Overcrowding? Back Door finds?

Interesting and I share the overall opinion.

Would you share the name of the documentary? Which channel or source?

Yes, you do make sense. We have friends in Germany, specifically in Weinheim and Rimbach. Lovely small towns but we didn’t see too many tourists. There could have been German tourists but they would blend in.

Also, our apartment in Croatia is in the city of Rijeka. In all the years I’ve been visiting there, it is only since the war ended do you see tourists. Not many, but a few, mostly backpackers working their way down the coast. Is it a nice city, yes. Does it have a pedestrian only street, yes. Does it have great restaurants, yes. Does it have beautiful beaches, yes. Does it have a large cathedral, yes. Is it in Rick’s guidebook, no. But Opatija is on his tour. It is located a few miles away along the coast. A short bus ride separates the two places. Plenty of tourists there. And I understand completely why Opatija is crowded and Rijeka isn’t. Just an FYI, Rijeka is where the torpedo was invented and they have a museum about it.

Us, we travel to see the places we read about in history books, see in movies, other travelers write about, or have family. For us, there isn’t enough time to dig into the local life, it’s too big a world.

I would suspect the only way for someone to find a "real new back door" would be to rent a car and just drive through villages, towns and regions of any country until they find some place that looks and feels interesting to them, stop, park, and just mingle around in the location.

This would be an excellent way to discover some new "back doors". However, most travelers just don't have the time to drive throughout a country looking for a new place to visit. 99% of all travelers plan to some degree. Also, a language barrier will probably come into play in these off the path locations making it a little less desirable for those who do not speak the local language.

As you say, the "current back doors" are not real finds anymore because they now anticipate tourists.

It is trailblazers such as you that bring attention to new areas and share here, like your recommendation of the Harz region. Thanks for sharing.

But if you want to know what life is actually like in places--if you
are prepared for something that is imperfect because it is real, that
can't afford the illusion or the modernization or is forgotten, where
you can truly see what life is like for the locals, where adventure
and weirdness might disappoint but are equally or more likely to make
you fall in love--that true "back door" experience that many think is
gone--where do you go?

There are certainly places all over the world that fit the description. Thanks to the internet and television and the general shrinking of the world, what were stark cultural differences between many of the great cities and what we are familiar with in the US are not as defined as they once were. Even a small German village with few tourists can have a KFC. Where once the RS theme was back doors to popular tourist destinations … those doors are now all superhighways. The concept of a back door these days is more viable when discussing back doors to Europe as a whole.

Maybe some of the under visited Nordic countries, possibly the Baltics but with certainty the old communist bloc and former soviet republic countries can provide a new way into Europe where life and culture still exists for the sake of the culture and not for tourism. A little further afield maybe the “…stan” countries.

But move quickly. We saw a lot of southern Croatia turn from backwater to tourism ground zero in under 15 years. Others will follow.

So, Paris and the Black Sea Coast of Bulgaria make a nice trip.

In my case, the answer is typically related to a special interest. Last year, I posted a question where I mentioned Frome, England. I traveled to Frome on a day trip from London because it was a filming location for Sanditon and Poldark. Consider it a bit of a pilgrimage for this fan. This year, it was walking along High Street in Alton to return from Chawton.

What I found in Frome, beyond the recognizable streets from the shows, was a market town with active shops, coffee spots, bakeries, interesting architecture, and a lively Saturday atmosphere. UK posters can correct me if I’m wrong, but Frome seems like a popular regional destination—a weekend day trip spot that those who live within a certain radius are more apt to know about than international tourists. Equivalent types in the U.S. are places like Staunton or Lexington, VA, or Frederick, MD—not because they look like Frome but because people go there for a day/weekend—train access, cute shops, old buildings/history, thrift stores, coffee shops, tea rooms, etc. Tourist things to see but as much “workaday” as geared to your get-away travelers. What I’ve learned from places like this is that human nature is much the same country to country—at least in this example.

Interesting topic. We find our most enjoyable experiences through longer stays, walking/hiking, riding public transportation, and not seeking big or “must do” sites.

