Please sign in to post.

Planning your trip? reflecting on why, IMHO, fewer is better, especially when travelling Spain

First of all, I want to say that "one man's meat is another man's poison", of course, and everyone has their own unique way of travelling, with no one way being necessarily better than another.

Often, especially around this time of year, you’ll see posts from first-time travellers planning their vacations in some corner of Europe. For many, the overwhelming amount of options and other travellers’ comments about this city, that town, or that region worth visiting makes it tough to plan their trip properly—too much to do and see in too little time.

Years ago, there was a comedy that perfectly captured this type of travel: "If It's Tuesday, This Must Be Belgium", where a group of American tourists takes an 18-day trip through Europe, filled with clichés and ridiculous, funny situations. Even 50 years later, this scenario often repeats itself.

Everyone has their preferences, but as a European, I personally don't like travelling "too much" when on holiday (in Europe). Rushing from A to B to C like a headless chicken seems like a waste of time since you can't really appreciate much of what you're seeing. I prefer fewer basecamps and spending more time on short day trips. I specifically mentioned "when on holiday in Europe" because, for historical reasons, Europe is a mesh of thousands of cities, towns, villages, and hamlets in relative proximity to each other—with a few exceptions on the continent's fringe. This means many opportunities exist to enjoy different experiences without moving around much.

Whether you're an urbanite, a nature lover, or into rural experiences, you can find plenty within a short distance from any corner of the continent. So, I always recommend staying at least 3 or 4 nights at each base camp, especially for visitors from larger countries accustomed to long travels between cities. You'll slow down and enjoy the whole experience better while still having plenty of things to do and see. This especially applies to more touristic countries like France, Italy, or Spain.

Take my home city, Barcelona, for example. The city warrants at least four or five full days to scratch the surface of what it offers. Then, there are countless day (or sleepover) trips that will blow your mind, from the picturesque towns of Costa Brava to the vast plains of Lleida, the Delta del Ebre nature reserve to the south, or the imposing Pyrenees mountains to the north. All of these are within 100-150 miles of Barcelona, many even reachable by a very decent public transportation network. Similarly, whether you set up basecamp in say Madrid, Seville, or Donosti/San Sebastian, for example, you have plenty of options for enjoying a day in the countryside visiting quirky towns, beautiful natural landscapes, historical ruins, heritage festivals, tasting local products, and more, without having to drag your suitcases up and down.

And don't forget about the heritage festivals and other popular celebrations. Every corner has its own, celebrated throughout the year. A vacation isn't just about visiting museums, ruins, and natural landscapes... interacting with the local culture is often the highlight for many travellers. When planning your trip, check out the tourism websites of the towns and cities around your base camps to see the event agendas. If you can attend any of them, don't hesitate!

If you plan to visit my turf, here is a taste of what you can do and see: www.catalunya.com/en

Enjoy!

Posted by
2535 posts

I totally agree with your sentiment to slow down a bit and enjoy what you are seeing. That is how my husband and I travel. But remember you have the luxury of already being in Europe where getting to different sites does not mean a 6 to 12+ hour round trip flight. For those traveling that long distance from the US, Canada or beyond to get to Europe with limited financial means and not knowing when or if they will ever return, the urge is strong to want to see and do as much as possible while there.

Posted by
89 posts

This is exactly my preference. I typically will choose a location with lots of options within a 1 hour radius….and stay at the chosen location for the entire time. Usually in a small to mid-sized town/city.

I like to get the “local” feel, for example going to the same coffee spot or bakery each morning.

Cities are great as an option for day trips, but not much charm to be found there. The charm people dream about in Europe is off the beaten path.

Cities like Barcelona feel more international to me, rather than a good representation of Spain.

Posted by
3047 posts

For those travelling that long distance from the US, Canada or beyond to get to Europe with limited financial means and not knowing when or if they will ever return, the urge is strong to want to see and do as much as possible while there.

That's precisely why I made this post, to reflect on the fact there are too many things to do/see so, and no matter what you choose, you're going to be missing a lot anyway. So, to those confused, I am saying: "Balance your trip".

Besides, it's the same for us Europeans when we travel to other parts of the world, meaning, we are confronted with the same dilemma: quantity vs quality.

Posted by
3480 posts

The other reason Americans rush about in Europe so often is because of our limited time off work. I believe Europeans get considerably more time off.
That said, now that we are fully retired we are joyfully planning to max out our Schengen time in Europe! We look forward to immersing ourselves in Europe with several stays of 2 weeks in one location…..ahhh

Posted by
329 posts

For a new traveller to Europe, I believe Rick Steves suggested itineraries are perfect. His tours essentially follow the same pace. Competitors to him like Tauck, Roads Scholar etc also all have about the same pacing. Most new travelers want to see the high points of each place and are willing to put in the time and effort to see them. They also don't need to always see the secondary sites and loiter. Finally, the travel from place to place is half of the fun for the new traveller. Driving the autobahn! Wow! Taking the trains across the Spain! Fantastic. Looking out the window of a bus at the mountains! Does it get any better? Packing and unpacking? What? That's no big deal!

Now as folks take more and more trips to Europe --- which is really not the norm-- they want to spend a minimum 3 or 4 days per stop. These seasoned travelers aren't into rushing. They don't want to see two museums, a garden, go for a hike and then a concert in a single day! That's crazy talk. They say things that Rick Steves trips are all a blur! I say nuts to that!

Well, given the reviews of his tours and his competitors tours and their pacing, I have to say the seasoned travelers posting on this forum are in fact out of touch with what younger less seasoned travelers want. Traveling to Europe isn't a beach vacation. It's a rare chance to see past civilizations, their roots, history, great art and visit cultures. Putting up with some travel "work" and long days is part and parcel of the experience. Faster! Harder! More! Carpe Diem! Another glass of wine! Go for it!

