What does “slow travel” mean to you?

Slow travel to me doesn’t mean where you go, countryside or big city, but how you go.

It means staying longer in a place, maybe 7+ days when most people would stay only 2-3.
It means no 1 night stands.
It means maybe only having one activity planned for a day, or maybe skipping a day and just strolling through the local park.
It means taking the slow means of transportation, not hopping on a quick flight.
It means stopping to smell the roses.
It means if you miss a site, church, or a museum, so be it. There is always another one around the corner.

We’re not at the slow travel level yet, but we are definitely on our way.

The most recent slow travel for us was staying a month in Prague. We did three 2-3 day side trips to Berlin, Olomouc, and Brno. But we REALLY explored all the areas of Prague, not just the typical tourist locations. We even had "our" bar near our apartment where we became the semi-regular Americans.

This is where I would say, "hike your own hike". I also agree with Barbara's points.

For myself -
5-7 days in a particular location is optimal.

I'll have a list of attractions, venues, sites, et al., that I'd like to see. But I do not plan them out. It is all too often a question of what on the list strikes my fancy that morning, and I leave room for changing my mind and distractions. And yeah, often I'll only visit one significant site in a day. I just don't feel the need to run from one thing to another.

I'm not in a hurry. My most precise planning goes to bringing the parts & pieces of transportation together, otherwise I don't have to be anywhere and im on no schedule.

Once I'm in Europe I'll only travel by trains or ferries. Last week, to get to Prague, I flew to Berlin then continued by train. Yesterday I made the journey from Prague to Brussels by train - Prague to Berlin to Köln to Brussels - 680 miles over 13 hours. Today I completed the journey on Eurostar from Brussels to London.

Maybe I have moved beyond slow travel and on to lazy travel

On my car trips to Scandinavia and especially Norway I had two steps to slow down.

The first step is leaving German Autobahn into another country e. g. A7 to Denmark. The speed limit there has an automatic relaxation moment compared to speed unlimited parts of German Autobahn. I experienced this also at day trips to Denmark.

The second step is using ships such as car ferries or also using Hurtigruten ships to get far into the North. Sitting with a hot coffee, tea or chocolate and watching the beautiful landscape passing by is to me a wonderful experience of slow traveling and in parallel moving forward on my journey.

So, what is slow travel to you
Having more time than pre-planned sights to fill it.

and what do you get by traveling slowly, as you define it?
Time to wander around my destination, zig and zag around and see what I stumble upon. Which might be another sight that I hadn't pre-planned. Or it may be a table in a nice square with a local drink.

“Slow travel” is what I don’t do in Europe! LOL!

My definition of it is staying a week or longer in a smaller city or at least two weeks - more like a month, in a larger city. Slow travel is the absence of a wristwatch, lingering over coffee in the morning, maybe walking over to the market in the afternoon to see what to make for dinner. Taking a nice walk after dinner, etc. It’s staying in an apartment or small home vs. a hotel or B&B.

I experienced the mental mindset of slow travel during some of the cities I stayed in Italy recently - no itinerary planned for those days, but I still was moving every 1-2 days, so I wouldn’t define it as slow travel.

Slow travel is what my husband & I did several years for our winter vacation in Hawaii - no plans, taking a sailboat ride when we felt like it or a hike. A couple of weeks at one place with no “must do’s. What did we get? A vacation where we came back refreshed.

I agree with what the others have said, plus:

• I compile detailed notes on sights at each planned stop, roughly calculate how many nights that will require and pad the hotel booking to allow a lot of extra time for walking around and enjoying the local architecture. I add specific "walk-by" destinations to my maps so I can identify neighborhoods of particular interest; sometimes there are so many interesting buildings in one neighborhood that I spend a full day, just walking around and taking pictures. This leads to initial bookings of at least a week in most large cities.

