Romania?

I did notice that Rick Steves does not have any information about Romania and that did make me nervous.

Tamera, Steves is not the only source of travel information. Use a bradt Guide to Romania. There are anumber of travelers on this site who have been there including me. I would go back in a second. We loved it and very seldom was there a language problem.

I'll check it out, Monte. So hard never having been to either place and knowing this is probably a one-shot deal...and the only time I expect just my daughter and I will be able to travel together. I want it to be as positive as possible. Thanks.

Sorry but guess I am a nasty mother, but if one of my sons would do this to me I would just say sorry, I have spent X number of hours researching and planning this and since I am paying for it (assume you are), we are going to a place I feel comfortable, Ireland. That is just my opinion.

You've raised a couple of separate issues. One is Romania itself. I haven't been, but I agree that Rick Steves is not the only source of travel information; I'd never let the fact that he doesn't include a place in his books stop me from going, if other books, etc made a place look appealing. As you've already seen in this thread, there's a range of opinions about Romania, as with almost every place in the world. So, if you want to go, do so, and if you don't, go somewhere else. But the other issue is more problematic. You had set up a trip to one place (Ireland) and were looking forward to it, and your daughter is trying to change the plan in mid-stream. This is one for a family therapist, not a travel board. You have to decide if you're going to accede to her wishes, to put your foot down, or follow some third path (not sure how avoiding Ireland got you to Romania; there's lots of other places to see besides these, if you need to compromise). And we really can't help you in this; again, you've already had some replies advocating each. Good luck in whatever you choose, and I hope you end up enjoying wherever you do go!

Tamera, me again. You know I am biased. I never met a Romanian that I didnt like. Well, there were the two gangs of old men in downtown Bucharest throwing rocks across the street at each other, but I'm sure that was an exception (and quite funny). I'm sort of like some of the others as I am not so gentle with my kids feelings on such matters. Sibu is a wonderful town complete with old fortress walls. It was a UNESCO world heritage town in 2008 or 2009 or 2010 (dont remember exactly). From Sibu there are a lot of decent day trips. Of course Ireland is real too.

Heck, if I am going to be biased, here is my suggestion: http://www.gillesvidal.com/sziget2008/budapestchateau.htm

Hi, I suggest Rough Guide on Romania as a source for your research. Good that you're considering Sibiu (Hermannstadt). I would too, since it's on my list. As for the language barrier: a lot of Romanians are multilingual, German and English among the languages.

Fred what was your favorite town when you visited Romania? Here is some information on Sibu.
http://www.romaniatourism.com/sibiu.html On the otherhand Sighisoara while a tiny bit more rustic is absolutely stunning. Prince Charles keeps a home there.

I have not been there yet. As I said certain towns there are on my bucket list. Thanks for the information.

Thanks for that panoramic pic of Romania. First, let me say that this trip is about my daughter. I will have many opportunites to travel (as will she some day), but I wanted to go somewhere with her that she really wanted to go. She kept dropping it in my lap saying whatever I wanted to do would be fine. So I ran with Ireland, familiarlized myself with it, "met" the people...and then got an email from her saying her class had gone to Scotland for five days and it was amazing. I threw out there that Ireland is probably scenery-wise much like Scotland (never having been myself), and maybe she'd want to go somewhere different then...like Romania, since the landlord of the Romania apartment had written me twice trying to convince me that it was the hot spot to go. She said, "Yeah, we can go there. That would be fun. Ireland probably is a lot like Scotland." So there, now I've cleared my daughter. I didn't tell her I was sold on Ireland because I want this to be about her. (I'll have my turn with my husband.) I appreciate all the opinions. I'm throwing them all back at her and this time SHE can do the research! Thank you all.

Well, glad you made your decision, but if you ever have the chance to visit Romania it is a beautiful country with a ton to offer....
Not sure which Ralph was referring to as filet vs old big mac... but I have been to both and actually while I enjoyed Ireland and it's people I do not feel the need to return, however I would go back to Romania in a minute and I am next spring.

