The "right" way to travel......

I appreciate this post. For me personally, I like to pack in as much as possible and plan every minute of the day. But that is just my personality, and I enjoy the planning as much as the actual travelling. Going without a plan or things booked just makes me anxious. This also allows me to see more places with limited holiday time. It's definitely not for everyone and I totally agree there is no wrong or right way, just what is best for you. Also- I really like seeing the big sites. I'm not looking for off the beaten path things. But again, it's about doing what you enjoy.

Well stated Carol now retired!

Excellent post! So often a new poster shows up and the DEs (destination experts) and OHs (old hands) and PSFs (Pittsburgh Steeler Fans) steamroll the new poster with a "slow down". And if you happen into the fray as a CBF (Cleveland Browns Fan) and say "Heck, Ricks Steves tours follow that speed and Rick Steves suggested itineraries are this speed', well, you often get folks saying "Rick Steves?! That guy is all wet!"

With all that said the DEs and OHs generally give pretty good advice (with exception of the advice of being unnecessarily fussy about dress for operas!!!) What do I know? Not much.

Anyway, this forum is tops!

Happy travels!

Well stated - thanks for this post. In particular, the slow travel mavens are often taking for granted that they have the time and funds to prioritize, for example, sitting in a cafe for hours and people watching. If you haven't traveled much and have limited time and/or money, that seems like a ridiculous waste when you can do it at home for free. You've given us a timely reminder that everyone's situation is different.

I like this thread a lot, thanks CNR.

Just like the joke that goes whenever three whoevers get together they produce four opinions, there are even more ways to travel than there are people.

I contain multitudes of travel preferences myself -- I aspire to blitz through-travel where I get off the train, do the town highlights, and get back on the train. Repeat as desired. But I also aspire to having the time and money to settle in to a small spot and let it grow on me for days on end.

While we are at it, there is another small sin that many of us in the Forum are guilty of --
trying to share someone else's spotlight. ::

Someone will post about a new discovery or a great experience, and others will comment 'oh, we've been going there for years!' or 'that's one of our favorites, too' or 'Xyz is good but Abc is even better!'

Agreeing with a post is fine, sure, but it's also a fine line between concurring in support of someone's report and using someone's report as an occasion to boast about your own travels.

Again, this is a small sin and I'm as guilty as anyone, but it can get in the way of a fun time reading the forum.

If you are immune to bias and projection then it may as well be AI. Isn't a suggestion biased? I mean if your suggestion of a restaurant/hotel/tourist site was a perfect fact then there would not be any reviews that were less than good on those places. Yet, that is rarely so.

”However, we shouldn't be projecting our preferred travel styles onto others.”

Let’s be honest; all of us are bringing some of our own bias to travel, even if we travel in a variety of ways. Ask me about taking a RS tour, and I will tell you the advantages I have experienced. Ask me about traveling independently, and I will be bringing those advantages I have experienced to my response. I can confidently say that every person who attends our local RS travel group in Coeur d’Alene is bringing their own bias to the table discussion….and it is greatly appreciated! I want others to tell me how & why they’re traveling as they do. Pam is almost talking me into a Mark Seymour tour - just from her conversation about those experiences she likes so much.

If someone asks a question about Italy, for instance, and I see something in their itinerary that I would change, I will mention it and the reason why. The person is completely free to take or reject any advice, but I have so appreciated the variety of opinions I receive when I asked a question on the forum. I don’t want people to be afraid to give their opinion.

My wife sometimes thinks I am an AI. Then she revises it and shortens it to just an A. Ouch!

As a long time traveler for work, I have an easy time packing light and never checking a bag. Heck, I've been on multi-month trips with a carryon.

My wife regularly packs heavier and almost always check bags. Who is right? She's right! What works for her is fine by me! We both love Rick Steves tours and we also love traveling independently-- sometimes fast, sometimes slow.

CNR's message of being circumspect is well taken by me. Watch for bias, be polite, thoughtful and never, never root for the Steelers. (I may have added the last bit and I will admit it wasn't CNR's idea.)

Happy travels.

As OP on the “slow travel” post, I wasn’t meaning to suggest that slow travel was necessarily the “right way.” I don’t even really know what “slow travel” means exactly. I was looking for ideas about how people travel - and why - for planning future trips, both domestic and foreign.

I like to travel for a number of reasons.