• Two days in Venice means hitting the major sites and getting frustrated; one week there means getting into areas seldom seen by tourists.
• Four days in London has one in the midst of crowds non-stop; two weeks allows leisurely walks through parks, visits to smaller villages less than an hour away, even finding nature in and around this great city.
• Long stays lead to finding “your” cafe or coffee shop for morning coffee or evening apperitivo in even in the sprawl of Rome or Paris.
• Long stays allow finding local events (the small village celebrations of King Charles’ coronation were fun to stumble upon), seldom seen sites, unusual museums. Seeing the witches dance? Sign me up.

I often see people post about wanting to find an out of the way place that is "authentic", "Live like a local", and experience the "culture"

Having traveled regularly to Europe, in more trips than I can recall off the top of my head (must be somewhere nearing 30?), I get a bit of a chuckle from the thought, and rarely respond, maybe not wanting to burst their bubble, or be seen as a pessimist as to their plans.

First, Yes, there are hundreds of small towns worth a stop...and many not worth the effort. Maybe many more medium sized towns and cities that get overlooked, and deserve some attention, and would welcome the tourist dollars.

In these places, you can have a much more relaxed experience, have to deal with the local language much more, and it can certainly feel like a more "local" experience. But it is not, or at not at least what many wax on about in their desires.

As much as you try, as considerate as you are, even if you know the language...you are still a tourist, or at the least, not a local, even if you were to have a visa and live there several years in many cases, and certainly not in a week stay.

One can certainly interact with the locals, have conversations, but usually at a polite level, rarely at that "confidant" level. But there is nothing wrong with that. The lady at the bakery may get to recognize you, the restaurant anticipate what you want, escort you to one of the better tables, but all that is common courtesy and good business.

Maybe understand that you are always a guest, not one of the family, though often, as good hosts do, you may be treated as one of the family.

As for "authentic culture" I see many more expecting an impression, a fantasy as the OP said, rather than embracing modern reality. It is easy, still happens to me every trip. As Americans (or Canadians, or...) we are bombarded with images through TV, Movies, Novels, through local celebrations of heritage in many immigrant locales, and develop what we believe German, French, Italian, or Scottish culture to be...and we are usually woefully mistaken, seeking some idyllic, pastoral image of Germans in their lederhosen and Scots in kilts. Does that image exist? in many cases to a degree, but current culture is much more complex.

There is nothing wrong with seeking out legitimate history and appreciating a cultural aspect that is maybe more what once was, than what is, but it is important to see these things for what they are. Most Scots do not wear kilts, or even think about clans; lederhosen is a Bavarian thing, worn to fests or as part of your uniform at the restaurant. We seem to be searching for a culture from the 1700's or 1800's, which makes sense, since that is probably the last memories our forbears had when they left the place.

The most often question I see is someone seeking out restaurants where only locals eat, I always want to respond, "get off the beaten path, and find a McDonalds or Burger King", it will be full of locals. Want traditional food in Germany? A donor kebab is now as authentic as a sausage.

This is not a rant, but more a suggestion to appreciate the modern, complex, multicultural societies these countries have become. Most locals will not look or act like the stereotypical person you think a German, or Swede, or Italian does, cities will not all be quaint villages, food much more diverse, But embracing that can make your travels much richer.

Anytime someone mentions Rothenburg, many of us post about towns that are truly the same, but original and authentic. (100s of half-timbered houses, city walls, towers, ancient churches, lovely carved altars, not bombed in WW2) How many people go there?
I mention Büdingen all the time and every once in a while someone posts that they have gone there. Others mention Dinklebuhl, or Nordlingen, or Miltonberg. How many forum members go there?

Here in the state of Hessen, we have many towns on the Half-timbered route, like Limburg, Idstein, Marburg, and some that can't be bothered with that, like Michelstadt, Seligenstadt, Gelnhausen, etc. I mention them all the time, especially for Christmas markets or medieval markets. Not sure if anyone goes to them or not. They are all beautiful, original towns, with fabulous old churches in them.

Has Rick been to any of these towns? I doubt it. Has Rick been to one of the oldest churches in Germany (830), the Justinus church in Frankfurt Höchst? Nope. It doesn't interest him, because it doesn't fit in with his idea of Frankfurt being a modern city. I tried my best to get him to go see it. Just like he never mentions the medieval churches or wall paintings in one of the cloisters here in Frankfurt, though he has seen them and was dutifully impressed by them. Again, it doesn't fit the image he wants to present of Frankfurt. People will continue to think this is a modern city with nothing to offer but skyscrapers and banks.

