To see or to experience - that is the question. Tourist Gaze as motivation for travel.
Author: Lech Guzowski
2 Commentries
Why do people travel? What is the driving force behind their decision to choose one place over another? Over centuries the reasons for travelling have been changing, but usually revolving around travelling for culture and pleasure purposes Nowadays, the most common categorization is 'business' and 'pleasure'. A theory called the Tourist Gaze says that the motivation that makes people leave their normal places of work and residence for short periods of time is to gaze upon and experience different scenes, landscapes or landmarks which are out of the ordinary. This paper sets out to explore the concept of the tourism gaze in more detail by looking at the historical development of travel and tourism. Also, different approaches will be looked at including the 'places one must see, and the ongoing discussion tourist vs. traveller.
Travelling to explore and learn about other cultures is not a new phenomenon. Medieval times saw the religious pilgrimages as a reason for visiting remote places of worship. "Grand Tours" in the 17th century were embarked upon by young aristocrats for educational purposes. However, it was not until 1840s when travel became available for the wider population. It was due to middle class being wealthy enough to travel for pleasure. The technological advancements in the 20th century caused an extensive growth in travel, which became part of nearly everybody's yearly life cycle.
The tourist gaze is directed to features of landscape and landmarks that are unlike the ones that one can witness in one's everyday surroundings. When a tourist sees a small village in England he associates the gaze with 'real olde England'. In any historic period it has been constructed as a contrast to its opposition, the non-tourism forms of social experience and consciousness. Over the years the tourist gaze has been questioned concerning its authenticity. Consider, for example, the Hula dance, which originated as a religious performance at the platform temple and now is performed on stages for tourists.
As for tourist attractions they have been defined as an empirical relationship between a tourist, a sight and a marker (piece of information about a sight). Markers come in a variety of forms; i.e. guidebooks, slide shows, souvenir matchbooks, photographs, etc. Sights that attract tourist are the well-marked ones and include mountain ranges, the Mona Lisa painting or even entire nation-states like the Vatican.
Tourists chose the places to gaze upon on the basis of anticipation of intense pleasure involving different senses than those normally encountered. The choice can also be made on the base of wanting to see a live event, scheduled to take place at a particular moment. The gaze and tourism itself is also often about the body-as-seen, for example the Hula dance. In simple terms, travel is motivated by the need of co-presence that involves seeing or touching or hearing or smelling or tasting a particular place.
In modern tourism sightseeing has its own moral structure which is a collective sense that certain sights must be seen. If one goes to London, one 'must see' Big Ben; if one goes to Rome, one 'must see' the Colosseum; if one goes to Paris, one 'must see' the Louvre, etc. The 'must see' approach brings on the subject of the 'sight sacralization' process, which involves a site 'going' through five different stages; naming, framing and elevation, enshrinement, mechanical reproduction, social reproduction.
However, both the sight sacralisation and the 'must see' approach have been questioned, with most criticism falling on to the latter. The ongoing discussion about the tourist vs. traveller is only spurred on by the 'must see' attitude. A Tourist, as oppose to a traveller, will not spent too long on marvelling at a beautiful landscape simply because he needs to run to see X, Y and Z. Nowadays most people go to Paris just to see the Eiffel Tower, very often not realizing there are dozens of other remarkable places worth visiting merely because they did not devote the time to do some research. They go to see it only because it is in Paris and it is famous for being famous.
Looking at the tourist vs. traveller debate which is driven by the 'must see' approach brings the question, is it the tourist gaze experience still true? . People should learn about the places they are going to and once there get local and not rush. However, if the tourist gaze is constructed as an opposition to the non-tourist experience maybe we have to be tourists not travellers. The lifestyle is much faster than a century ago leaving less time for appreciation and experiencing things. The answer is difficult and quite possibly will be delivered in the future when looking back and making a judgement will be more appropriate.
Urry, J. (2002): The Tourist Gaze, 2nd Edition, London: Sage
MacCannell, D. (1999) The Tourist. London: California Press.
Kendle, A. (2006) 4 Ways to be a traveller, not a tourist [online]. http://www.vagabondish.com/4-ways-to-be-a-traveler-not-a-tourist/
Travelling to explore and learn about other cultures is not a new phenomenon. Medieval times saw the religious pilgrimages as a reason for visiting remote places of worship. "Grand Tours" in the 17th century were embarked upon by young aristocrats for educational purposes. However, it was not until 1840s when travel became available for the wider population. It was due to middle class being wealthy enough to travel for pleasure. The technological advancements in the 20th century caused an extensive growth in travel, which became part of nearly everybody's yearly life cycle.
The tourist gaze is directed to features of landscape and landmarks that are unlike the ones that one can witness in one's everyday surroundings. When a tourist sees a small village in England he associates the gaze with 'real olde England'. In any historic period it has been constructed as a contrast to its opposition, the non-tourism forms of social experience and consciousness. Over the years the tourist gaze has been questioned concerning its authenticity. Consider, for example, the Hula dance, which originated as a religious performance at the platform temple and now is performed on stages for tourists.
As for tourist attractions they have been defined as an empirical relationship between a tourist, a sight and a marker (piece of information about a sight). Markers come in a variety of forms; i.e. guidebooks, slide shows, souvenir matchbooks, photographs, etc. Sights that attract tourist are the well-marked ones and include mountain ranges, the Mona Lisa painting or even entire nation-states like the Vatican.
Tourists chose the places to gaze upon on the basis of anticipation of intense pleasure involving different senses than those normally encountered. The choice can also be made on the base of wanting to see a live event, scheduled to take place at a particular moment. The gaze and tourism itself is also often about the body-as-seen, for example the Hula dance. In simple terms, travel is motivated by the need of co-presence that involves seeing or touching or hearing or smelling or tasting a particular place.
In modern tourism sightseeing has its own moral structure which is a collective sense that certain sights must be seen. If one goes to London, one 'must see' Big Ben; if one goes to Rome, one 'must see' the Colosseum; if one goes to Paris, one 'must see' the Louvre, etc. The 'must see' approach brings on the subject of the 'sight sacralization' process, which involves a site 'going' through five different stages; naming, framing and elevation, enshrinement, mechanical reproduction, social reproduction.
However, both the sight sacralisation and the 'must see' approach have been questioned, with most criticism falling on to the latter. The ongoing discussion about the tourist vs. traveller is only spurred on by the 'must see' attitude. A Tourist, as oppose to a traveller, will not spent too long on marvelling at a beautiful landscape simply because he needs to run to see X, Y and Z. Nowadays most people go to Paris just to see the Eiffel Tower, very often not realizing there are dozens of other remarkable places worth visiting merely because they did not devote the time to do some research. They go to see it only because it is in Paris and it is famous for being famous.
Looking at the tourist vs. traveller debate which is driven by the 'must see' approach brings the question, is it the tourist gaze experience still true? . People should learn about the places they are going to and once there get local and not rush. However, if the tourist gaze is constructed as an opposition to the non-tourist experience maybe we have to be tourists not travellers. The lifestyle is much faster than a century ago leaving less time for appreciation and experiencing things. The answer is difficult and quite possibly will be delivered in the future when looking back and making a judgement will be more appropriate.
Urry, J. (2002): The Tourist Gaze, 2nd Edition, London: Sage
MacCannell, D. (1999) The Tourist. London: California Press.
Kendle, A. (2006) 4 Ways to be a traveller, not a tourist [online]. http://www.vagabondish.com/4-ways-to-be-a-traveler-not-a-tourist/