I've seen this word thrown around a lot, usually in a disparaging way. But I'm not exactly sure what it's supposed to mean.
What makes a place "touristy"?
What are some places that are visited by a lot of tourists but are not "touristy"? And why not?
The shops are all selling the exact same junky things, and they are not made in the area, or even in the same country.
Some places accept a lot of tourists, but it’s not the only reason for its existence, and they don’t try to squeeze every dollar/peso/euro/keep er/pound/etc. from those tourists.
The places that put on a facade to attract tourists and their quick money, and as noted above, offer mostly cheap trinkets as the result, or a contrived “experience” to lure visitors - those are “touristy.”. The worst offenders are “tourist traps.”
Agree with Pat and Cyn. My definition: too many people in too small an area, from other countries, who can be loud and pushy, junk stores all around you, crap food places all around you. Hard to define precisely, but you know it when you’re in it. Doesn’t feel authentic.
“What are some places that are visited by a lot of tourists but are not "touristy"? And why not?”
Versailles is one example… lots of tourists but not touristy to me. No junk stores, junk food, locals there walking and enjoying the gardens/grounds, authentic and in a real town not geared to the tourists visiting the palace.
Bruges maybe is a dictionary example of touristy????
I think there’s a big difference between “touristy” and tourist trap. Have you ever been to Niagara Falls in Ontario? Or Fishermans Wharf in San Francisco? Those are places I would consider tourist traps. They have some beautiful things there to see, but the overwhelming number of souvenir shops and hucksters spoil the entire scene.
Touristy, though, seems to refer more to a place that attracts a large number of tourists, usually due to its reputation as a place of charm, or for some other reason. Yet it still retains that charm and doesn’t cash in too much on that reputation. Rothenburg ob der Tauber in Germany could be considered touristy. But you don’t see the huge number of souvenir shops that you do in tourist traps.
There are some gray areas. For example, the Royal Mile in Edinburgh has a lot of historic value, but also a lot of souvenir shops. Is it a tourist trap? Or just touristy? I don’t know.
It’s a really interesting question, Lane, and it’s given me a lot to think about.
Touristy = lots of tourists around and I don't like it.
Not touristy = I like it despite the tourists.
Good summation Dick!
From Oxford Languages:
relating to, appealing to, or visited by tourists (often used to suggest tawdriness or lack of authenticity). "a touristy shopping street"
The part before the parentheses is common to most of the definitions I saw and seems positive or at least neutral. The part inside the parentheses is the negative part. The quoted example brings a few specific images to mind.
So, I'm thinking that no matter how many tourists, if a place is authentic and not tawdry (cheap and of poor quality), it's touristy in a positive way. One of the synonyms I found for places lots of people like to go or see is "touristed."
From that perhaps we might describe the authentic yet crowded as heavily touristed but not touristy. I'm sure all of us could list places that we think could fit that description and some of us might still think of them as touristy in a negative way.
Interesting. Touristed vs. touristy. Maybe that’s just semantics, but there is a difference. As mentioned above, there may be a fine line between the two. Or it can be a marked difference.
You know the less desirable situation when you see it. And maybe a place can be crowded but you don’t mind, or perhaps you’re put off by the crowding of fellow tourists. The thing is, if you’re there, you’re part of the problem. If it’s not a problem, then join in, but then don’t complain if it suddenly seems to have crossed that fine line and become a problem.
I must say, the Cinque Terre were wonderful back in 2001. Many elements were still nice in 2021, but other aspects were annoying and unpleasant, and very crowded with pushy tourists. I’m glad for the 2 times I got to visit; I likely won’t be back.
On the other hand, the Blarney Castle and its wonderful grounds were quite enjoyable last month. There were no busloads of tours that afternoon. The castle and remnants of previous other buildings were interesting. The gardens were imaginative and colorful, lush with blooming plants, and with a temporary exhibit of modern sculptures. The ridiculous Blarney Stone was easily passed by and ignored, while the rest of the surviving castle was savored. Cheap souvenirs? I didn’t see them, if they were there, so were easily avoided. Had there been 6 busloads of additional people, that might’ve been a different situation.