• Pure pleasure
• Seeing nice places
• Eating well
• Meeting folks with different experiences
• Understanding how differently we can live … and grow
• Enjoying new experiences with my wife
• Seeing art
• Hearing music
• Opening up to chance … serendipity
• Learning more history
• Relaxing
• Being active - hiking and biking and walking and enjoying parks and the outdoors

On our most recent trip we spent 13 of 30 days cycling on three different segments of our journey. While those cycle trips included two-night stands at one, or another, or both ends of each segment, we also had 8 one-night stands. I don’t know if that is slow travel, or not. 12 to 15 mph and moving just about 20 to 40 miles from one day to another sounds slow, but all those one night stands sounds fast.

We stayed in 19 hotels in 30 nights. Yet we confined ourselves to the bounds of about 1/8 of Germany and about 1/6 of France … plus Paris for all of about 69 hours (excluding the train ride to and sitting in CDG).

Slow? Rushed? Right - or not?

I planned too much and didn’t mind missing some of what was on the list, but that we just didn’t have the time or energy or inclination to do. Yet it was great to have had plans, as well as reservations for two wine tastings, two museums, and three of six train trips. Still, we remained flexible and took in other opportunities - including two different 45-minute musical events in two different cities (Colmar and Dijon) on the Journées du Patrimoine weekend. Being open to new possibilities and new encounters is always the right way.

And, Carol, you are absolutely right that there are many right ways to travel.

There is no right way to travel and I've never felt any pressure from thoughtful discussions to amend our travel choices. Each to their own, whether you are new to the game or a seasoned traveller. Travelling for a week or a month, you can not see everything so enjoy what you do see and don't stress about what you missed. Carry on - not for me. We're pared down to basics for 6 weeks, but still too much for carry on. It is what it is. I'm not convinced about group travel yet. This has nothing to do with travel skills or age issues - it's all to do about being with the same group of people for several days. Day tours and city walking tours are great and a good way to get to know the city that you're in. I love this website and the discussions that occur.

I'm going out on a limb and assume that most people who come here to ask a question are sentient adults of at least moderate intelligence and with some ability at critical thinking. If I'm wrong, please feel free to correct me.

Unless their question simply requires a factual answer ( the Louvre is closed on Mondays, the official website for ABC is www . xyz), then just about any advice given will be opinion coloured by personal experiences and preferences on that particular subject. I've rarely seen advice given as an imperative or the only right way is such and such, unless that was a matter of fact, and not opinion.

And it is very much up to the OP to decide which information or advice to accept and which to ignore. And when it comes to advice, I've rarely seen a thread where differing opinions wasn't the norm. That is where the OPs critical thinking comes into play. Or perhaps we should all just copy and paste an AI generated response?

No amount of peer pressure, forum pressure, spouse pressure or suggestions by Rick Steves' when we travel on his tours, will ever get me to bend on point 1. Carry on only. It doesn't work for me. And I assure you that not only does nobody on the tour care, there are always 1-3 men on our tour (referred to as kind gentlemen types) who always kind of help the tour bus driver pull and organize the bags onto the street/sidewalk upon our arrivals. Nobody ever says a word. They just point me in the direction of my bag with a smile!
Everyone do you! Just remember you are responsible for it whether traveling independently or with a RS group!

As often happens, I think I am clearly communicating an idea, but subsequent posts tell me I have not clearly communicated what I meant to.

First, I had no issue with the original post or slow travel posts themselves. I had hoped calling it a thoughtful thread would communicate that. I clearly fell short on my purpose there.

I expect people to give their opinions on posts asking for help. I’m not trying to dissuade anyone from that. I’m not sure if I can adequately describe the small nuances that sometimes make me ,and perhaps others, feel criticized for a particular travel choice. I’m sure this sentence alone will get me some responses to “toughen up.”

However you travel, I wish you many happy trips.

Carol, thank you for the clarification. In the slow travel thread, note the first thing I stated was, "hike your own hike". And I read each response to be how it works for each poster personally, not that it's the only way to travel. How we travel is unique to each one of us.

This is key for me, because there is not a correct or right way to travel, and it grates on me and displays hubris when responses to questions prominently state "you must", "you need", or "you don't need". I know I am weird and the way I want to travel is not going to be the way anyone else wants to travel. This is why I tend to skip over itinerary threads. We all are opinionated, so I try - I do try - to err to the technical answer rather than opinions. Anyway...

@Fred, I really love your post. Thank you. Lots to think about in there. I especially love your recent trip example and the biking / several one-night stays and thus being perhaps both "fast" and "slow" travel.

As often happens, I think I am clearly communicating an idea, but
subsequent posts tell me I have not clearly communicated what I meant
to.