The beautiful pano was Budapest, Hungary.

I'm sure Romania is fine, but since you said this is all about your daughter, why not press her to give you a few options of some places she would like to visit? If one of them sounds great to you, select it, and you're all set. Seems easy enough to me anyway. What country is she studying in? You only have 5 days, so, perhaps, geography might help in making a decision.

Well, the decision has been made. She's been out of internet range for days and just checked in and was excited about the plans I'd made. Good to have that decision made. We're going from London, where she's studying, to Shannon, Ireland. Now I'm hoping there's a B&B in Shannon that isn't coming up on HomeAway. And I'm hoping that it's close enough to things that we can stay there for a couple days. Have made contact with a very pleasant family in a B&B in Dublin where we'll spend the last couple days. I was too nervous to start out driving in Dublin and thought starting in Shannon might be easier...but now I have to rush back to Shannon to return the car and catch the flight so I hope that doesn't backfire. I'm thrilled at the thought of going to Ireland and of having the decision made! I guess I'd better go to the Ireland board and ask for suggestions since I'm rambling on under Romania, huh? Thanks so much for your help. So excited to go meet our new friends!

Ralph dislikes Budapest as well, but that's way okay. If there were only one perspective on life it would indeed be a boring life. Glad Tamera has a plan. Dress warm, bring an umbrella and embrace what ever you find and it will be a wonderful trip.

Again, thanks to everyone for your input. SO many places to see, so little time. It's opened my eyes to some spots for my husband and I to visit though. Seven months and counting....empty nesters!!! Over to the Ireland board to get some input. Appreciate you!

Again, thanks to everyone for your input. SO many places to see, so little time. It's opened my eyes to some spots for my husband and I to visit though. Seven months and counting....empty nesters!!! Over to the Ireland board to get some input. Appreciate you!

I'm a little late to this but I'm chiming in to say that I'm guessing for you that Ireland was a better choice, honestly. I just got back from spending 5 nights in Romania and while it was an interesting and rewarding experience, I'd say it's best stuited for moderate-to-advanced-level international travelers and I feel that some of the Romania champions on this board sometimes provide a glossed-over view of the country (sorry guys! I respect your advice but maybe you're just more hardy than me!) Language can be a problem in Romania. Surprisingly, I found it to be less of a problem in Transyvlania (where Sibiu is, although I didn't go there, I went to Brasov instead) than in Bucharest, the capital. There is absolutely no guarantee that people who work in transit - train personnel, ticket sellers, etc - will speak any English, or be very receptive to your attempts to speak and understand Romanian. This was a recurring issue for us. Scamming is also an issue, we were told by locals (born and raised in Bucharest) to not take taxis from the old town, as they will rip you off, and this apparently holds true for many tourist areas all over the country. (Since many don't use meters, you can try to get around this by negotiating a price in advance). Stray dogs roam everywhere, apparently sometimes they can be hostile although we didn't witness this. Seatbelts aren't provided in many taxis, and the driving is quite dangerous. Pickpocketing is something you really have to watch out for in many places. I would return to Romania, but it's not someplace that I'd send novice travelers, or unadventurous ones. I have spoken to several people in person who have traveled there who had similar conclusions.

Could not agree more with Sarah, and this is coming from someone who has different travel tastes (Belarus anyone?). It is fantastic that people are suggesting places like Romania, Bulgaria etc. but be realistic about your comfort level and interests for travel; had a family member have to go to Rom. for work (they had only ever been to W. Europe)and they could not deal at all. Just my 2 cents.

Sarah, i read your post sort of fast and thought you were talking about NYC. Seriously, I only recommend Romania with a guide. Not that its unsafe, because i bet its no worse on average than NYC, but the language and transportation can be tricky. And a trip to Romania with a guide and a car isn't much more expensive than a solo trip to Rome.

I'm far from an experienced traveler!