• I don't prebook hotels more than a few days ahead unless I feel I must, due to local demand/availability, cost, or an impending flight. This leaves me free to extend my stay if I've underestimated how much time I need in a city. That happens very often, because I don't want to risk over-committing to a city and running out of things to see. Yes, the added-on nights are often somewhat more expensive than the initial booking.

• I don't prebook entry to sights except potential sell-outs; I would never create an itinerary that allocates sights to specific days and times except for those requiring prebooking. I travel with charts making it easy to see which sights are open on which days, and I take a look at the local chart the night before or during breakfast to decide what I want to try to do.

• As I walk from Sight A to Sight B, I wander off course if I see an interesting intersecting street. In small cities my goal is to walk every street in the historic center. That's not possible in really large cities, but I make a concerted effort to see as many streets as possible rather than starting every day by walking in the same direction from my hotel, along the same street.

• I use very little public transportation, preferring to walk, even though it means I need more time in most cities (a net increase in cost because this can add up to an extra hotel night, or more, in a sizable city).

• I include a lot of secondary cities convenient to my major stops rather than going only to the best-known destinations. There are so many interesting places; I'd rather see all I want to see in an area rather than making repeated, time-wasting trips back to a region to visit towns I could have seen (from the geographical perspective) on an earlier trip. The Schengen limit means I am sometimes forced into shorter-than-desired stays that necessitate revisits.

My approach means I spend a lot of time in Europe at a lower cost per day than would be the case if I hopped quickly over considerable distances. The total cost, though, is higher because of the length of my trips.

One side benefit of in-depth coverage of individual regions is that there is sometimes a very well-priced, annual sightseeing pass that really reduces average daily sightseeing costs. Examples can be found in Finland, Estonia, Lombardy (Italy), Piedmont (Italy) and Campania (Italy).

So, what is slow travel to you and what do you get by traveling
slowly, as you define it?

What is Slow Travel? Means standing in the middle of a river for days on end. From early morning to mid-afternoon. Then going “home” eating and falling asleep. The last was about six weeks ago. Amazing time.
What do I get? Fish.

The rest of the trips there is so much to see in the world that it’s hard to be too slow about it. But those special places that spoke to me I can do slowly on a repeat trip. Check-in, get comfortable and just live off the grid for a while. One of those for every 3 new adventures. The last I did was Kyiv in January this year. But it wasn’t long enough. No plans, just revisiting memories.

Slow travel means to me that it is relative.

I pace myself more. I make it point not to huff it. If I don't see everything i want in a specific town , I simply go back the next day or sometime again during the trip, such as going twice to Nogent-sur-Seine this time because I didn't feel I had covered enough of the town the first time around.

Slow travel means to seeing those places that are not only so-call "backdoors" but could also be defined as " backwater", eg in Germany going for a few hours last trip to Prenzlau in the Uckermark region as a day trip from Berlin.

Several towns I wanted to see as day trips from Berlin or Paris this time, bottom line : just didn't get around to that, such as in France, Bethune, Cambrai, Lens, Bar-sur-Aube, Reims, etc. In Germany...Greifswald, Babelsberg, more of Schwerin (once was certainly not enough), Halbe/Brandenburg, Lauenburg an der Elbe, are a few.

As for getting around< in the small towns, it's walking, follow the signs carefully and walk, both in France and Germany. The result is you basically walk all over, maybe 40 mins from the train station to the centre ville or old town.

Relying on public transport means you follow the bus routes especially from a city to an adjacent village accessible by bus from the bus depot located at the city's train station, such as taking the bus from Lille Flandres to the outlying village of Lambersart.....well worth my time and energy expended.

"So, what is slow travel to you and what do you get by traveling slowly, as you define it?"

There is rarely a need to rush. And it spoils appreciating the moment you're in.

The "need" comes from the various ways of people.

"FOMO" (fear of missing out) I've mentioned. Need of "getting your money's worth", tied to the horrifically short time a lot of people get to do their traveling is another. You could say "slow travel" is another part of Privilege. Many reasons.