No, you communicated adequately. Better than adequately actually. Most every thread these days, maybe it’s always been the case, falls victim to an intentional lack of understanding for a number of reasons, or an accidental lack of understanding due to moving too fast through the words being read. Either way, sometimes false assumptions rise up where assumptions shouldn’t be made at all. But it’s human nature. Such is life. You just gotta suck it up. Well, I haven’t learned how to do it yet, but I am working on it.

I do believe, either through less-than-ideal writing skills or through actual belief, that there are several individuals on here that appear to be somewhat ideological about travel. Ideological = opinionated with a sense of superiority of thought and process. Don’t dare question their turf or you will be ripped to shreds. Oh, and a few are just mean to be mean. I fell into one of those traps last week.

But I never saw you ideological or mean or intentionally or accidentally misinterpreting what others had said. So, feel good that you work with good intent and if others don’t get it, its their inability to process not your weakness.

Carol nr, I get what you mean and sometimes I see that. For example, I have a spinner bag, and there have been posts that vehemently protest the use of spinners. I've seen remarks like, "You'll mess up your bag when you're going over cobblestones," or "They don't work well in Europe," or the ultimate "You'll knock someone down with your bag," and so on. I'm experienced enough that I can ignore statements like that, but I'm sure there are people who take it completely to heart.

I do think there is a slight bias for promoting slow travel and carry-on. But I'm not sure that can be avoided. This is, by and large, a group of travelers who tend to travel slowly and carefully, and aren't the type of travelers who rush into a city and hit every spot immediately. I admit I have on occasion suggested to people that maybe their schedule was a little tight and fast. But I also tend to tell them that if that's really what they want, then that's fine. It's their trip, and they have the right to take it how they want. I certainly did. I still remember my first trip to Europe. I spent the first week in London and was out every day from dawn till dusk, hitting every single site I could. The second week I rented a car and stayed in a different place every night. I don't think I would have the energy to do that now, but even if I did, I wouldn't. Because I've discovered that as much fun as I had then, it's hard to keep up that pace, especially when you take longer trips. However, there are a lot of people out there with more energy than me, and if they can keep up the momentum, more power to them!

For what it's worth, I don't think I've ever seen a post that suggested bias towards group travel. In fact, I would say almost the opposite. I sometimes feel a little out of it because I have never taken a group tour. From everything I've read, they sound like they're a lot of fun. I don't know that I would have the temperament for it, but that's me. And I would certainly never suggest that group travel is only for those with weak travel skills or age-induced issues, especially since there are so many long-time, experienced travelers here on this forum who take multiple group tours a year.

But I do think it's a good topic for discussion, and I don't see any harm in thinking about it before you post next time. It's always good to review our responses before posting, so that we don't push our preferences onto someone but just give an objective opinion. 😊

For what it's worth, I don't think I've ever seen a post that suggested bias towards group travel. In fact, I would say almost the opposite. I sometimes feel a little out of it because I have never taken a group tour. From everything I've read, they sound like they're a lot of fun. I don't know that I would have the temperament for it, but that's me. And I would certainly never suggest that group travel is only for those with weak travel skills or age-induced issues, especially since there are so many long-time, experienced travelers here on this forum who take multiple group tours a year.

LOL, I hear ya. Never mind skill or age, what about introversion vs extroversion, or friend groups vs solo in a tour group setting?

I don't know that I would have the temperament for it, but that's me.

Exactly. I know I don't have the temperament for extended group travel, on the otherhand do enjoy small group day tours and food tours.

Carol now retired, here is the problem for me. Whenever we put a label on something, that label becomes the defining factor when enjoyment should be. It's also a divisive practice. We have experienced slow travelers vs. the inexperienced tourist. (the experienced and inexperienced is usually implied, but the experienced people "understand")

I've just read through the slow travel thread and think it's a wonderful compilation of experiences people have had, from Mark's slow down on the ferry and Mr. E's fishing to acraven's budgeting outcomes. I don't think there are any implied assumptions in this thread but a pleasure in sharing some moments of enjoyment. Even if I don't follow everything suggested, there are good definitions and consciousness. One person mentioned that slow travel is a privilege that not everyone can afford financially or timewise. It just happened to be answered by people who have had had the opportunity for slow travel, so that may have given you an impression of implied assumptions.

BTW, at this point in our lives a most of our foreign travel is with groups, and we've always checked a bag, even the carry- ons.

I don't agree with any of the three, however, #3 has some truth to it.