It is what it is.

Interesting topic. We find our most enjoyable experiences through longer stays, walking/hiking, riding public transportation, and not seeking big or “must do” sites.

I co-sign this thought 100 percent.

We are "extended stay" gluttons. Our favorite extended stay destination: Paris. And talk about "back door" opportunities available within Paris, neighborhoods that don't make the typical "bucket list" we see here and elsewhere, ad nauseam.

Paris is a city to discover, on foot, neighborhoods and streets not listed in the guidebooks. Get lost in Paris, you won't regret it. Most people think of the back doors of Europe popularized by Rick Steves 40 years ago as small, hidden away villages, undiscovered by the masses, and while some still do exist, particularly in Eastern Europe, so many have been overrun, and the infrastructure simply can't support the tourists that flood their towns and villages.

What amazes me is the number of Americans who want to visit the "quaint" Cotswolds because Rick recommended it. Everyone goes to the same few villages when the whole country is full of lovely villages and landscapes. There are so many other places I would recommend people visit ahead of the Cotswolds, many of which are more easily accessible.

Full marks to those who recommend longer stays. Again, I'm always surprised by the number of people who go all the way to Europe for a week to 10 days, and expect to see multiple places. We once took out then little kids to London and Paris for a month. While we were in big cities, we had time to explore, and drink it all in. If time is more limited, stick to one or two locations rather than running around ticking things off a list.

Full marks to those who recommend longer stays. Again, I'm always
surprised by the number of people who go all the way to Europe for a
week to 10 days, and expect to see multiple places.

I doubt the average American can afford (money and career cost) to take off with the kids to Europe for a month. I was over 50 years old before I came close to being able to live up to your standard. I did quite a few 7 to 14 day trips when that was all I could do. Cant say that I regret staying home until I could do more.

For those that use the time and resources that they do have to broaden their understanding of the world and just plain have a good time; if only for a week, is something to be admired and respected.

EDIT, okay, I will run with Jojo's explination below and offer my apology.

I prefer itineraries that mix the familiar with the unknown. My only criteria for the unknown: 1) access by public transport and 2) a comfortable-looking place to sleep that is fairly close by.

Just got back from a trip that included Porto/Douro/Obidos with stays in the mostly-unheralded towns of Caldas da Rainha, Leiria, and Peniche. I did not reference Rick's materials for this trip and relied mostly on bus/rail maps and schedules for my planning. I was a little surprised, when I just now glanced at his planning-for-Portugal page, to find that Obidos ranks higher in importance than Porto. I was not surprised that the "lesser" destinations I chose were not mentioned.

Caldas, Peniche and Leiria were really interesting from the street level perspective. Unlike Obidos, these places had no tourists to speak of... I think I noticed one couple speaking English, and I heard German and Spanish here and there. But it was all-Portuguese otherwise. I enjoy wandering around new places to see what turns up. I got horribly disoriented in Peniche and in Caldas (I don't travel with a phone or reliable street maps) which was enormous fun. Perhaps I went places "where no American man has gone before?" I stumbled around neighborhoods, poking my head into shops and such, resting at an apartment-complex picnic bench, and eventually wandering into an elementary school on a Sunday afternooon, where locals were entering and exiting like ants. Thought maybe there was a flea market or such, but it turned out that this was voting day and this was the town's main polling place. Later I had to rely on my non-existent Portuguese skills to get myself pointed in the direction of my hotel. I followed the iffy directions as best I could until things became slightly familiar and I was able to self-guide myself to my hotel. In Caldas I stopped at a cafe for a soda and ended up also with something called a cavaca, which was a bit nasty, but this part of my trip was intended as an adventure rather than the fulfillment of some fantasy, right? There was clearly enough tourism in these places that restaurant and cafe employees needed English skills to serve their mostly European customers - so I was grateful after ordering a crepe with chocolate ice cream that I did not receive a sardine pizza.

