. When I travel,
it's to experience the place I've travelled to. I don't care if a hotel has
20 restaurants -- it won't make a difference.


You just get a lower level of service, smaller room, less sumptuous
bathroom (if a private bathroom at all), a harder bed,
Depending on the category of the hotel you're staying at. The main
difference between 5-star and 3-star is usually the services available
in the hotel: restaurants, bars, swimming pool, massage, marble lobby
with leather seats, ...

The main difference between 5-star and 3-star _is_ the level of services,
but usually has nothing to do with the availability of marble lobbies,
leather seats, wimming pools or massages. The formula is complicated and
varies from country to country. However, because providing the services
required for 5-star designation adds costs which, of course, are passed on
to guests, 5-stars tend to nicer because they want to attract the guest who
can afford more expensive accomodation.


and no air conditioning.
Even the cheapest hotels give you the choice between air-con and ceiling
fan rooms.

Nope, not so. I've stayed in 3-stars in France and Italy that were not air
conditioned.

Tchiowa kirjoitti:


Given the openly racist posts you've made here, I'd say you are a
perfect example of what's wrong with budget tourists.



You mean I prefer African elephants to Indian ones ?

Tchiowa kirjoitti:


I get laundry free (4 pieces per day) at JW Marriott.


No, you don't (or whoever pays the bill).

On 15 Jul 2004 12:08:37 -0700, the renowned
(Tchiowa) wrote:


I agree. Why not? But the point is that the claim that travelling poor
somehow helps you understand the culture better is nonsense. Do you
agree?

I don't think it's decisive one way or the other, but travelling
"poor" forces you into the culture to some degree, as does (much more
so) actually trying to live in a foreign culture. It's a different
experience to sharpen your elbows and buy a train ticket in Chinese at
a train station compared to having your hotel buy it for you. For
example, setting up an office in Taiwan was a real eye-opener for me.

I think the movie _Lost in Translation_ captured the experience of
staying in a ritzy hotel in an alien culture quite well- the inane
phone calls, the lost souls from your own background, the things that
are the same as home, but not. Backpacking would be a different movie-
still with the people from home etc., but different.

IMHO, the bigger factor than how much you spend is whether you travel
alone or not. I never have as intense an experience when not alone, a
zillion miles from home, and immersed totally in a foreign culture.

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

"Spehro Pefhany" wrote in message
...
On 15 Jul 2004 12:08:37 -0700, the renowned
(Tchiowa) wrote:


I agree. Why not? But the point is that the claim that travelling poor
somehow helps you understand the culture better is nonsense. Do you
agree?

I don't think it's decisive one way or the other, but travelling
"poor" forces you into the culture to some degree, as does (much more
so) actually trying to live in a foreign culture. It's a different
experience to sharpen your elbows and buy a train ticket in Chinese at
a train station compared to having your hotel buy it for you. For
example, setting up an office in Taiwan was a real eye-opener for me.

I think you've got it turned around, though. It is easier to insulate
yourself from a foreign culture if money is of little concern, which is to
say you can buy whatever you want, including isolation. However, it doesn't
follow that people who don't travel poor want this or do this.

It is just as much a valid part of Chinese culture to go to a Chinese travel
agent and purchase "soft class" train tickets or, for that matter, plane
tickets -- it's just a different aspect of the culture.


I think the movie _Lost in Translation_ captured the experience of
staying in a ritzy hotel in an alien culture quite well- the inane
phone calls, the lost souls from your own background, the things that
are the same as home, but not.

I enjoyed the movie, but it is completely alien to my experience when I
travel. As an example, returning again to the the JW Marriott in Hong Kong,
the hotel bar there is filled with local Hong Kongese who, for some reason,
have decided that the Marriott bar is the place to practice swing and
ballroom dancing. It's quite something to see and experience, and totally
unlike the sterile, westernized "any hotel in the chain" bar that Steve
Martin found himself in. The bar at the Marriott is pure Hong Kong culture,
and a part of the culture that can never be experienced if one limits one's
self to hostels.

Backpacking would be a different movie-
still with the people from home etc., but different.

I saw that movie -- it's called The Beach.


IMHO, the bigger factor than how much you spend is whether you travel
alone or not. I never have as intense an experience when not alone, a
zillion miles from home, and immersed totally in a foreign culture.