We have been traveling overseas for decades and have lived overseas for several years.

My first travels involved faster trips than we do now. Wanted to cover more ground. I learned that you can't do Paris in 2-3 days.
Still, for young travelers that want to cover lots of ground and my come back years later, it is not wrong.

1. We have never done the carryon only when doing overseas trips. We always do at least 2-3 weeks for overseas trips and can take enough clothes in a checked suitcase each that we don't have to do laundry on the trip. We have done trips that took 7-8 weeks and had to do laundry, sometimes twice. Had we done the carryon only, we would be doing laundry about every 6-7 days.
2. When younger and had less money we did trips independently, on our own. Once retired and spending our kids inheritance, we had plenty for cruises, river cruises, bus group tours, etc. Now that we are in our late 70s, group tours are perfect for us, since we don't have to make any arrangements for lodging, transportation, admissions, reservations, etc. Also, if going to third world countries, I feel that it is important for security to go with a group tour.
   

Another great post, Carol. However, I do think inexperienced solo travelers often need to be warned about how much time it takes to change locations and the unfeasibility of trying to travel to as many places in as short a period of time as group tours are able to do.

Carol,
You certainly did not fall short and your original post and reply here are both thoughtful. TY.

Thank you, Carol. Excellent post.

It is difficult to have a conversation with strangers on a forum like this. I dont see any replies to posts requesting input to be imperatives, or the one "right" answer. But it's often easy to infer that some people are starting with assumptions that may or not be practical, or at least need to hear a different perspective. For example, carry-on only, or using trains, and their advantages might be an idea that never occurred to an inexperienced traveler. To offer a suggestion for consideration is what a friend would do. Same with things like multi-city ticketing of which a fair number of new posters are unaware. How you say it is of course often a problem.

Sometimes you can infer that a person has not taken into account travel time between destinations and sights, jet lag, or money issues. But if someone asks how to make a day trip from London to Paris, it's human nature to want to explain why that might not be a good idea, rather than just answering the logistics question.

1. The ideal of carry-on only. If you check a bag you are somehow not getting it right.

I blame this guy for the traveling light mania on this forum:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oz4Dt3jnB-c

CJean, I agree with your post wholeheartedly!

I've been on this forum a long time, and never interpret posts as telling people the "right" way to do things. Obviously we all come from our own perspective and some of us are well-travelled all over the world using planes, trains, buses, ferries, trams, tuk tuks, etc. That is a great wealth of experience in what has worked for us or not, and it's great that so many people are willing to share this knowledge. I know that I've been glad that I had a carry-on when getting on and off various trains in Europe, so when someone says they have two large bags I recommend that they either travel lighter or find a different means of transportation.

There are a lot of phenomena that pendulum swing back and forth between boobs and cognoscenti, like lines in Shakespeare that appeal to the groundlings and the philosophers while the middlebrow ticketholders are just bored.

The mention in this discussion of how it's ok, prosocial even, to let new solo travelers in on the secret that transfers often don't go smoothly and need to have some allowance in your schedule planning, is one of those pendulous phenomena -- so many of us have learned by experience that the first meal of your trip or final belvedere before you head for the airport don't happen as hoped.

But that's why Rick's guidebooks are so valuable (one reason among many): he has made the mistakes already and saves you the trouble of learning by experience, assuming things are still up to date when you do the trip.
Haven't you often learned in retrospect that something Rick asterisks in his guide saved you some time or money when you heeded it? Or the opposite--you tried the main route instead of the alternate and it got you stuck in a molasses morass.

But then the pendulum swings again and you might end up following the letter without following the spirit -- I remember sitting a few tables away from a couple in a bistro near the Rodin Museum (the one in Paris) who had the RS guide on the table, well-flagged with color tape, who ordered in English from the English menu exactly what the guide suggested while the server nodded and shrugged at their timidity -- of course, onion soup and oysters with fries and dough robineigh . Were they really stretching? Being temporary locals? If they had looked over the carte en Francais they might have found something more exciting but they might also get something that looked gross, too.

Back to the transfers -- who would contest that some experience and some prep will make transfers easier, less haphazard, and allow you to get more done with less effort? It's not forcing your opinion or preferences on someone who sees things differently to mention that if you get on the bus with the X in the route name you will get to your stop sooner than the one with the L in its route name. Or that you want the old town station and not the new town station? That's good advice. Bad advice would be 'don't stop in that town b/c there's nothing worth seeing there'.