Of course I did some advance sightseeing/planning for my better known destinations... there are always the usual "must-see" items on my trips... but getting lost and feeling stupid and out of place is often more interesting and more memorable later on.

Ms Jo, RS redefined “backdoor” some years ago so the term will be more in line with what he is marketing. Nothing is wrong with that. Pretty much his term to define. If he were to go back to the old definition for his trips, I wonder how many tourists he would have?

Ms Jo, i posted under Germany a question for you. Thank you for the help.

I doubt the average American can afford (money and career cost) to take off with the kids to Europe for a month. I was over 50 years old before I came close to being able to live up to your standard. I did quite a few 7 to 14 day trips when that was all I could do. Cant say that I regret staying home until I could do more.
For those that use the time and resources that they do have to broaden their understanding of the world and just plain have a good time; if only for a week, is something to be admired and respected.

Mr E, I took Simon's post a bit differently from your takeaway. He was really pointing out the folly of Americans who want itinerary advice here for a 7 to 10 day trip to Europe and how best to connect the dots of Paris / Switzerland / Rome / Venice (or something similar, we have all seen these posts). I scratch my head at these insane requests, and I usually make the argument for first time visitors who mention Paris to stick to Paris for a one week to 10 day trip, do a couple of day trips, and save the grand tour aspirations for a longer trip.

Anywhere that’s worth visiting will be ‘known’ at least locally. Rachel’s description of Frome is spot on. It’s not somewhere international visitors make a beeline for, but it’s well known as a lovely little town to visit for a wander about. Most people will be day trippers.

There are lots of similar places that we head to for a weekend walk or a short break. The thing is, they’re probably not that interesting to foreign tourists who have spent a lot of money to come and visit. You kind of want to see Chatsworth House and the Tower of London if you’ve flown half way around the world, not some perfectly charming but otherwise unremarkable small town.

We recently did a great 12 day tour with Road Scholar called "The Hidden villages and towns of Tuscany and Umbria.
We visited many smaller places that were intact Medieval cities or towns a bit off the beaten path.

The tour had us stay 5 nights in Siena for Tuscan towns and 4 nights in Spoleto. We did day trips to visit other places that were not so far away. It was great, there were crowds, but nothing like going to Rome or Florence.

Jojo, see my apology on the post you commented on.

But i do take some exception even to the revised understanding. I have know people who did the one or at best two night stays in a dozen different cities and towns over a short period time. For them it was a different kind of adventure. I can say I wouldnt enjoy it, but I cant say i wonder why they would do it. One old college buddy who has been back to Europe a dozen times since his race through Europe on his first visit talks more about that first trip than any of the longer more normal to RS people trips. I just dont judge. I suggest and try and make sure they know what they are doing then I try and help, when I can, make it the best of their type of holiday. But I use to push back. When someone would say they are coming to Budapest for 2 nights I woud tell them why bother. Then I figured it out, its their trip, not mine and I have helped put together a few brillian 2 night trips here.

My main purpose in being on the forum has become encouraging folks to break out of the Dublin-Galway-Dingle-Kenmare loop for their trip to Ireland, especially if they're driving. With a car, you can stay anywhere that meets your needs. This is true in every country. And the internet allows you to easily find accommodation that meets your needs (this is likely true in every country in Europe at this point). These folks always say they want to get "off the beaten track," yet they have chosen the most beaten track there is.

But i do take some exception even to the revised understanding. I have know people who did the one or at best two night stays in a dozen different cities and towns over a short period time.

My first trip to Europe 40 years ago was like that, 2 weeks, solo traveler, a Eurailpass in hand, and I covered a lot of ground...land in Frankfurt, 1st night Koblenz - Frankfurt - Romantic Road bus trip - Munich - Venice - Milan - Wengen - Lausanne - Paris - Frankfurt. And it was great, to be sure. So I get it...

But I was in my 20s, I was traveling solo - nobody else I had to accommodate - some of these posters with the crazy itineraries have several small children in tow, or they are themselves as old as I am now. Travel to and within Europe was a LOT cheaper back then, too - average hotel room for that trip was $15, (my hotel room in Wengen overlooking the valley was $10), the rail pass was a a couple hundred dollars, strong dollar era, etc. And I flew on frequent flyer miles...talk about an inexpensive trip...those were the days!