And then there's always the people who just get bored if they don't rush. :)

I like to travel the wrong way... so I like to go wrong quickly!

Ah, depends. Sometimes travel is a vacation. Sometimes it's a learning journey. Sometimes it is sharing places I've been with friends. As long as I have time for a good morning coffee, the rest, at any speed, is all good. (Except no more than 3 museums at day-- I'm too [old] for that now!)

Happy travels!

From reading all of acraven’s posts over the years and participating in a few zooms during coved, I believe she is the queen of slow travel.
And she has the memory of a 20 year old. I am always amazing at how many facts she can remember and guide other posters.

CWsocial wins this thread so far as I am concerned with the pithy aphorism

Having more time than pre-planned sights to fill it.

I usually have a plan and a backup plan for every third of every day of travel.

Some of those thirds have more emotional or financial investment in them than others, and a few might be abnegatable in favor of an in-the-moment discovery or an in the moment mood -- choosing not to do something on the list could be slow travel, in some circumstances.

We're all defining what slow travel means to us individually, but did we all start off as slow travelers? Did your travel style evolve? And is there a natural progression? Did age or significant life events force change in your travel style? Do you set rules and are they set in stone or breakable?

Treemoss2, excellently stated.

I am largely endorsing what several above have already said. It is a bit of serendipity over serious preparation--an emphasis on the overall experience of being in a place (and perhaps revisiting favorite spots) rather than on checking off boxes on a list of must-see sights. RS says in his books that the A students read his books more than once and make notes. Well, it's not bothering about credit and grades and auditing the course for fun.

Every time I see this topic, I see the sloth from Zootopia (Zootropolis for our UK friends) trying to keep up with a Rick Steves tour group!

-- Mike Beebe

RS Tours are not the epitome of slow travel. They are the opposite. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with travel that does not fall in the "slow travel" column. Those hailing the virtues of "slow travel" usually checked off the boxes of the must-see museums and churches a long time ago. Whatever works for you, given your experience and interests, is the best way for you to travel.

"...usually checked off the boxes of the must-see museums and churches a long time ago. "

As I mentioned, no.

Just started traveling (relatively) and have no hope of doing even most of that. Luckily, I know better than to try.

edit: though I wouldn't say I was a good example if we're talking numbers

Well, it's not bothering about credit and grades and auditing the course for fun

Love this. When I was younger, I felt the need for those travel "credits and grades." And I wouldn't try to tell my younger self any differently. It's fun, now, to audit the course because I like the subject. My younger self might not understand. And I wouldn't change a thing - then or now.

"And I wouldn't change a thing - then or now."

Oh, I would. I made too many stupid mistakes. Just glad of the protection of "fools and..." to have lived through them.

"Slow travel" to me is a fad.

Everyone needs to find their own rhythm and timing when they travel. Some people genuinely like the blitz style, while others like to pace themselves more slowly. Neither style of traveler should face criticism, so long as they respect their host locations and attempt to be a net positive to the economies of those locations.

Unfortunately many of those who promote "slow travel" do so in a manner that subtly depreciates those who are more peripatetic.

"Unfortunately many of those who promote "slow travel" do so in a manner that subtly depreciates those who are more peripatetic."

Perhaps because there are so many examples of people doing "fast travel" badly?

"If it's Tuesday this must be Belgium" for example. And the complaints from people who feel they "have" to do it that way (for different reasons) and are disappointed by the results.

No doubt there are many who enjoy the faster route.

Can't say I've heard of people doing "slow travel" badly.

Slow travel to me is when you go with the purpose to enjoy the experience of a different country or city, without focusing on hitting the "must-sees" and best restaurants. I am past the point of wanting to visit another cathedral/museum/monument/etc. Much more interested in the contemporary daily life, which might just be sitting on a park bench for awhile while. But that's what comes with age and experience. My first visits were rushed too.

Perhaps because there are so many examples of people doing "fast travel" badly?