I believe the constant refrain on this forum to slow down in contradiction to Rick Steves advice and pacing of his tours (and indeed almost all tour companies) is just misplaced and wrong. Talking people out of skipping Venice or Pompei or Barcelona so they can spend more time to see the secondary sites , what? That's nuts. Why go to three places when you have time to see it all! At least consider the pacing of an expert like Rick Steves.

Now with all that said I too have been to Europe a couple dozen times now and I too like slow trips. I like spending weeks in the same spot even if there is nothing new to see the area. But when I help my kids or others plan, I send them towards Rick Steves-- not to slow down alley!

Is there really a right way and a wrong way? No. Both ways are good. Both ways are rewarding.

Posted by
1810 posts

I think because Americans get so little vacation time compared to Europeans, there is the tendency for us to pack the itinerary to the hilt so we can hit all the places on our bucket lists.
The other impact of too little vacation time is Americans often think the trip may be the last one for a long time. So they “have to see it all” (as if that were even possible) because this may be their last chance.
Then there are the travelers who only go to capital cities, missing their chance to see small charming towns and villages which really are unique and charming. Just on the third day as they finally become familiar with their favorite cafe or bistro and the metro system of Paris— it’s on to Berlin where they need to learn the U-Bahn layout. So, they never can settle in and get comfortable and actually relax where they are, because they move on so quickly.
It brings to mind the adage: “ Pleasure sought is pleasure lost.”
Another example of the frenetic travel style of “ If it’s Tuesday, this must be Belgium” was on TV ads in the 1980’s in the U.S. A tour company would offer various European tour packages with the least expensive tour touted by the announcer as the chance to “See 5 countries in 3 days for only $599”. followed by “Or See 11 countries in 9 days for $999.” The ultimate tour was the package offering the chance to “See 23 countries
in 14 Days!”
The ads were hilarious and they must have been successful because they went on for years especially during summertime.
When returning travelers shared what all they had seen on their bucket list during their trip ( as though their trip was the Olympics 100 meter race), I just wanted to ask:
“ Did you enjoy yourselves?”
Because you never can see it all.

Posted by
117 posts

I'm still trying to figure out the balance for myself. On this year's vacation I will be traveling the fastest I have ever done - 2-3 nights/place and I'm not sure how I will like it. But I want to give it a try because my bucket list is long....

Posted by
1212 posts

I think Brits my age (50-ish) who grew up in the package holiday boom of the 70's or 80's have a largely different idea about European travel. Staying in one place for an extended period of time is much more normalised, probably even amongst quite experienced travellers from Europe, travelling within Europe.

The only vaguely multi-destination travelling I've done is Interrailing a long time ago. Even then I made really poor use of tickets. Because we enjoyed Bayonne and Biarritz so much, all I saw in three weeks out was that little part of Basque Country, a day in Paris and the rest camping in Amsterdam north. The advantage of that I suppose was that I was able to buy my white tee and red neckerchief in Bayonne and everyone kept speaking french to me thinking I was local.

The statutory paid time off across Europe may be a factor. I've always been lucky to have all the holidays I need from work. Sometimes more than I knew what to do with. In my my last workplace I went full Parisienne and didn't go to work whole of August, just because French and Italian colleagues that put work my way did that.

Posted by
1810 posts

GerryM, You have transformed Parkinson’s Law which says “Work expands to fill the time available for its completion” into “Travel condenses in proportion to the happiness it brings.”
Cheers!

Posted by
7658 posts

Hi Enric, you live in a beautiful country! I appreciate the details you shared for many options in Spain.

I heartily agree with your comments towards the end to not forget about the heritage festivals and other popular celebrations & that interacting with the local culture is often the highlight for many travellers. Both of those are priorities for me when planning independent trips.

I do see many comments in general on our forum promoting thoughts like these two comments in the replies you’ve received. I know the intentions are good and to be helpful. But, it can seem like “wise travel choices” becomes a narrow definition of “a small quantity of base locations with day trips, only”.

”Now as folks take more and more trips to Europe --- which is really not the norm-- they want to spend a minimum 3 or 4 days per stop. These seasoned travelers aren't into rushing”.

”So, they never can settle in and get comfortable and actually relax where they are, because they move on so quickly.”

I’ve taken 17 trips to Europe now, and my itineraries are the exact opposite of these comments. My itinerary in May was 17 small hotel/B&B’s for 34 days. (I’m a retiree now.) Many on the forum would have tried to talk me out of it if I had posted it for # of nights feedback, Yet, I absolutely love this travel style! I never felt rushed; I relaxed leisurely at each location sketching & photographing and enjoyed the culture immensely, along with the San Nicola festival in Bari. I had studied Italian and enjoyed interacting with locals, especially the car ride to Martina Franca and the two cooking classes.

https://community.ricksteves.com/travel-forum/italy/my-1-month-independent-trip-to-southern-italy-tribute-to-my-husband

Posted by
638 posts

Interesting debate for sure. My experience would suggest fast, slow and in between are all ok. If I compare 47 year old me to 22 year old me, there are some key differences.

At 47 years old I have more money, more vacation time off from work, a family as travel companions, the ability to rent a car and knowledge from previous trips on what I like and don’t like. All of these lead towards longer stays in more off the beaten path locations. But to get here I needed 22 year old me to sample Europe. I’m currently planning a 2 week trip around Brittany France based on preferences from previous trips. This is not better or worse than my 1999 trip from Paris to Bern to Munich to London in 8 days, it’s just want I like now in 2024.