And in keeping with this thread about back doors, back in the 80s, the RS "back doors" were not overrun (Cinque Terre in particular comes to mind), but those days are gone forever, in the internet "bucket list" age we live in now. Europe was less overrun in general with tourists in the 80s, it was easy to do the one or two nights per stop travel back then, improvise on the fly and do it without reservations, something I would not dare do today.

When I comment on these threads, I offer my advice based on the poster's circumstances (age, kids?). But like you, Mr. E, ultimately I realize it is their trip - but if they come here asking for advice or comments on their proposed itinerary, I give them my hard earned advice, and they can clearly take it or leave it...

I think that the American tourists who actually want the "back door" experiences are few: they want to be entertained**. Travel is a luxury for most and multiple trips to the same European country or area is not always an option. And I think a large percentage dont want anything but to see the highlights, with a minimum of the unfamiliar and challenging.

It seems to me that most US-originated tours do their best to insulate their tour members from having to deal with things like non-English speakers, weird food, and strange customs. I think the value of RS's original concept of back doors was to get people to look beyond the basic destinations. Now he has been preaching for people to find their own back doors.

I'd love to do the deep dive into local cultures and dance with the witches above Thale. But it's unlikely that I will ever have enough time and money to exhaust all the "must-see" places in Europe first.

**The self-selected group that hangs here are the exceptions. Not everyone has the curiosity and imagination to want to have those experiences.

stan, the group that hangs here is pretty typical. Sometimes the majority is quiet, sometimes the majority doesnt want to confess. But look at where all the post are and the questions being asked. The vast majority are standard American holiday in Europe questions. Even the RS tours are standard American in Europe tours (a lot of short stops to tourist hot-spots, and a lot of ground covered over a short a period of time). But it works so why not.

Stan, you make a great point about the self-selecting group on here, which is kind of why I posted here. We have one time travellers, expats and European natives, and everything in between.

I am fully aware that travel is a privilege, and I absolutely get the limitations of time and money. I also understand that not everything is for everyone. I have been on package tours similar to RS (but with students and catered to school groups), and for that context, they are unbelievable--you can pack in a TON of cool sites, not have to worry about transport or decisions, meet cool people, and have the built in support of a guide. And of course the places people go are where they go for a reason.

I did like what Ms. Jo said, because I often feel that way--that we recommend place A and then people go to better-known place B anyway. Again, not necessarily wrong, but surprising how often this happens. I don't know if anyone here has been to Glückstadt despite my recommending it repeatedly.

I also like the idea of discovering Paris--many years in Hamburg and I am still finding new things all the time. One of the advantages of living in Europe is discovering lots of it one piece at a time. A road trip through France took us to a campsite in a regional nature preserve in Lorraine, a paleontological site near the Swiss border, and the village of Trevignin. I am lucky enough to also be part of a K9 SAR team, so we are always training in super obscure places. Furthermore, I am a horse person, which also takes me to out of the way places. So I fell in love with the views and feel of Neufeld on the mouth of the Elbe. I doubt I would drive that far if I only had limited time on my sole Europe trip, but if I were into sailing, it would be a place I would visit, and I am grateful I got to discover it.

But of course one can do this in the US, too--a roadtrip there had me stopping at 1880 town in South Dakota, while Mapleton, OR remains a favourite stop for a milkshake. Horses took me to places like Kennet Square, PA and Newnan, GA. And finding back doors in a city I lived in for a long time was something I enjoyed as well. A lot of it is about going through the world with an eye for beauty, I suppose. And for life and the people living it.

But yes, I am the type of traveler who visited Kyrgyzstan on a whim a few years back.

I am loving these responses. Keep 'em coming.

Oh, and the requested link to the documentary, which has AMAZING music:
https://www.ardmediathek.de/video/ndr-story/heimat-harz-wer-stoppt-den-niedergang/ndr/Y3JpZDovL25kci5kZS9wcm9wbGFuXzE5NjM3NDg4NV9nYW56ZVNlbmR1bmc?at_campaign=c0184&at_medium=feed&at_target=traf&at_adg=doku&at_ad=story-harz

You have given me a lot to think about why I travel the way I do. I love traveling but did not have the opportunity to travel much in my 30s and 40s. Now in my 50s I have started traveling again, but even then I have constraints of energy, time and money, especially related to health, family and career.