What is an example of someone doing fast travel badly? Isn't it up to the individual to determine for themselves whether they have traveled badly? While I have my own opinions, I wouldn't presume to tell someone else that they're doing travel badly.

I don't know, I think sometimes I have a bit of "European privilege" in terms of how much time I've had off work, pretty much my whole career, and proximity to continental Europe. I've never felt the need to pack things in.

I think culturally Europeans are more likely to go to one place and stay put, what folks here seem to be calling "slow travel". Staying short times in a variety of destinations all in a row has never really appealed to me.

Maybe there's a class divide too. I grew up fairly working class, doing holidays the same way many British people my age have done, breaks in the UK and a fortnight in Spain or Greece or similar. Although I have no real interest in package holidays to the sun these days, I think it shaped how I think about travel at a young age. My mum and sister are off to a resort in Bulgaria next week for example, in attempt to catch the last of the weather (fingers crossed for them).

I'd like to think I'm no philistine, but seeing every historical site in a city doesn't hold all that much interest to me. I've travelled a lot through my interest in music, so I am travelling culturally, but I have scant knowledge of historical cultural sites. An interest in music and contemporary arts has opened doors for me to see places the average visitor doesn't. Likewise, I've been fortunate to make friends in music, and on several occasions this has given me a place to stay, and the different outlook you get from tagging along with a local.

Anyway, yeah just something different. I'd never considered these things until I started reading here.

Do you think you may approach things differently if you were to fly all the way to visit the US?

I don't know for sure. If I were to go out to the west coast I'd probably be pretty happy to settle in LA or San Francisco for a week or two. The only time I've been to the US (flying out of Glasgow) I spent ten days in New York in 2007 without thinking about going anywhere else. Plenty enough to keep me entertained in NYC for that length of time.

VAP says they "wouldn't presume to tell someone else that they're doing travel badly."

How about this? I get angrier than I suppose I should but I still do so anyway when I see tourists wandering around in the Embarcadero and between Fishermans' Wharf and the ferry building here in San Francisco --

didn't you take the time to read or watch anything about the city before you came here? I think.
Those people are doing travel badly.

Ditto those people trying to range a few blocks away from the megastores around Union Square -- if you know what you're after there are diamonds in the rough to be found in the Tenderloin but if you just follow your nose all you'll find is crappy sidewalks and loud unsavory characters. You are doing travel badly.

It's Columbus Ave that you want to range a few blocks away from. The real Chinatown is literally one block over from the tourist Chinatown. You can have your chowder in a bread bowl, sure, but if you look just a little closer you can see where William Tecumseh Sherman developed his sour disposition.

I try to extrapolate --- it is very clear to me that a lot of visitors to The Bay Area are in fact doing travel badly. Therefore, I could very well travel badly to any interesting place myself if I haven't taken the time to develop the eyes to see and the ears to hear. Take heed, I tell myself, and make some effort to find the best version, the A grade version, of places I visit.

How about we all agree to stop using the phrase slow travel? When we look at the world or even just the US, only a relatively few of us have the opportunity to be slow travelers.

avirosemail, how much of that is travel badly, and how much is our bias as locals? There's how we think visitors should enjoy our communities vs how visitors actually experience the places they visit, and they are not always going to merge.

Many thoughts here, not just on “slow travel,” which still seems a little amorphous to me, but also about “being there,” serendipity, and even right and wrong ways to travel.