I agree, though I also think a lot depends on the motivation for travel.
When I have to go for business, I'm a lot more interested in comfort, ease
and familiarity than I am when I travel for leisure.


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

PTRAVEL wrote:
"Spehro Pefhany" wrote:
I don't think it's decisive one way or the other, but travelling
"poor" forces you into the culture to some degree, as does (much more
so) actually trying to live in a foreign culture. It's a different
experience to sharpen your elbows and buy a train ticket in Chinese at
a train station compared to having your hotel buy it for you. For
example, setting up an office in Taiwan was a real eye-opener for me.

I think you've got it turned around, though. It is easier to insulate
yourself from a foreign culture if money is of little concern, which is to
say you can buy whatever you want, including isolation. However, it doesn't
follow that people who don't travel poor want this or do this.

It is just as much a valid part of Chinese culture to go to a Chinese travel
agent and purchase "soft class" train tickets or, for that matter, plane
tickets -- it's just a different aspect of the culture.

It's valid, I guess (though I don't really know what that word means in this
context) but it's surely not as intense an experience, and it's more similar
to home (some English will often be spoken, ambient factor like smells and
climate control and quantity of floor-spitting will be more familiar, and so
on). And it's not as "typical". There are some Chinese people who fly
around. But there are a whole lot more than ride in the cheap seats on the
trains.

I think any argument that claims the diversity of experience in high-end
hotels is greater than that in low-budget hotels used by locals of the
region, is doomed to collapse (unless the criteria are limited to restaurant
menus or wall art). High-end hotels spend a whole lot more time and effort
checking each other out (and they can afford to) in order to figure out what
their clientele consider top-notch accommodation. There are consultants and
foreign investors and foreign management, all chiming in in various cases.
That necessarily leads to a convergence along a fair number of axes.

I enjoyed the movie, but it is completely alien to my experience when I
travel. As an example, returning again to the the JW Marriott in Hong Kong,
the hotel bar there is filled with local Hong Kongese who, for some reason,
have decided that the Marriott bar is the place to practice swing and
ballroom dancing. It's quite something to see and experience, and totally
unlike the sterile, westernized "any hotel in the chain" bar that Steve
Martin found himself in. The bar at the Marriott is pure Hong Kong culture,
and a part of the culture that can never be experienced if one limits one's
self to hostels.

Some false alternatives here. The choices are not limited to the JW Marriott
and a Hosteling International property.

miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos and tales from around the world: http://travel.u.nu

"Miguel Cruz" wrote in message
...
PTRAVEL wrote:
"Spehro Pefhany" wrote:
I don't think it's decisive one way or the other, but travelling
"poor" forces you into the culture to some degree, as does (much more
so) actually trying to live in a foreign culture. It's a different
experience to sharpen your elbows and buy a train ticket in Chinese at
a train station compared to having your hotel buy it for you. For
example, setting up an office in Taiwan was a real eye-opener for me.

I think you've got it turned around, though. It is easier to insulate
yourself from a foreign culture if money is of little concern, which is
to
say you can buy whatever you want, including isolation. However, it
doesn't
follow that people who don't travel poor want this or do this.

It is just as much a valid part of Chinese culture to go to a Chinese
travel
agent and purchase "soft class" train tickets or, for that matter, plane
tickets -- it's just a different aspect of the culture.

It's valid, I guess (though I don't really know what that word means in
this
context) but it's surely not as intense an experience,

I suppose it all depends on how you define intensity. China is probably a
bad example, because my wife is Chinese, I go there a lot, and it feels more
"home like" as a result.

A better example (at least for me) might be India. We traveled by both
train and plane. The train experience was fairly mundane -- comparable to
train stations and trains cars I've experienced in many places in the world.
The airports, on the other hand, were quite unusual -- they didn't feel at
all like European or American airports, and were considerably more alien and
confusing than their train station counterparts.

and it's more similar
to home (some English will often be spoken, ambient factor like smells and
climate control and quantity of floor-spitting will be more familiar, and
so
on). And it's not as "typical". There are some Chinese people who fly
around. But there are a whole lot more than ride in the cheap seats on the
trains.