• Lack of resources: My travel in Europe is often sandwiched between flights to Asia (to visit family) from USA. So I tend to be in the international hubs, which are mostly top tier cities. For example, this September I am going to get 4 nights in London. This is going to be all the time I get in the UK this year. And hopefully I will feel well during my travels, which is never a given.
• Lack of research: Going to an out-of-the-tourist-path destination takes more research. A few years ago I planned a trip to the Chilterns in the UK, which I absolutely loved, but it took a lot of work (labor of love) to plan and execute. And this is not even a remote destination!
• Perceived safety issues: Sometimes, as a solo female traveler, I have felt that staying on the tried-and-tested path is safer. While I still take basic safety precautions, as I travel more, I am growing more confident, and this is becoming less of an issue. But in some areas, I still consider taking guided tours, which again keeps me on the common circuit, because this is where tours operate.
• FOMO: If I am honest, sometimes I also feel tempted by the fear of missing out (FOMO), especially when people say, oh you MUST visit X, Y or Z. Sometimes I travel with my husband and/or son, and then I have to deal with their FOMO too!

In a perfect world, I would travel slow and allow myself to ramble & get lost, but currently I have to compromise with a few days in between other responsibilities. But as I travel more, I am growing in confidence and learning to dig deeper, which takes me off the beaten path more often.

Interesting thoughts indeed, HowlinMad.

Of course, we often begin our travels with iconic places. Places we have heard of that fire the imagination. And in the U.S., the typical person has such a short vacation window to see them - if indeed they can get to Europe (or elsewhere) at all. As you state, there is absolutely nothing wrong with traveling like this and to these places. (Well, except overcrowding for locals as more people travel).

I think your question is aimed at the so-often stated desire to “live like a local” or find “places off the beaten track”. And is that realistic? Or desirable? Complex questions!

For myself only: I live like a local when I am home.

When I began to travel Europe, I wanted first to see places that I had read about that stuck in my head. As I traveled more, I began to isolate the feeling I got in certain countries and learn more about what I like as a traveler. And now I can afford to stay longer in places (and I move more slowly), I like staying longer in one spot. I think that does give me more time to find a better insight into day-to-day life there, but it is certainly not “living like a local”.

Off the beaten track? Yes, I think these places exist. And if you are looking for the rhythms of life in that culture, you find more of those when you stop longer. But I feel you are right - most people don’t truly want the lack of tourist infrastructure or the cultural inconveniences that go with “off the beaten path”. They just want the good stuff but without crowds of other people also wanting the good stuff.

Lots of thought-provoking posts here!

Thank you for the link. Impressive documentary, partly mixed with a reporter in a red BMW from late 80s / early 90s and his emotions and memories from earlier times.

And I think that this is one key. I never saw an academic field "tourism history"; so why certain destinations are getting through the decades and others not. A main question is why destinations become popular, another one is why they remain popular - and for what. You can take nearly every film location of a James Bond movie from the 60s and 70s to find that out. btw: the documentary did not mentioned Bad Harzburg which was a well known and demanded tourist destination in Harz from the mid 50s to the 80s.

My part 2 of this could be "What about Helmstedt?". Not far from Harz mountains nearly every German over 40 knows that its was a Autobahn crossing point at German-German border. But nearly nobody stopped at the town of Helmstedt which is an impressive small town - no recommendations on forums, nothing. And we can continue this list of cities in this region.

In business there is the wording of "too big to fail". So, maybe the big city locations with their selection of sights and basic business visitors are just too big to end this way?

Back to the beginning of the documentary: Sankt Andreasberg is now more known to Germans by the ARD crime series "Harter Brocken" (very entertaining and playing with the "smell" mentioned in the documentary) which is of course derived from Harzer Brocken (Mt. Brocken). Maybe this will bring more people back into the old charm of the forgotten villages of Harz mountains.

Swedish Ystad, a not very popular tourist destination before year 2000 - only a passing though ferry port, is now the destination with the highest ratio of tourists per inhabitants of the whole Baltic Sea - more than Copenhagen and Stockholm. Why? It was the film location of TV crime series Mankell's Waalnder. The future will show how substantial this is.