Crime index in London: 59.87 Crime index in Dublin: 55.91 Crime index in Paris: 47 Crime index in Bucharest: 28.12 Not sure why people still insist on giving Eastern Europe a bad publicity.
It's way safer than most cities in Western Europe and USA. http://www.numbeo.com/crime/rankings.jsp

John that was really interesting thanks for sharing.

I'm not interested in giving Eastern Europe bad publicity - I have loved everywhere I've gone in "Eastern" Europe (depends how you define Eastern but includes Hungary, Bosnia, Serbia, Croatia) without reservations except Romania, and I don't think all of Romania is unsafe. But there are parts of Bucharest - including parts that tourists will likely need to go to - that definitely feel at the shady end of the travel deal, and I don't say this as some shrinking suburbanite. Oakland, CA is my adopted home city, OK? I'm one of those people that pushes Marsielle on this forum when most people seem freaked out by it's reputation. I would have no hesitation about recommending Belgrade, Budapest, or Sarajevo to a novice traveler with good common sense and an open mind. And the trouble with Romania is that to get anywhere I just think that Bucharest is a little trickier to navigate if you're traveling independently sans guide or tour. And I went with an open mind expecting the rumors to be overblown, and found them to be very much on target. I was warned repeatedly about safety issues by the couple we stayed with who are both Bucharest natives, as well as other Romanians we spoke with on the trip. It may be an EU country, but traveling in it independently can feel like a third world experience at times. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but it's something people should be aware of before they decide to go.

FYI, she is now going to Ireland, read the section on what I think is called " the west".

Romania is totally unsafe...it's the home of Nosferatu, Lycanthropes, and such for crying out loud. I would never go there.

I will agree that you are best off with a guide in Romania and that Bucharest deserves a respect for some caution when visiting; as does NYC and to about the same degree depending on the neighborhood you are staying in. Acutally I wouldnt go to Romania to see Bucharest. Generally you have to lay over a night there when entering the country by plane and i would limit my street walking after dark out of common sense; but with a guide, no problems at all and there is a good days worth of interesting sights and lessons in Bucharest (maybe two). A room and a guide in Romania will cost you about the same as a 3 star hotel in Paris so its not a big deal to hire the help. ONce out of Bucharest, like out of any major city, the countryside is a lot less tense and the people very kind ........... and its well worth any uneasyness you may feel in Bucharest.

This is as much for the exercise as for anything else. I noticed while traveling that from time to time I would get a negative comment if I refereed to Romanians, Bulgarians or Hungarians or Slovakians or Czechs or.... as Eastern Europeans. Generally speaking no one seemed to appreciate it. But how wrong could they be!!! I grew up in the United States and of course they are all Eastern Europeans!! There was even that Churchill speech about Eastern Europe behind the Iron Curtain!! Well upon investigating the speech I found out he referenced Central and Eastern Europe behind the Iron Curtain. Upon doing even more research I discovered that, well, the concept of East and West isn't clear so I had better respect what they think of as themselves and not try to impose my cultural reference points on them. So here is the best I could determine:
EASTERN EUROPE without much debate includes: Russia (parts of), Ukraine, Belarus, Moldova and Kazakhstan. However, Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia are also Eastern European but they escape the label at times by using the term "the Caucasus". Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania would be thought of as Eastern Europe but they avoid the label by using the term "Baltic States". CENTRAL EUROPE without much debate includes: the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia. Germany is either Central or Western Europe depending on who you talk to while Slovenia is either Central or Southeastern Europe depending on who you talk to. Croatia, Serbia and Romania belong either in Southeastern Europe or Central Europe depending on who you talk to. From personal experience, friendships and business relationships I feel pretty good about this list being the most politically correct on the ground over there. Clear as mud?

Posted on another site, she is now going to Ireland!