Some places now are like spots that Yogi Berra once suggested, “It’s so crowded that nobody goes there anymore.”
Well done, Dick, but I would add that places are a lot more enjoyable to visit absent a crush of humanity. The Louvre, for example.
Means I am there having a good time.
I'm a tourist, not a traveler. Today I am a tourist in Malta. Tomorrow Budapest, next week D. C. That's a lot of traveling for a tourist.
Look at any cruise ship stop for the essence of touristy.
There are some gray areas. For example, the Royal Mile in Edinburgh
has a lot of historic value, but also a lot of souvenir shops. Is it a
tourist trap? Or just touristy? I don’t know.
Here's an excerpt from a Trip Report I wrote last year:
There was a person that was in Scotland at the same time as us that was making daily posts of her trip to the RS Facebook site. She called the Royal Mile touristy and disappointing. We walked up and down the mile several times in our first couple of days and enjoyed the views and architecture, but her opinion wasn’t entirely inaccurate as it is full of souvenir shops. However, thanks to the Mercat Tour we took of the Royal Mile we were able to have a historical picture painted for us of the Mile that completely turned around the views of what we were seeing. https://www.mercattours.com/ It made the Mile relevant to us instead of a tacky tourist trap, and I can’t recommend Mercat enough.
For me 'touristy' is such a misused word that I tend to ignore it when reading reviews or opinions of why not to go to a location. You can choose to see the souvenir shops or you can choose to see the history all around you.
Pompeii is another example. As you get off the train at the Pompeii Scavi station, you are in the middle of my definition of 'touristy' with tacky souvenirs, crappy food and people doing their best to hustle you out of your money. But you enter the archeological park and even though there may be a mass of tourists, it is one of the most historically sensational places I've ever been. And yet some choose to blanket the entire experience as touristy.
We found the Royal Mile to be extremely touristy (in a bad way). To me, if there are crowds of people standing around street performers, then that brands it as touristy in my book. (I'm looking at you, Royal Mile bagpipers!)
I think the difference in the Lake District is that the whole area is touristy (not a bad thing), but certain towns- especially Keswick and Windermere get totally over run by tourists and become tourist traps. Windermere in particular really struggles with the infrastructure.
Guide books (including RS) focus on lists of top 10 (or whatever sights) which just encourages the bunching phenomenon.
Even people who come by car insist on going to the main towns and main sights, and no-one can get them distributed around the equally good villages- with glorious exceptions of course.
I have taken the conscious decision this year that I am keeping out of the central Lake District entirely between Easter and September, and avoiding the crowding, bustling and log jammed traffic.
There are many other places I can go to in the County where I can avoid the crowds, but are equally as good, if not better than where all the tourists are (the so called "must do" places)- that is probably about 75% or more of the County. I will be back when the crowds have gone for the year. I can go round the County to go south, not through it. Everything will still be there then.
First off, Dick, I think you've hit the nail on the head. If the presence of (other) tourists detracts from your pleasure, it's touristy.
But I don't necessarily agree with how some have characterized tourist traps.
The way I see it, a tourist trap is a place that tourists are lured to but that have little or no touristic value. They are a waste of time and/or money. Some tourist traps maybe were once worth visiting, but have been so completely transformed by tourism that they have lost their identity.
I would never characterize Niagara Falls as a tourist trap. The falls are still a sight to behold. Touristy, yes, but not a tourist trap.
Fisherman's Wharf was probably a delightful place to visit at one time to get an authentic look at the workings of the local fishing industry. But over the years it has become something completely different, and is rightly characterized as a tourist trap.
Touristy = lots of tourists around and I don't like it.
Not touristy = I like it despite the tourists.
So it's OK for me to say that Disney World is not touristy?
This is why I love walking tours. Instead of wondering what you're looking at, you have someone explain the importance of the places and that adds a whole other dimension of understanding. It's also rewarding in that you can ask the tour guide what it is you're looking at.
English is not my first language so maybe I'm wrong but for me touristy means a place that has become a "disneyfied" version of its former self where the tourists vastly outnumber the locals. For example, a place where the entire economy is predicated on the fact that cruise ships filled with paying customers, often double the local population, must come into port every morning for the town to survive. I'm thinking places like Oia, Hallstatt, Barcelona, Prague, Dubrovnik etc.