And there are places such as Dubrovnik which came too fast too close to the "sun" of movie fame and simply burned through by a brutal tourist demand which met a not well enough prepared community.

TexasTravelMom, I have seen your trip reports. You live like a local in the sense that the term was intended. RS calls it "like a temporary local" but I think the "temporary" is infereed even if not stated. https://www.ricksteves.com/travel-tips/sightseeing/temporary-european Having been here nearly 3 years, I sort of fit the RS definition, but I prefer "extended tourist".

Want traditional food in Germany? A donor kebab is now as authentic as a sausage.

Thanks. That's exactly my topic. But there are two sides to it :-)

When we talk about the larger cities, I agree with you. I'm always trying to convey that traditional food in Munich isn't just schnitzel (which, by the way, isn't even a Munich tradition) or pork knuckle. It's actually everything from the mentioned doner kebab to ramen soup, Italian pasta, and sushi. Everything you can imagine, from vegan sausage to Munich's white sausage.

In the countryside, it can be completely different. I went hiking in Franconian Switzerland (Pottenstein). Incidentally, that's also something I've never read about here. In any case, time stands still there, and the restaurant menus are also outdated.
Yes, it's nice to eat the Franconian specialty 'Schäufele with potato dumplings' once in a while, but please not meat all the time. On the last evening, I probably would have gone crazy if we hadn't driven to the next 'bigger' city for Vietnamese food. I probably would have died from vegetable withdrawal :-)

Overcrowding is a relative concept. A ton of places don't come close to being overcrowded in the summer. I only go in the summer. Tons of places in Germany and France hardly see international tourists and it will stay that way.

The easiest way to avoid overcrowding , being inundated with crowds, is go to places not on the agenda of international tourists, or if you are in the same places as they are, then it's a matter of accommodating yourself to that predicament if you regard it as such.

I generally don't allow myself to bothered by crowds but there are exceptions too.

In both Germany and France I've been to numerous "back door" or what I call, "backwater" places....Meissen, Halle, Frankfurt an der Oder, Neuruppin, Prenzlau, Babelsberg, Magdeburg , Bonn, Minden, Soest, Hildesheim, Schleswig, to name some of them and there are a lot more.

In France, aside from the obvious, less visited , except by French tourists (you go where they go !) are Amiens, Ardeche, Obernai, Arras, Bar-le-Duc, Troyes, Luneville, Grenoble, Soissons, Toulon, Metz, Toul, Rouen, Vichy, Lens, Lille, Toulon, to name a few.

"They just want the good stuff but without crowds of other people also wanting the good stuff."

This! And the thing is that a lot of places have this--everybody goes to the half-timbered houses of Rothenburg, but do they visit downtown Quedlinburg, which is equally cool and very accessible to visitors? People want the quaint village festival--so go to St. Andreasberg for Walpurgisnacht. The Harz (and I am using it as an example because of the documentary that inspired my post, but it IS just an example) has people who speak English, is a former (and in some places current) destination for local travelers, and has good roads and things to see and do. You can do a super long zipline over a canyon (Rappbodetalsperre), visit the former East German "weather" (listening) station, collect hiking stamps and enjoy hikes without seeing many other people, and find lots of artistic and lovely old architecture and facades. All the good stuff but without the crowds, with the "unique" Insta pictures, etc.

Nowadays if you are just a LITTLE bit adventurous, you can find that there are very few places that are truly undiscovered by tourists. On our trip to Kyrgyzstan a few years back, we discovered tons of backpackers and vacationers, none of whom were American, and infrastructure that included guided horseback expeditions, boat trips, luxury yurt camps, and even pretty adventurous looking hard core vehicles taking people the first miles up the mountain to start their hike. English and German got us almost everywhere (we had one tricky spot). It's not for everyone, but some (growing) infrastructure does exist!

Of course, there is the "flew too close to the sun" phenomenon--I love that imagery. The balance is key--becoming a "must see" a la Rothenburg without becoming a Venice is a narrow path.

Keep up the discussion--I am also taking notes on where people have found they like traveling!