Between this post and Carolnowretired’s related post, there’s a lot to absorb. From this thread, some of what resonates with me …

• It means stopping to smell the roses. Barbara
• we REALLY explored all the areas of Prague, not just the typical tourist locations. Carol from Chicago.
• Time to wander around my destination, zig and zag around and see what I stumble upon. Which might be another sight that I hadn't pre-planned. CWSocial.
• “Slow travel” is what I don’t do in Europe! LOL! Jean.
• include a lot of secondary cities convenient to my major stops rather than going only to the best-known destinations. There are so many interesting places; I'd rather see all I want to see in an area rather than making repeated, time-wasting trips back to a region to visit towns I could have seen. acraven.
• special places that spoke to me I can do slowly on a repeat trip. …No plans, just revisiting memories. Mr. E.
• There is rarely a need to rush. And it spoils appreciating the moment you're in. RobertH.
• Ah, depends. Sometimes travel is a vacation. Sometimes it's a learning journey. Sometimes it is sharing places I've been with friends. As long as I have time for a good morning coffee, the rest, at any speed, is all good. (Except no more than 3 museums at day-- I'm too [old] for that now!) David.
• I usually have a plan and a backup plan for every third of every day of travel. Some of those thirds have more emotional or financial investment in them than others, and a few might be abnegatable in favor of an in-the-moment discovery or an in the moment mood Avirosemail.
• Travel at its core is the seeing of new places and things. Those done, you may welcome a break of nothing. But that also becomes same old. Cafes drinking coffee making believe we are part of the local flow. So we give it a new twist, slow travel. As if to justify to ourselves that we still are in the game. treemoss2.
• It is a bit of serendipity over serious preparation--an emphasis on the overall experience of being in a place (and perhaps revisiting favorite spots) rather than on checking off boxes RJ. (Comment: personally, I am happy with the serious prep, but I am also willing to deviate when serendipity calls.)
• And there is absolutely nothing wrong with travel that does not fall in the "slow travel" column. RJ.
• Everyone needs to find their own rhythm and timing when they travel. jphbucks
• I am travelling culturally, but I have scant knowledge of historical cultural sites. An interest in music and contemporary arts has opened doors for me to see places the average visitor doesn't. … Anyway, yeah just something different. I'd never considered these things until I started reading here. GerryM

Some Take-Aways for me.

• Don’t worry about traveling slowly, whatever that may mean. Just travel slowly enough to be there, to be present, to relax, enjoy, experience. To have time to travel the path less travelled. To remain open to serendipity.
• There’s nothing wrong with feeling the need to take in great sights. There’s a reason - perhaps many reasons - they’re widely considered to be great.
• Don’t be judgmental about other travelers (except about that loud foursome who berated a waiter in France back in 1999 about the steaks that weren’t cooked “the way we cook them in Texas.”)

Plus, continue to engage that couple at the next table, the woman on the bus, that other woman on the park bench — openly and with interest and with no agenda.

Walking, wandering and wondering.
Stopping to pet cats, speak with folks and people watch.
Striving to get lost.
During inclement weather taking a city bus without concern of the destination.
Unpack once for a week before moving on.

This isn't really 'slow travel' but on our trip to Spain I planned one or two activities for each day, calculated how many days we'd be in each city, and added a day to stay in each city. I had a list of possible things for that extra day and we really enjoyed taking our time.

The concept of "slow travel" is not something I would have come up with on my own. It is nonsensical to ask me what it means. I would need to be told what it means. I try to spend the amount of time in a town that the town justifies, except that if the city is like London or some other big city that has more than a weeks worth of good activities, sights, and museums, I try to limit how much time I spend in the city and sacrifice sites that look appealing. I travel to see whatever specific sites, museums, and so on, that I have identified in advance. I don't travel to bask in the novelty of being in a foreign place and just see certain streets and spend gobs of time sitting in restaurants or cafes. If I wanted parks, lakes, and countryside, I could travel in my own state of Michigan. I get ten paid days of vacation per year from one anniversary date to the next anniversary date. I try to not sit on benches for more than about 20 minutes at a time.

"Slow travel" can legitimately mean different things to different people. To me, slow travel means going to one place for a couple of weeks and staying there. Maybe take a day trip or two, but basically, renting an apartment and not moving for a couple of weeks. We get up a list of things we might want to do or see in that particular location, and then we do them or not do them as each day comes. It doesn't have anything to do with us being seniors; we've been "traveling" that way for the last 30 years. We've never traveled any other way.

