The New York Times:
You’re probably familiar with those sweeping, romantic shots of the pyramids of Giza. In photos, movies and textbooks, there’s sand as far as the eye can see — and maybe a figure in the distance obscured by haze. It must surely take a train or a bus to get there. At least a camel ride.
Well, for those who have never visited the Pharaonic structures or thought about what may surround them, this might come as a surprise: The pyramids are flanked on three sides by the roads and neighborhoods of Giza, a major city with a population in the millions.
The same goes for the Great Sphinx. A mere quarter-mile or so away sits a Pizza Hut with expansive views of the historic site.
This story is funny/sad. I’ve been to the places described and they really can be disappointing if you’re expecting something much grander. It may no longer be there but when I was at the Great Sphinx ten years ago, there was a “Sphinx Guest House” a literal stone’s throw away. It was really jarring.
My first time in Rome I walked to the Spanish Steps and at the bottom, off to one side there’s… a McDonalds.
I saw the Mona Lisa many years ago, and I agree, most of the rest of the Louvre is more spacious, less crowded and far more impressive, particularly the Nike of Samothrace. (Don’t miss Monet’s Water Lilly room at the Musee de l’Orangerie.) Just a few weeks ago, I bypassed Pisa in favor of Cinque Terre – a wise choice, though I greatly preferred the next day in nearby Portofino. The Alamo is a great hour or so – park at the nearby shopping mall, walk about a hundred yards, and you can spend an entire day roaming up and down the Riverwalk. The article is absolutely correct about Barcelona and the Sagrada Familia (buy your tickets in advance for the early evening for the best window light). We could have easily spent three days in Barcelona and still not seen everything.
I saw some aerial shots of the pyramids a few year ago with Giza right next to them and it is weird.
Same with Stonehenge – major highway and tourist stops right next to it on the “other side” of the camera.
This is why I dislike the entire concept of “bucket lists.” Instead of following trendy, crowd-sourced advice pressuring visits to specific destinations, just explore. It will almost certainly be more interesting, more genuine, and less invasive. “Tourism” is, in many ways, a virus. Individual, personal exploration, nine times out of ten, is more rewarding and less disruptive.
The pyramids critique is odd. Part of why it was built where it was was for its easy access to a town and the Nile. It was intended to overlook the city. It’s quite funny how the proximity to a city is a merit for La Sagrada Familia, but a demerit for the Pyramids. The other critiques, IMO, are more valid. The things are smaller and less grand than the imagination, access is limited, etc.
Why jarring? It’s one of the world’s biggest tourist attractions and has been so since the *middle ages*, if not before. Naturally the original buildings are now adjacent to tourist friendly shops, restaurants, and hotels.
Protip: if you want your experience of something to be unbesmirched by tourist traps, don’t visit places where other people go.
My wife and I spent two weeks in England last month. We’d been before and have seen London and all the big stuff, so we decided we would just get in a car and drive through the countryside, exploring on the fly, staying in small villages and talking with the locals. We had an incredible experience and found wonderful places we’d never have visited otherwise. The best vacation I’d ever had, and I never saw a McDonalds. LOL. The big attractions and cities are nice to see, but I don’t think you can really get a feel for a culture until you’re out mingling with regular folks.
Ancient architectural wonders, smack-dab next to slums,fast-food chain restaurants, and damaged by a century of industrial pollution? Sounds plenty jarring to me.
As the article recommends, we were driven past Stonehenge on that highway a couple of years ago, grateful for the fact that we’d instead chosen to inspect other neolithic ruins much more closely, in relatively undeveloped areas, elsewhere.
Agreed. But it’s also well worth doing the detailed research first, as my smarter half made clear to me.
We were in The Netherlands for a few days, and took a day trip to The Hague, not to view Rembrandts at The Mauritshuis (to the consternation of the train station’s tourist guides), but to crawl all over The Museum of The Book, which was much more pertinent to us. We pursued similarly personalized destinations in Maastricht, Amsterdam, London, and Ghent, Belgium.
But none of that could have happened if we’d simply shown up and “just explored.” It took a lot of directed search queries and reading beforehand. Without prep, we’d never have known about Ghent’s amazing MIAT museum, to name one example.
Once we’d seen a particular handful of destinations, we then took long walks around town. We were fortunate to have a friend in Maastricht who led us on a long walk through that city with a more-or-less specific route in mind.
Also, to confirm the article’s description, I’m told that the Mona Lisa is a tiny object in an immense room full of packed, jostling people. I’m certain I’d find much more rewarding things to see while at The Louvre, whenever that happens.
WHEN the Great Pyramid was built it was adjacent to slums…
Onward and upward.