I don't understand the point of your exercise. From any high school history course, one learns that East and West (as the concept applies to Europe during the Cold War) essentially meant being either under the Soviet sphere of influence or under the U.S./Western European sphere of influence. The Iron Curtain was an actual physical boundary, separating Warsaw Pact and NATO nations in Europe. East and West used more broadly speaks to differences in philosophy, ideology, religion, culture, and a host of other things. It's not a matter of imposing your cultural reference points on somebody else as much as it's a reference based in historical fact. I suspect the issue you have described is more a matter of someone identifying as a Czech, a Pole, or a Hungarian and not as an Eastern European. Maybe this is the point you're making?

I think he meant to say that the term "Eastern European" connotes communism or ex-Soviet Union. And most people in east of Europe hate being labelled as such.

John, Bingo! and more. And outside of the US very few people have ever defined that region the way we do. Even Churchill's Iron Curtain closed off, according to Churchill in the famous speech; CENTRAL and Eastern Europe. I just point this out as a curiosity and as a note to consider when speaking with the folks over there. Around here, when i talk to friends i tell them i am off to Eastern Europe when i leave for Budapest. They understand it that way. When i arrive i tell my friends there that it feels good to be back in Central Europe; because thats how they understand it. Ha! This really isnt being any different than learning a few phrases in a foriegn language to be polite and to show some respect. But it does rile people up for some reason. Maybe we are too Ameri-Centeric (i made that up). HA!

Is it really a desire to not be associated with communism and the Soviet Union, or is it more of a natural inclination to be described as Czech instead of Eastern European, because being Eastern European (or even Central European) has no meaning for you whatsoever but being Czech is everything to you? Despite Rick's best attempts to make everyone here believe in some concept of a United States of Europe, Germans don't refer to themselves as Europeans...they are Germans...period. And wouldn't it also be strange if a Romanian declared to his American friend that he was happy to be back in North America? What's the difference? Romania-centric? You could take it a step further and consider the Basques, some Flemish, some Walloons, or even some Quebecers. It's unlikely these folks would first consider themselves, Spanish, French, Belgian, European, or even Canadian. Certainly not European or North American. But I digress. My original point is that Romania should be avoided at all costs, because it's unsafe due to Nosferatu and all the Lycanthropes running around there.

I sort of like these discussions. Until WWII it is my understanding that among Europeans that everything west of the Ukraine was thought of as being in the center of Europe. In those days I don't think the subject was as heavily catalogued as now. I don't get the impression that people ran around declaring to be Central Europeans because it just didn't matter. Then along comes the Cold War and the Americans label the Soviet satellite states as "Eastern Europe". Probably to create a clear and definable foe for discussion. Those countries in the Soviet sphere were generally isolated from US propaganda and had no idea that they had been catalogued as Eastern Europe. You understand that if we had given up Austria to the Soviets (and we almost did) then without moving an inch Austria would have gone from Western Europe to Eastern Europe in the eyes of the Americans. Then the wall falls and the tourists arrive and the definition the people of the region had never known is imposed upon them. And yes, I am certain it is a bit more frustrating because there are some negative connotations attached to it (and for me at least some positive). Now when I land and say it is great to be back in Central Europe it's to respect that the region is special to me. We land in Budapest, unpack, and then generally hit the road to another country in the region for a few days. So, yes, my friends there understand that I am glad to be back in HungarySlovakiaRomaniaBulgaria. But good point. And don't get me wrong. I don't really care too much. Other than being an interesting discussion no one is going to get mugged in Prague for saying they love being in Eastern Europe. The ignorance will be noted and the next trinket will be stuck in your face for sale.

Was in Romania last year and can tell you it's actually pretty safe. It's not as developed as western countries, but with a car and/or a guide you'll do fine. I have visited Sibiu and it's a nice little town. The Transylvania region is full of little towns like it, and if you drive around you can see plenty interesting places. Most young people speak English, no problem getting around. When I visited Sibiu I had to change a local train, and it was a little scary first when I saw the train - old, a lot of gypsies riding with you, but they're just commuting with you not trying to pick your pocket.