To me, the right way to travel is what works best for you. I have learned what works for me. Until we travel together or discuss our experience in-depth I will never know what works for you. I will share my lesson learned and try to do so in a manner that is constructive rather than pejorative.

There are a few recurring travel forum questions that often raise my eyebrow. Some samples, making the example with Florence as it is where I live, but it could be a lot of places.

“What is the best train between Florence and Rome?” Well, obviously what is good for one may be not good for other people. But it is also how the question is worded. Would the second best be good enough?

“What are the sights in Florence?” You are going to spend money – a lot of – and commit yourself to the vagaries of modern air travel, just to go in a place you do not know anything about to start, and you do not even care to study on your own? How the idea of going to Florence came into your mind?

Alternative wording: “What are the sights in Florence? We are not much into museums”. Well, a combination of filthy rich bankers and artists brought art and literature to Florence for three centuries, then the richness went away so the place was more or less conserved in the following centuries with scant renovations. This is why there are so many museums in Florence. If you are not into museums (judgment not intended), there are a lot of places in the world where your money may be better spent than Florence. You can stand heat, crowds, high prices, erratic service just because Botticelli’s Spring is only there to be seen. But if you do not care about Botticelli, maybe some other place could be better suited to your taste. Insider tip: also the food is generally better elsewhere, crowds and good food rarely get together.

@Lachera, excellent tip! ”..crowds and good food rarely get together.”

There are a lot of phenomena that pendulum swing back and forth between boobs and cognoscenti, like lines in Shakespeare that appeal to the groundlings and the philosophers while the middlebrow ticketholders are just bored.

One of the great successes and turning points in my life occurred because a “boob” did something that no “cognoscenti” would have ever done. It was genius. Serendipitously, it brought me an incredible opportunity and it brought relief to a great number of people.

People brag about the interpretation of travel but in the final end slow or fast or whatever is still the same. VACATION When we started going back in 1996 vacation were 2 weeks or less and were that way for many years. Today we can go back for 2 or 3 months but it is still vacation. I see no reason to call it anything else. We are 78 years old, rent cars, and never have been on a tour. The big reason for that is the cost. We are not flush with money and find independent travel cheaper. We are experienced travelers but are reminded very quickly when we land in Europe how truly inexperienced, we become. Our days of roaming Europe have been shortened and staying in our favorite cities are more common. But we both agree staying in Europe if it's just one city for 3 months is what we want to do.

Great, great post.

As an example, my only time in Venice. We arrived one morning at 10:00am. By 11:00am we were out and about until 7:00pm. Up the next day and out by 9:00am until about 8:00pm. Left early the next morning. In those 19 hours we saw all we wanted to see in Venice, satisfied, with no regrets and not at a backbreaking pace.

Now, I know as this is read at least one person or more is saying, that is crazy, I needed at least 4-5 days in Venice.

The "right way to travel" is "your way".

@fred, the Seattle version: a lot of us have similar experiences!

"The ideal of carry-on only. If you check a bag you are somehow not getting it right."

Yes, this is my intuition. I try to pack only 2-3 changes of clothes, in addition to any cold weather clothes and a minimal amount of stuff that isn't clothes. In the last ten years I have traveled to different parts of Europe 6 times, Mexico and Peru once each, and some shorter trips to cities in the United States. At first I was able to travel with only carry-on luggage but then I was carrying food that I didn't want to get crushed in my carry-on bag and they wouldn't let me take 3 bags on the plane and when I went to Peru I packed a heavy coat and my travel-bag with my clothes was too big.

"Independent travel is better than group travel somehow. Only people with weak travel skills or age induced issues would travel on a tour or cruise."

Yes, that is my intuition. I have not traveled with a whole-trip guided-tour. My top reason for travelling unguided is that I don't want to worry about how much or little I should talk to my tour mates. Also I would rather pick which sites I see and then randomly spend whatever time I spend at the sites instead of having the tour operator pick when I arrive and leave at places. Although I try to come up with a detailed itinerary, and some advanced reservations are set in advance, my itinerary is really just a list of places I hope to see. It isn't as rigidly planned as a guided tour.

"Slow travel shows you are an experienced traveler, while fast trips mean you are inexperienced."

Yes this is my intuition except that you need to define "slow versus fast travel." I have a talent for seeing under-appreciated museums and sites. Some travelers are good at picking just one or two major sites in a city and skipping everything else. Some guided tours whisk travelers around on tour buses and skip museums and sites I would see on my own. I try to make a list of places in a town that look appealing before I figure out how many nights to reserve in the town.

Those 3 statements are all true.