Perhaps they are nice to visit once, but I wouldn't go back a second time.
I think Carlos has made a great post. I think of Galway, Ireland when I think of a place that seems like it has become what tourists think it should be in order to get business. Nothing wrong with that, but it was just a feeling I had while I was there. Did it keep me from enjoying myself? No, but I found many other locations throughout Ireland that did not have that vibe.
Cruise ports are interesting because the area closest to the where ships berth often do have the same shops with the same merchandise. Really, are there that many people out buying diamonds while on vacation to justify a Diamonds International store in every port? However, I have never found it a problem to move beyond the port area and out into areas that are less tourist oriented.
I think the key here is move beyond or see beyond the distractors of commerce and getting the tourist $$ and enjoy yourself.
PS I do not begrudge anyone operating a business that targets tourists. People need to make a living.
After reading this, I am definitely a TOURIST. How about you?
Europe’s 15 Most-Visited Tourist Attractions
Touristy often is used to describe the greatest wonders of the world, which attract large numbers of people wanting to see or experience them. As opposed to experienced travelers who, for the most part, saw the wonders years ago and now go looking for different experiences and advise others to skip what they themselves have already seen.
Mister E for the winning definition!
I frequently "traveled" for work, and spent a lot of well-compensated time in places that I would also visit as a tourist. I will take tourist over traveler any day.
A few years ago, a relative traveling to San Francisco for work called me for some sightseeing tips. I told him to take MUNI to Fillmore Street, walk downhill to The Marina, and then take the Fort Mason trail to Hyde Street Pier and beyond. I warned him that Fisherman's Wharf was real touristy. His response: "I'm a real tourist!".
Touristy often is used to describe the greatest wonders of the world, which attract large numbers of people wanting to see or experience them. As opposed to experienced travelers who, for the most part, saw the wonders years ago and now go looking for different experiences and advise others to skip what they themselves have already seen.
Naturally the great monuments of the world are touristy. I don't think many New Yorkers visit the Statue of Liberty everyday or Parisians make a daily trip up the Eiffel Tower on their way back from work lol!
I think the op is more thinking of towns and cities as a whole which have been transformed into tourist attractions over the years, rather than purely the individual monuments themselves.
Also from my experience I've never seen anyone on this forum recommend people don't visit the Pyramids, or the Vatican, or the Sagrada Familia, Machu Picchu.
After traveling all over hell and creation in the Air Force, I'll pick tourist over traveler.
Embrace what we are, folks. Blend in. Don't blend in. Nobody cares.
If you're self-conscious about looking like a stereotypical tourist, remember these people won't see you again nor does it matter.
Tourist Traps: Disney World, the Wisconsin Dells, Colonial Williamsburg, Knotts Berry Farm, Six Flags, etc. Made for tourists.
Touristy Places: Odd museums (the definition is in the eye of the ticketholder), any store that sells T-shirts, fridge magnets, statues of the local monuments and anything made outside the local country
I agree with a lot of what Allan said especially using his example of The Royal Mile. Your experience of a place can be what you make of it. We took the Mercat Tour of the Royal Mile and the introductory tour of the Castle. And that made all the difference for us. We learned about the history of the Royal Mile and their introduction to the castle was just as interesting. Our guide was wonderful, very informative and knowledgeable. And guess what? We didn’t go into one single souvenir shop on the Royal Mile.
Was it crowded? Yes, of course in June the Royal Mile was crowded. But all these well-known and famous sites, whether it’s the Royal Mile, the Eiffel Tower, the Alhambra, Venice, Cinque Terre, etc. are crowded for a reason. They are beautiful and historically important!
Disneyland is about 500 acres and serves about 50,000 tourists each day. Everything in Disneyland exists to serve tourism.
Prague Old Town is about 300 acres and serves 50,000 to 90,000 tourists a day. Everything, nearly, in Old Town exists to serve tourism.
Is Prague Old Town a tourist trap? Disneyland? Both are "touristy" but neither is a trap as a trap is something different than what is advertised.