But I will add, there is no right or wrong way to travel. You do what you like. We just like immersing ourselves in one place and not stressing over whether we get to see this thing on this day and whether we have to pack up and move to the next place. Personally, I enjoy sitting on a park bench with my wife and watching the locals walk their dogs. Or wandering around randomly seeing things. Or sitting in a sidewalk cafe enjoying a cafe' con latte. Or going to the local market and buying a fresh fish to take home and cook for lunch.

I do a lot of research beforehand about the history and culture of the place we are going to, I try to learn some of the language, and I try to learn enough that I can be our own tour guide at the important places we see. I enjoy preparing for a trip like that.

I can tell you what slow travel is not.....

If it's Tuesday, This Must Be Belgium

Seriously, a number of years ago I was in Chester (UK) and saw a couple wearing shirts with my university's emblem on them. I stopped to chat.

They told me they were on a two week tour of the UK and showed me the itinerary. They were literally in a different hotel every night.

I don't know how they were doing it but I was exhausted just reading the itinerary.

Oh to be young and never exhausted! My first trip to Europe I traveled by bicycle— sleeping someplace new every night for 6 weeks! Nowadays six weeks at the same place can seem busy!

Happy travels

But! how much of it is being young vs. economics?

I went into planning my first international trip, believing it would be that once in a life time trip - the only one I could afford - and I was going to cram as much as I could of the most important sites I wanted to see. Four cities across two countries traveling as thrifty as I could. Once all was said and done I actually understood the economics and affordability. That was an incredible revelation and changed everything about how I viewed travel for myself.

"Once all was said and done I actually understood the economics and affordability. That was an incredible revelation and changed everything about how I viewed travel for myself."

Please elaborate.

”For those of who travel outside big cities, how do you find something smaller, less touristed ? How do find that obscure (tom me) town in Bulgaria or Montenegro, let alone in France or Germany? Read the forum and research, yes, but what about what’s not here?”

Wanderlust48, this is a detailed process - but effective. After I’ve picked the country and the month I want to travel, I look up any local festivals in the country during that month. Next, since I travel by train, I pull up the diagram of the train routes. I open a couple of tabs on my laptop, and I am alternating between TripAdvisor “things to do” and Booking.com for possible small hotels or B&B’s in the center of the city for each city where a train stops. This sounds slow, but I can finish this whole process for a country in a day. I’m fine staying 1-2 nights in smaller towns, so I am mainly noting which towns have something to be considered on the initial list and also have decent lodging. Sometimes an extra special lodging option will drive a location stay - Pavia, as an example in September.

From that list, I draw a rough transportation map. Each city name is placed in the general area of where it would fall on a map of that region/country. I add an approximate number of days under the city name. Any special ones, plus festival locations get highlighted in a color. Then I look up each city on their train sites (don’t use Rome2rio!) to see how much time it takes between cities, i.e. 1 hr by train gets a segment between two cities with “1-T”. The map ends up looking a little like a web, connecting cities in different directions.

Since I do like to move locations often, I want train connections that are less than 2 hours, as the norm, so I’ve left off my bag & am out enjoying the next city by 11am. Usually the transportation map with some cities highlighted, plus time between locations will begin to visually form a likely route. I might look on the forum at this stage or post a question to the forum for input. My next step is making a calendar out of Post-Its with each day one Post-It, and the same city’s days all get the same color. I begin marking museums, for instance, with day closed, other activities, etc. At this point, I am finding more specifics on cities - cooking classes, bike tours, with key word searches. The Post-Its make it easy to shift the order of cities or slide everything a day if museums are closed.

Hope that helps!

While I think there may be some correlation between economics and duration, I tend to think the correlation is weak. I look at my kids — both in their twenties. Both have been to Europe 1/2 dozen times. Neither would plan a trip where they even spent even three days in the same spot. They’d be on the go. (I’d still do brisk trips but I also like slow ones too now that I’m older.)

