Where to go?

Not really sure what "Steveian" means. However with only 5 days I would go to either London or Paris. Either city has enough to see to occupy 5 days plus sticking with one city will be best with that short of trip.

Have fun!

With five days, any major city in Europe that you can get to directly would be great....so it really depends on what you like to do. But, with five days, one city is really it. For me, Paris would be the one.

I agree with Norm on Paris. My favorite city in the world. Don't plan on more than one city for 5 days.

Your interests are different; so you should research London and Paris to determine which would please you more.

I would research on the web by doing a google search for "Longon sights" and the same for Paris. Read about each city to decide.

Second choice for me is to go to the library and browse travel books for the area I plan to see.

The more time you research before you go, the more your trip bill benefit you.

Dan: Does the 5 days include the arrival day? If it does, consider that day a half day at best, and that would be another good reason to be in Paris only, or London only. You might also think about Amsterdam but I would opt for Paris without a minute's thought !

Have you ever traveled to Europe? Do you prefer to soak up the local atmosphere or sigth-see? Although language barriers are falling all over Europe, how much of a barrier would you prefer?

And I would agree with the others. With only 5 days, I would stay in one location, with one possible daytrip, depending on which city you pick.

I agree with much of what was said. If the five days includes flights, that means only 4 1/2.

We don't know if you've been before or this is your first trip.

I always suggest to Europe novices that they think about London as the first place to go. No real language problems, lots of do both in town as well as a daytrip--including a daytrip to Paris--and I believe it's an easier transition to another culture.

Paris would be my close second as a suggestion.

The choice really depends on what you want, enjoy, and would feel most comfortable in.

And since you're close proximity to JFK and EWR--should you choose London or Paris, stick to non-stop flights. No reason to change anywhere.

Five short days, Paris. London would be a second choice.
Five days equals one city to me.

You will definately want to go back once you have whetted your whistle on Paris, you could spend weeks there and not see everything,, and the best part about Paris is just the " cafe culture" , nothing better then just sitting down at some cafe and nursing a cheap pitcher of wine or a overpriced cup of coffee( although Starbucks has numbed me to what expensive coffee really is, ) and relaxing .. ahhh Paris!

There are tons of cheaper places to stay, for first timers , or people who enjoy being able to walk to alot of sites , try staying in arrondissmonts 1 through 7,, although 8 , 9, are not too far out from center either. Hotels addresses will have a 5 digit postal code ,, the last two digits will tell you which arrondissmont hotel is in,, ie:75006 means it is in 6th (aka St Germain ) .

Have fun, plan on seeing one or two "big sites" a day, and then just wander and enjoy Paris the rest of the time!!

Dan,

Regarding your description of the "Steveian" travel philosophy, I've also heard RS devotees described as "Rickniks".

To comment on your question, I definitely agree with the others. With such a short visit, limit your stay to one city. London or Paris would be my choices also. Your choice will depend to a large extent on what you most want to see - both of those cities have lots of Museums, Art Galleries and other historic sites. From London a day trip to Paris is certainly possible (although with only five days there's lots to do in London). Day trips to Bath or York are also possible.

You didn't indicate if you've been to Europe previously? Also, you didn't say if you'll actually have five days for touring, or whether that includes the flight day?

Whichever city you choose, I'd suggest taking a Guidebook along so that you have lots of information available to tour efficiently.

Happy travels!

I agree that Paris and London would be good choices but how about Rome.If a direct flight from NY goes directly to Rome april would be a good time providing its not easter week.

I would go to Paris or Rome. As a previous poster noted, Rome would be great weather-wise as long as it isn't Easter week. If you have never been to any of the cities, I would say London or Paris.

Thanks for all the suggestions. Here are a few more details based on the the comments thus far.

We'll have 5 days, not including travel days. We've been to Europe once together -- last year to Munich, Florence, Cinque Terre, and Rome. My wife has been to London, Dublin, Madrid, and Barcelona on her own.

We see London and Paris as attractive options, but each has a liability. London: (i) my wife has already been there (albeit many years ago) and (ii) friends have commented that it can feel like visiting New York City (where we live). Paris: we don't speak French.

Do these details change anyone's opinion? Thanks again for all your help! We hope to return the favor.

Dan, be careful about what you "hear" about Paris. Take it with a grain of salt so to speak.

There seems to be a group of people, who often have never been to Paris( or France) , or were there years ago on some 1 day bus tour stop, and love to say negative things about the city. ( these same people poured their french wine into gutters and renameing their fries "freedom" fries, LOL )

You will hear the " french are rude" or " the french don't like Americans" etc.. niether of which are any more true then the stupid "Ugly American" steretypes.

You may encounter a rude person. You may encounter someone who does not speak english.. BUT, is this not true in even your own city ?

You will also encounter many kind and helpful people, some of whom will speak english well, some of whom will reluctantly speak a little of it poorly( they are embarrassed of their ablilties and will only speak it if they find our your french is worse then their english.LOL) .

If the sights you think you would enjoy are in Paris, don't let the langauge thing hold you back, and do not accept third hand information from people who have never been there,, challenge them, when they say they have heard " the french are such and such" ,, ask they when their last visit was,, it could be awkward for them, LOL

As noted , either London or Paris are good choices, you just have to figure out your personal tastes and desires . I give the nod to Paris for the "cafe culture" and better food, but London has a lot of interesting sites also.

Dan,, why on earth would you not go to Paris because you don't speak french??

Do you need to go somewhere that is english speaking, or do you speak some other languages??

You need to learn to say a few words in the language of any other country you visit, please, and thank you for instance. This is simple, anyone can learn a few words. Other then that you would be fine.