There are even more who live in mud-floored huts, sleep on concrete kangs
and never travel more than a kilometer or two from their rural village.
Visiting these people is a wonderful experience, but it isn't any more
"authentic" an experience of China than sharing drinks with a western-suit
wearing business man in a late-night restaurant in Beijing. They're all
experiences worth having.


I think any argument that claims the diversity of experience in high-end
hotels is greater than that in low-budget hotels used by locals of the
region, is doomed to collapse (unless the criteria are limited to
restaurant
menus or wall art). High-end hotels spend a whole lot more time and effort
checking each other out (and they can afford to) in order to figure out
what
their clientele consider top-notch accommodation. There are consultants
and
foreign investors and foreign management, all chiming in in various cases.
That necessarily leads to a convergence along a fair number of axes.

A hotel is, at bottom line, a place to sleep. 5-star hotels are more
comfortable places to sleep than hostels. Everything else is what the
traveler makes of it.



I enjoyed the movie, but it is completely alien to my experience when I
travel. As an example, returning again to the the JW Marriott in Hong
Kong,
the hotel bar there is filled with local Hong Kongese who, for some
reason,
have decided that the Marriott bar is the place to practice swing and
ballroom dancing. It's quite something to see and experience, and
totally
unlike the sterile, westernized "any hotel in the chain" bar that Steve
Martin found himself in. The bar at the Marriott is pure Hong Kong
culture,
and a part of the culture that can never be experienced if one limits
one's
self to hostels.

Some false alternatives here. The choices are not limited to the JW
Marriott
and a Hosteling International property.

No, they're not, but the "debate," such as it is, focuses on 5-star hotels
as being sheltered and insulated versus hostels which are "real."


miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos and tales from around the world: http://travel.u.nu

Spehro Pefhany wrote in message . ..
On 15 Jul 2004 12:08:37 -0700, the renowned
(Tchiowa) wrote:


I agree. Why not? But the point is that the claim that travelling poor
somehow helps you understand the culture better is nonsense. Do you
agree?

I don't think it's decisive one way or the other,

I agree.

but travelling "poor" forces you into the culture to some degree,

But I don't agree with that. Why do believe that poor people have more
"culture" than middle class people?

as does (much more so) actually trying to live in a foreign culture.

That's true. I have lived and worked in Asia and Africa for about 15
years.

It's a different
experience to sharpen your elbows and buy a train ticket in Chinese at
a train station compared to having your hotel buy it for you.

Of course it's a different experience. But eating ice cream is a
different experience than shaving. What does that have to do with the
culture of the country?

IMHO, the bigger factor than how much you spend is whether you travel
alone or not. I never have as intense an experience when not alone, a
zillion miles from home, and immersed totally in a foreign culture.

To me the biggest factor is the respect you have for the culture. I
know people who have lived in Thailand for years but don't know the
first thing about the culture. They consider themselves superior to
the Thai and won't be caught dead actually associating with them,
outside of work. I've seen the same in Indonesia (and Papua Niugini
and Angola and The Congo and Nigeria and Kazakhstan and many other
places I've worked and/or lived).

And that is why I don't agree with the "backpackers experience more
culture" line of thinking. Because the percentage of people who have
no respect for local people and their culture is much higher in the
backpacker crowd than in the business crowd or in the "average Joe"
crowd.

Many of the Khao San Road types go there not for the culture or the
experience, but rather because they've been poor all their lives and
want to hang out with people even poorer than them so they can feel
important.

And that doesn't make for a good understanding of the culture. Just
the opposite.

"ggg" wrote in message
om...
(PTRAVEL) wrote in message
. com...


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.

Not that that determines whether they are "Americanized."

The JW in Hong Kong isn't. My wife is from the PRC and I'll go by her
opinion as to whether a Chinese restaurant is good and authentic.


Marriotts are franchises.

Some are, some aren't. None of the JWs are.


The crappiest HK eatery I've been to was a YMCA and there were no
Chinese patrons.

You've clearly never eaten at the JW's restaurant. It is mostly Chinese
patrons, and many of them are not hotel guests.


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.

I agree. Unless you're in some hostel experience where you can pick
your the brains of bunk mates, what would you get culturally from any
hotel? I guess if it's a sole proprietorship, the owner might provide
concierge services as well.