Have just returned from a wonderful month in Italy. I think I spent six months in my planning. Planning is great and exciting but what's the saying 'the best made plans ....' I had recommendations of restaurants in different places but really who has time to actually find where they are, it's okay in theory but not in practice.
Lots of things went out the window as we walked and explored and discovered. We had great food and great experiences but mostly not at the places I had 'listed' The internet is great but does it turn us into control freaks. Travel is about taking risks, having prior knowledge of certain aspects is certainly helpful but letting go and knowing you can't see everything is very freeing and less stressful. We had an average of four days in most places and seven days in one village but really you just get to know where the best coffee is, the bakery, the internet etc. and its time to move on. I would go to less places and spend more time in each. Just a thought .......
Posted by
Jonesboro, Arkansas, USA
606 posts
Excellent advice, Carol. So good, in fact, that it needs to be repeated!
I've often had the same thoughts regarding restaurants. They aren't easy to find, even with good directions. You end up spending a lot of valuable vacation time trying to figure out the street sign system and address numbering systems that aren't always consistent. Perhaps it's better to ask at the hotel desk about a good place nearby. Even those places aren't always easy to find, but you'll rarely be disappointed.
I'd agree that advance research is valuable. If you happen by a place you're read about, you know if it's worth going in or not. But it's best not to advance-micromanage every hour of your vacation.
Posted by
Myrtle Beach, USA
12313 posts
Advance research is invaluable because you can learn all your options. When you are actually on your trip, you can pick and choose based on your priorities rather than waste valuable time trying to figure out what to see and do.
The least valuable part of any guidebook are restaurant recommendations. Good restaurants are essentially ruined the moment they are printed in a guidebook. A restaurant that may have catered to locals and offered great menu choices at reasonable prices will be overrun by tourists, the prices go up, the locals go away and the menu changes to meet the demands of the tourist trade.
I just ask a local for a good place to eat. I always stress "nothing fancy". I want good, affordable and authentic food. IMO the nature of guidebooks makes it impossible for them to recommend that.
Posted by
Eastern Iowa, USA
8058 posts
I wholeheartedly agree with the sentiment. I love researching, learning, and roughing out itineraries; but realize and cherish the fact that travel is an exploration. I list restaurants like I do hotels and sites. If I see a recommended restaurant, I usually check it out, but rarely do I obsess about finding these places, overlooking what I see along the way. I did make a point to seek out a couple places in Rome, mostly to good results, some great, and one closed. Interestingly, I look not at the recommendation, but the information about what food they serve.