I cannot beleive people only travel to places where they speak the language,, gosh, I wouldn't have much fun at all if I chose places to visit based on that!

As for London, if you wife has only been there once, and that was years ago, I hardly think another visit would be a problem, so much to see and do there, and what little she remembers would make her a great tour guide for all of you!!

Pat,
Thanks for your thoughts. We've traveled to many countries where we don't speak the language, but I've heard that France is especially challenging for non-speakers. To your point, though, we have four months -- more than enough time to learn something! Thanks again.

I would still go to London or Paris. You don't need to speak French to go to Paris . . . geez, Rick doesn't speak French! Every day people go to France without speaking French. London is the most magnificent city in the world. Once is not enough, twice is not enough.

I still vote London since you haven't been.

But Paris is also great. You don't have to speak French to enjoy it. Just learn some of the basics and start your conversations in French. I have found the Parisians, as well as most others in France, appreciative that you at least tried.

There are some excellent language programs out there that teach the basics for tourists. I like Pimsleur because it works. Even after doing just the Level 1 program (which took 30 minutes a day for 30 days), I was able to go to Paris and have no problems at all. (Check your local library as they might carry it.)

I would pick a major city and stick there with maybe one day trip. Rome, Paris, London, Berlin, Vienna would all be good choices for five days.

You can always get by on English only. Once you decide, it's worth spending a little time studying language so you know some polite words and menu items.

I am going to suggest Berlin. This is truly an exciting city, with lots of historical sites, museums and great day trips too.

And of course, Vienna should be on the short list as well! :-))))))))
http://www.vienna.info/article.asp?IDArticle=9010

I have to vote for London. Unlike many on this board, I did have a bad experience in Paris! London is one of my FAVORITE desinations. We've been to Europe more than 40 times in 20 years and almost every trip has included at least a few days in London. Many were London only (as a base with day trips). There are STILL things we haven't done in London. It is a great place for couples and there are marvelous day trips. PM me for ideas. I wrote an article for AAA Carolinas "Go" magazine last year about the day trips- here is the link: http://www.aaacarolinas.com/Magazine/2008/Jan-Feb/britain.htm?zip=28201&stateprov=nc&city=charlotte

I was going to suggest Rome but since you did that last year you should do something different. I like both London and Paris. A particularly attractive part of these cities is that you could see each while across the pond. You could make one your home base and swing over the other as day trip or even a one night stop over. Having been to both NYC and London - they are really quite different - but at the same time I understand what your friend meant. I suggest going to Paris for the bulk of the trip, so much to see and do while you are there - and heading up to London as a day trip. Then you can see for yourself that although there are similarities between London and NYC, you will see they are after all much different. Your wife will appreciate the flood of memories that will come back to her and the two of you can enjoy seeing it together for the first time. As far as what to do in each city - well this site is full of great ideas. Rick probably has a thing or two to say abut the cities as well :-) I don't speak french (despite taking it in High School) but that does not matter. You can get by quite easily. The Parisian attitude is much better than it was 10 years ago.

Dan,

Thanks for providing the additional details on your trip, that really helps.

Based on the fact that both you and your wife have been to London and Rome on past visits, I still feel that Paris would be the perfect choice. As I recall, there's a song titled April in Paris? I can't imagine a nicer place to spend five days.

Don't worry too much about the fact that you can't speak French. Paris is a major tourist destination, and most of the people you'll be dealing with have at least some ability to function in English. You may encounter a few people that appear "rude" but I tend to just ignore things like that. Rick has said in the past (and I'm paraphrasing a bit) that "if a person from Sweden meets a person from Italy, they communicate in English".

I've only got my limited high school French and have had very few problems in France so far (I'm planning to take a "refresher" at night school in March). However it's a good idea to learn some of the common phrases and words (please, thank you, hello, etc.). You might find it useful to take a copy of Rick's Phrasebook with you. Also, from what I've seen it's customary to greet the shop owner when entering a store, with a Bonjour, Madame (or whatever is appropriate for the circumstances). Most travellers seem to agree that the important thing is to at least try a few words in the local language.

However, if you're more comfortable with London I think your Wife will find it much different than her previous visit. It will likely be a bit more expensive than Paris, depending on the exchange rates (the Pound was at parity with the Euro recently, but I'm not sure where it's at now?).

Cheers!

Dan,

One other point regarding your trip. If you're planning on visiting any Museums in Paris (the Louvre, Musee d'Orsay, etc.), you may want to download Rick's Podcasts on whichever places you'll be visiting. These are FREE and it's almost like having Rick along as a "personal tour guide".

Check the home page of this site or I-Tunes. I'm assuming of course that you have an MP3 Player of some kind?

Happy travels!

Paris is beautiful. We were there for a week in May with what remained of my 3rd grade French (now about 50 years old) and had no problem whatsoever. A smile and a "bonjour" got us everywhere. I firmly believe that if you go looking for pleasant people you will find them. Every Parisian we encountered (and it was lots...I'm not the shy type) treated us kindly. Do not be put off because you don't speak French.

Having a 'road less traveled' philosophy can I suggest something not as predictable as Paris or London? As a profession photographer I love to explore new places, where sights are a surprise...
Budapest is a wonderful city... beautiful, and at half the price of Paris, it is a great travel value.
A rich history, wonderful indoor market with great food and friendly people have made this my new favorite city. Prague is the first runner-up. I have been many times to all of the cities suggested and think some of the more unique destinations are by far the most exciting.( I don't speak any languages except a few words of Spanish and have managed with sign language and pointing and a few laughs)