Given Rick Steves tours move what, 30,000 a year, almost all staying less than 3 days per stop— packing and unpacking every couple days, clearly there are people who like that. I like that. But compare that to say Norwegian Cruise lines that has you unpack once and they move 30,000 a day— not a year. Or Disney vacations in Orlando. Or beach vacations. I think probably the bulk of travelers are definitionally slow travelers. Rick Steves types are the exception I suppose. But I don’t think economics are the driver though. I think it may be more of what is the purpose— relax, take a break from work. Or adventure. Or something else. I tie some of it to age. But clearly that’s not all of it. Some of it could be economics too.

I don’t know.

Happy travels

We don't try to "find something smaller, less touristed" --- we just have interests that take us to such places, sometimes very obscure places. Like we want to eat a particular local food or drink wine made from less well-known grapes, or meet our dog's father, or see the 13th century frescoes in a church out in the middle of nowhere, or visit a thousand year old bell foundry or see a boat museum or WWII museum or find a wild orchid. We don't think of it as slow travel, just as doing what we want to do.

Going after that so-called obscure town depends on your field of interest. Lots of them in Germany and France. They are culturally and sociologically very revealing to put it mildly. My primary focus now has been to go after them in the last couple of trips.

that so-called obscure town … Lots of them in Germany and France. They are culturally and sociologically very revealing to put it mildly. My primary focus now has been to go after them in the last couple of trips.

Query, SF Fred, What revelations come to your mind? Back in 1999, we stumbled on a small, sleepy looking town of stone homes on a hillside off the beaten path a bit north of Montelimar, in Auvergne-Rhone. After dinner, we walked around the town, Mirmande, and saw that this rural, remote, stone dwelling village was totally wired. Satellite dishes. Computers in use, seemingly in every home as we peeked in through living room windows while we walked by.

Some of those towns - or at least some in those towns - are going after you. Small towns across France are vying for top honours from https://www.les-plus-beaux-villages-de-france.org/fr/nos-villages/

We were in Alsace in September and village after village was ‘oh so cute.’ The two of us were cycling on our own, but in and near Riquewihr we saw group after group of cyclists - mostly American - on parade.

Please elaborate.

Sure, though I don’t think it was any different for myself, than anyone else. There’s perception vs. reality then priorities.

Back then, my travel was always domestic, and my preference was for long weekends or at most a week off. I’d never taken 2 or 3 weeks off. I would rather bank leave time to maximize carryover while taking many small getaways, which never cost more than a couple hundred dollars. Going backpacking for several days never cost anything other than gas money -- I didn't always factor in the money I was putting towards gear.

My perception of international travel was that it was outrageously expensive and that people saved for many years to afford a once in a lifetime trip to Europe, and I had never spent that kind of money on such frivolous things.

My first trip to Europe was great, but I didn’t enjoy the thought that such a trip was a once in a lifetime experience. I didn’t enjoy the rush from one place to another; I wanted to linger in places and savor little things.

The lesson I learned was that it was all easier and more affordable than I originally believed. It was not any more expensive than the multiple little getaways I’d spread across a year. That many years of savings were not required and could be accomplished in short order. That it was just easy to plan and easily paid for, that I could do it again and again, and go slower.

While I think there may be some correlation between economics and duration, I tend to think the correlation is weak.

On the other hand, chalking up slow vs fast travel as an either or of young vs old is overlooking the many reasons for differing travel styles, not tied to age. We are dismissing economics, time constraints, personal interests and so on.

VAP,

Let's agree to agree! It's more than age, it's more than economics! Somethings are just better slow!

Happy travels!

Absolutely!

After reading through the comments I've come to realize that there isn't a single definition for slow travel. I'm curious, is this agenda slow or fast?

• A weekend in Amsterdam
• 5 Days in Bruges with day trips
• A weekend in Arras, France
• 2 days in Leiden, Netherlands.

