Among some intellectuals, leftists, and remaining holdouts in the middle class, tourism is nothing to be proud of. We don't want to look like tourists. We want to blend in, to seem like locals. Oddly, we might consult our Rough Guides to know what's off the beaten track, only to find other members of our tribe of tourists similarly off the beaten track. We eschew tourist traps, gift shops with souvenirs, attractions clearly created just for us. We want what's authetic, what's real.
But we should know better. The critique of authenticity has been around a while now. If the authentic weren't constructed as such, how would we recognize it? The very attribution of authenticity is already dependent on a referential structure. Assuming we know, then, that authenticity is a construct, what's the matter with tourism?
Is the problem that we are visitors, those who are not actual participants in a way of life? No. The critique of failures of participation, of disconnection and political alienation, operates just fine without the premise of tourism. We fail as participants before we ever leave home.
Is the problem that of hierarchy, of interacting with others as if they were there to serve us, wait on us, cater to our whims? No. Again, hierarchies and the service sector are already part of local experience, part of everyday suburban life.
Is the problem the consumerism of tourism? No. If consumerism is a problem, we don't have to go out of town to consume. That, too, is part of home life.
Carbon emissions and the environmental impact? Somewhat--particularly with respect to flying and parking lots. But, again, these are also already problems with work and living in contemporary neoliberal capital.
Why, then, do we feel ashamed to be tourists? Why do we feel ashamed for tourists when we see them?
Before answering the question, keep in mind the fact that tourism is a mass phenomenon, although it is rapidly returning to its former status as a practice of the privileged. Tourism is not simply traveling or taking a vacation. We don't consider visiting relatives or camping particularly touristic activities. Nor is lying around at the beach exactly tourism--it's relaxation, a break from work, a replenishing.
I think we are ashamed of tourism because it exposes our relinquishment of our enjoyment to commodification, our naked pursuit of this commodified enjoyment in its impossibility, and our subsequent guilt as we are trapped in the circuits of competitive tourism--did you see? did you eat? did you smoke and dance and have the mystical experience necessarily beyond the grasp of what appears as westernized modernism or the modernized west? We are ashamed of tourism because it is completely detached from our work and provisioning. It appears as dedication to pursuing the unique that is impossible, pathetic in its massness. We see others enjoying our illusion of being on a unique, personal adventure.
And once there is the option of tourism, traveling otherwise is difficult if not impossible. The non-tourist works and stays home. The business traveler is another version of the catered to tourist. The one who stays home is provincial, unworldly.
What are other ways to see the world?
It's so refreshing to read a smart, critical voice in defense of tourism. I agree that all too often tourists become scapegoats for other issues (e.g., commodification, racism, oppression, environmental degradation, etc.) through academic writings, popular culture, etc. In a book I published in 2007 called *Toxic Tourism*, similar to your point about everyday life vs. critiques of tourism, I argued that when even tourists dislike tourists it may be more fundamentally because some people dislike people. I think it's time for a much more nuanced and critical discussion of tourist practices (commercial and noncommercial) and the tourist as a mode of subjectivity--thanks for this post.
Posted by: phaedra | July 21, 2008 at 04:08 PM
thanks--this isn't a research area of mine, just something I was thinking about while in New Orleans. My partner was reading something about the long history of tourism in NOLA and I was trying to figure out what exactly bugs people about tourism--your book sounds like just the ticket (gee, a kinda silly metaphor...oh well).
Posted by: Jodi | July 21, 2008 at 05:59 PM
What if the shame and guilt is caused by our inability to practise a true free form of utopian living? :
http://www.atopia.tk/index.php/en/terra8/Auge-Tourismcouldwellbethelastutopia-AninterviewwithMarcAuge.html
What if tourism is as good as it gets? We should invent a tourism that allows the tourist to not feel guilty when not enjoying (to counter the superego order Enjoy). Meanwhile, I'll be watching Sean Penn's Into the Wild and Doug Pray's Surfwise.
Posted by: Guy from Holland | July 23, 2008 at 09:48 AM
As much as I appreciate what your saying, what if we just feel shame because we know there is something inherently wrong with the fact that 'we' can tour while those in the places we are touring can't even leave their town or village?
Posted by: gesticulate wildly | July 24, 2008 at 10:47 AM
First, that's not necessarily the case.
Second, even if it were the case, it would not differ from the hierarchies and exploitation already structuring/destructuring life under neoliberalism.
Posted by: Jodi | July 24, 2008 at 12:23 PM
Yes, but its one thing to have the hierarchies be present in the back of your mind and another to see the stark contrasts so vividly right in front of you.
Posted by: gesticulate wildly | July 25, 2008 at 05:23 PM
The stark contrasts are vividly right in front of me. I guess folks who live in gated communities can pretend not to see the stark contrasts. But I live in a mixed use area that includes large single family dwellings, apartments, bars, businesses, and abandoned buildings.
Posted by: Jodi | July 25, 2008 at 05:57 PM