The Komani Lake Ferry carries 80% tourists and would probably not exist in its current state if it were not for tourists. Touristy? Trap? Seriously, a lake ferry in the Albanian Alps could not possibly be a tourist trap?
Signed;
Proud Tourist
If there is a large amount of people at a site with no real interest in that site's history or importance, and are there just so that they can say they were there, and take a selfie to post on FB, then it is "touristy." :)
"Touristy" is a subjective and pejorative term used by a tourist to describe any place, food, activity or other thing that they don't enjoy even though a lot of other tourists enjoy them.
Touristy means you're paying 2-3 times what the locals pay at their pub a block away.
I've really thought long and hard about what it means to me and it doesn't mean anything positive.
Definitely not cities as a whole are touristy, just individual areas. Take Venice for example.
Some festivals, like the Oktoberfest in Munich, seem to be touristy, but they aren't because many locals go there as well including myself. On the other hand, I walked through the Hofbräuhaus last week with a visitor from overseas and I did not like it at all. Incidentally, this was only the second time I ever set foot in although the building itself is quite interesting. The few locals go in there, don't save the Hofbräuhaus from being a tourist trap in my eyes.
But for me the worst form of touristy in Germany is definitely Rothenburg. I've been there once and sorry it's like Disneyland for me personally. There are so many beautiful medieval villages in Germany that are much more authentic (in terms of charme) and where you don't just stumble upon tourists from all over the world.
Everyone should visit what he/she wants please don't get me wrong. That's just my take on touristy.
Some festivals, like the Oktoberfest in Munich, seem to be touristy,
but they aren't because many locals go there as well including myself.
Having that same discussion at work today because the Calgary Stampede starts on Friday. It's not touristy if the locals are part of the party.
Help me … if locals go there it's not touristy? Define local? I get the "local discount" at a few bars on Maui but I'm not a local just a "regular". If people from Florence visit the Cinque Terre are they locals or tourists?
Only people from Cinque Terre are locals in Cinque Terre.
"FROM" Born or naturalized?
I grew up in two heavily touristed cities, Washington DC and London, in a family that enjoyed grumbling about and making fun of tourists. So now, trying to be a better person (!), I just avoid crowds whenever I can and remember always that if I am someplace popular with a lot of other people, I am contributing to its being crowded.
I would say that a place is "touristy" when it caters significantly more to tourists than to locals.
For example, even though Paris is immensely popular with tourists, by and large it is not "touristy" in my book, perhaps with the exception of the top of Montmartre, the vicinity of the Eiffel Tower, and that of Notre Dame.
Born or naturalized?
A very American way of looking at identity. I think in Europe being a local implies a deep-rooted connection to the land, traditions, and history of a specific area or region. It goes beyond the idea of the nation-state/citizenship. It encompasses not only legal status but also a sense of shared experiences and a common understanding of societal norms. In my hometown of Barcelona for example, there live many people from around the world mostly on a transient basis, but there much fewer real "locals", per say, who have a socio-cultural connection to the area.
It's worth noting that in Europe we acknowledge the importance of welcoming and integrating newcomers into our societies, but it's not as easy as just legal status, it's hard work becoming a "local" and may take generations to achieve. Many times Americans will move to some charming village to live like a local, but they will always be seen as "The American" by the village community even after several years living there.
Carlos, good observation. I can move to France and live there 20 years, get citizenship and contribute to French society, but I would never be French. The US is very different. One of my favorite moments was when I was traveling from Istanbul to Houston with a young lady who was born and raised in a country that does not have friendly relations with the US (an understatement). She had gotten her US citizenship a few months prior to the trip and this was the first time she was entering the US on a US passport. She was in line in front of me at passport control and when we both got through I thought she looked upset. I asked if the agent had not been nice to her because of her prior nationality. She said, "no, he only said welcome home ma'am. And for the first time I knew I was an American," and that made her somewhat emotional.
Mister E, that's a fascinating story, yes I think that it's easier to become a local in the USA, just need citizenship and maybe a basic understanding of the culture and history. People are not so much tied to the land or history of a place, but maybe that's not necessarily a bad thing.