That's 3 countries and 4 hotels in 11 days. I didn't consider it fast travel, but it wasn't slow either.

In 2023 we spent 2 weeks based in Sorrento, but we were far busier and on-the-go than our trip described above. I reference the Sorrento trip often when questions come up about that region and I'm surprised how many people have recommended to the poster that my comment about 2 weeks is far too long for the region, especially when I considered that trip to be fast travel.

It's fast for me, Allan.

But not for you, which is what matters. It's your holiday.

@ fred/Seattle... What a coincidence. In 1999 and 2001 I went to Montelimar from Paris on the TGV.

I mean re a town being revealing : the architecture, also that of its cathedrals , churches, the old town, and museums and monuments, including the military cemeteries, plus unique and salient features.

The day trip to Schwerin this time was exactly for those reasons, absolutely revealing and captivating as I walked and explored from the train station to the Schloss, knew I had to come back as I had only set aside a day trip, 4.5 hrs to be spent in this city. I go after a town/ city mainly but not exclusively for its history importance and significance, which is why (in Germany) I visited Bad Ems next to Koblenz, Potsdam, Weimar, Prenzlau, Lüneburg.

In France a few of the small towns piquing my interest this time were St Dizier, Nogent-sur-Seine, Luneville, Bar-sur-Aube, Lambersart next to Lille. St. Cloud, Morhange/Lorraine Soissons, etc.

@fred/Seattle...part 2 here.

I'll be back next summer in France, especially there, to get back to places , ie these small towns, (there are lots of them for me) which I have to do a revisit since the first time there was marred by something negative, ie the weather, getting caught in a downpour in the open, lack of time, cancelled trains , a more deliberate pace when seeing the old town, going after specific and historic sites, and those war sites I didn't get around to on a previous visit, returning for the pictures, and a host other pertinent reasons, etc, etc, etc.

To me, slow travel is the difference between traveling in retirement when time is abundant, versus cramming a whirlwind two week vacation to Europe when employed., seeing as much as one can possibly see. I think age is part of it too. While still active and relatively fit at 68, the energy level isn’t the same as in my 40s or 50s.

Our 6 1/2 week trip last spring was a good pace, mostly 3-5 night stays, except for 3 one night stays which involved train arrival/departure/car rental pickup. Never felt rushed, and didn’t feel like we had a checklist of things to do. This trip was half by train and half car rental.

Currently planning our 4 week trip next fall. And a couple one night stays involve the arrival/departural i of trains/flight.

For me slow travel is like a quick moving. When traveling, you're typically stay in hotels for a couple of days and then proceed to the next stay. But when you have to change your residence due to a certain circumstances, you're staying for a week or even a month to settle a little before leaving. That's a slow travel for me. Hope I was able to explain it

I retired May of this year and began my Slow Travel around the world. For me & what a lot of YouTubers have been doing is about 28 - 30 nights in one location, with local & out of the city sightseeing.

This year has been divided up from 2 July - 25 Nov between Sarajevo, Zagreb (weekend trip to Ljubljana), Budapest, Paris (over night in Chartres & weekend trip to The Hague to see my niece), 5 nights in Cappadocia & 27 nights in Antalya.

I will mix it up at the beginning of 2026, due to the lower costs. 1 mo. in Bangkok, 1 mo. in Vietnam (Ho Chi Minh City, Da Nang & Hanoi), 1 mo. in Kuala-Lumpur, 4 nights in Singapore, 14 nights in Indonesia (getting re-certified in Scuba Diving) & 14 nights in the Philippines. Working on my return trip to Europe in June.

In Budapest I hired a trainer for the month and have gotten a membership in Paris & now Antalya and plan on to continue this during my travels. Work out in the gym 4 days a week adding walks within the neighborhood or area after the workout.

My plan is to use visiting family & friends in the states as my stops between Europe/Asia, S. East Asia & Central/S. America.