You know, this "Romania is great, if you have a car/guide" thing is pretty annoying. A lot of people have been pushing Romania with a guide without mentioning that they only travel in Romania WITH A GUIDE basically a private driver. Which makes is cost equivalent to Paris, or whatever, which means you're getting a crappy deal for Romania, which is dirt cheap. Is this not a Rick Steves board? What happened to the "backdoor"? Because the reality of "backdoor" Romania is that it's challenging and frustrating but you are getting a great deal for your travel dollar (why bother coming to Romania if you're going to spend as much as you would in Paris to buy a private guide anyway???) Romania is a great deal - AND a frustrating experience - if you travel independently via public transit or car. And I'm calling bullshit on people who said driving in Romania is easy - are you high? Were you not paying attention? Driving in Romania is insane. If you have nerves of steel , do it, but you will be passed at 80 mph on blind corners while a donkey cart is on your right - that's just standard. Let's just give people a realistic idea of a place, and if you love a place because you had a fancy private tour the entire time it's worth mentioning before you recommend it to independent travelers who are going to be spending a 1/3rd of what you spent. Romania is cool but it's not a place for the typical "hop on a train and go" types. And I don't care who considers themselves "eastern" (aka nobody) or that the OP decided to go to Ireland, I think all people considering Romania should read this thread and decide accordingly.

hmmmmm. I dont think the Russians or Kazakhstanians (?) have an issue with the eastern european label. Romania aka Europe through the side door

Having been born in Bucharest, I obviously have great knowledge about Romania. I left when I was 24. I am also very much an American, after having lived in the US for 20 years, as well as a bit French, since I speak the language and have lived in Paris for a while as well. Every year I spend about 2 months in Europe, with a month in Romania. Here's what I think about travelling there. The country has great food, a rich history and fantastic cultural heritage, as well as outstanding natural beauty. It is still on the cheap side, although not a bargain anymore. The train infrastructure is not particularly good, with old tracks and low speed trains, but decent cars overall. The roads are fairly good and getting better every year. Driving a car is a nightmare though, with buses and passenger vans not being much better either. Cab drivers will try to scam you if you are not a local. The crime level is generally low, but there are other dangers and annoyances to consider, among them stray dogs (lots of them!), and the occasional gypsy beggars. A couple of experienced and more adventurous travellers will have a great time there. On the other hand, a single woman with little experience will have a terrible time. Students on a budget can spend three weeks there as opposed to a week in France. Each one of us has different priorities. As far as East versus Central Europe, here is what I think. Transylvania belongs to the Central (Habsburg) European world, while Muntenia and Moldova clearly belong to the Balkans. Northern Moldova is rural, simple and clean, but more Central than Eastern European. Bottom line is that I would not recommend my friends to visit Romania, unless they have already been to all the other 20 European countries that are more developed and tourist-friendly. I am confident that this appraisal will remain valid for the next 20 years, possibly even longer. Unfortunately.

Thanks for the good analysis and assessment of Romania and its different areas. Historically, I agree saying that Transylvania (Siebenbürgen) with its prominent urban centers Sibiu (Hermannstadt), Brasov (Kronstadt), etc. are part of (East) Central Europe in orientation. That place has certainly interesting towns to visit.

Liviu - thanks for weighing in. I'd forgotten how frustrated this thread made me a few months ago! Agreed about the natural beauty of Romania and the fantastic food. I was just telling a friend the other day that I think Romania has the best national cusiene of ANY country in Europe. Such flavorful, wonderful food! The beer and wine wasn't bad either...and I like palinka (spelling?) too. Now that I've had time to recover from a tiring and stressful trip, I would recommend Romania to experienced independent travelers, with a few caveats, the biggest one being that if you want to visit Romania, it's best to do just that - don't do like I did and make it part of a jaunt across the Balkans as well. Getting to the neighboring countries via public transit (particularly Serbia and Bulgaria) is surprisingly difficult.