In many ways it reflects the ancient Roman views on citizenship, at least during the Imperial era.
I've helped a number of my employees get visas and eventually citizenship, and while some didn't understand how or why, I think they all came to the understanding that they had become equal American citizens. Not for comparison, just a cultural difference and every culture should love what's good in their culture.
I am a resident of a European country now, I know I will always be the Texan next door (I educated them on the distinction), but I am accepted with kindness and understanding and my host country should be proud of that.
"FROM" Born or naturalized?
Like Carlos said!
I am a resident of a European country now, I know I will always be the Texan next door
What do you think will happen if I move to lake Tegernsee as a Munich city kid? :-) :-)
I would always remain the Munich city kid in the eyes of the locals and never become a real Tegernseer. I forgot how many generations it takes to be considered local. In any case significantly less in big cities than in a little village I would say.
Totally enjoyed this whole discussion thread. Lots to think about.
Teger...what?
A lake Tegernsee resident is a Tegernseer :-)
Hello,
Touristy to me means a place with inflated prices just because many tourists go there.... restaurants and shops that are near major attractions tend to have poor service, high prices, and cater to said tourists. Of course, the history is there, but after viewing walk a few blocks out of the "touristy" areas and you will find better shops and restaurants with better pricing and service. Just my opinion but I get chuffed reading all these comments..
What makes a place "touristy"?
Its memorable and fun and devoid of "travelers"
A sight or location is often considered "touristy" when it exhibits certain characteristics that cater to the preferences and interests of tourists. These characteristics can include:
Crowds: Touristy places tend to be crowded with tourists, often resulting in long lines and congestion.
Commercialization: Touristy areas are often commercialized, with numerous souvenir shops, restaurants, and attractions geared toward tourists.
High prices: Prices for goods and services in touristy areas may be higher than in other parts of a region, taking advantage of tourists' willingness to spend.
Familiarity: Touristy places are often well-known and frequently visited by tourists, making them popular destinations.
Iconic landmarks: Touristy spots often feature iconic landmarks or attractions that are widely recognized and frequently photographed, such as the Eiffel Tower in Paris or the Statue of Liberty in New York.
Guided tours: Touristy locations often offer guided tours and other organized activities to cater to tourists looking for structured experiences.
Accessibility: Touristy places are typically easily accessible by public transportation and often have tourist-friendly infrastructure.
Multilingual signs and information: These places often provide information and signage in multiple languages to accommodate a diverse range of visitors.
Tourist services: Touristy areas frequently offer services like guided tours, shuttle buses, and information centers to assist tourists.
Touting and hustling: In some touristy areas, you might encounter people aggressively promoting products, services, or tours, which can be a turn-off for some travelers.
Limited authenticity: Touristy places may lack a sense of authenticity or local culture, as they have adapted to cater to the tastes and expectations of tourists.
Social media presence: Touristy places often become popular on social media platforms, contributing to their reputation as tourist destinations.
It's important to note that while touristy places may have some or all of these characteristics, they can still be enjoyable and offer unique experiences. Many people visit touristy places for a reason, such as to see famous landmarks or enjoy the convenience of well-developed tourist infrastructure. However, some travelers prefer to seek out less touristy or off-the-beaten-path destinations to have a more authentic or tranquil experience.
"A traveller is nothing more than a highfalutin tourist." - Randolph Scott.
But did they enjoy it?
For me it’s more the question what makes a place non-touristy but has the potential becoming touristy. I like to travel off the beaten path and like places still having their innocence and I don’t care about the local commerce you find actually anyware. It’s the combination of beauty and innoncence that makes those places so attractive. As soon as commerce arrive to exploit this, it’s over and out with the real attraction, it’s gone, and from then on the place is what I call touristy. It has become a business model and the tourist has no clue how it was before and seems happy with a superficial experience.
I live close to Bruges and not that long ago it was dead between autum and spring, and even touristy as it always has been it still had a kind of that innocence. The latter nothing of it nowadays, it’s busy all year around. In the past it was the place for visitors looking for quality but have become obviously an overlooked minority.
