PDA

View Full Version : Some strange tourist complaints about sites in Italy



Angela
13-09-16, 18:45
Hey, I have no problem with people complaining of the heat, crowds, long lines, maybe some rude service personnel, but these go in the "Are You Kidding?" category. They're almost as bad as one elderly American woman I heard discussing their bus tour in Italy: "Honey, I really enjoyed this Firenze place, but I was hoping we could see Florence."

These are some of my favorites:

The Colosseum:

I expected something spectacular, like an alien ship or a fountain of youth. I was disappointed.'


Leaning Tower of Pisa: "Not even straight".

Rabbit Beach, Lampedusa:

"Misleading...I spent all day walking up and down the beach, but unfortunately there were no rabbits."
"Lots of topless ladies, which was very inappropriate."

(That had to be written by a woman, right?)

Pompei:'The place was in ruins'.

You get the drift, right? :laughing:

I highlighted my two favorite ones.

See the rest here:
http://www.thelocal.it/20160913/the-strangest-complaints-tourists-have-made-about-italy

Some people should just save their money and stay home. :smile:

Pax Augusta
13-09-16, 20:31
There are funniest complaints, but these two are among the best because reveal their cultural vacuum.

Venice

"Just go to the Venetian in Las Vegas, you'll have a better time."

Sistine Chapel

"Just a typical Catholic church".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Work_of_Art_in_the_Age_of_Mechanical_Reproduct ion

Angela
13-09-16, 22:23
These kind of people would have no idea what he's talking about here:

"Benjamin discusses the concept of authenticity, particularly in application to reproduction. 'Even the most perfect reproduction of a work of art is lacking in one element: its presence in time and space, its unique existence at the place where it happens to be.'[6] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Work_of_Art_in_the_Age_of_Mechanical_Reproduct ion#cite_note-benart-6) He argues that the "sphere of authenticity is outside the technical" so that the original artwork is independent of the copy, yet through the act of reproduction something is taken from the original by changing its context. He thus introduces the idea of the "aura" of a work and its absence in a reproduction, a concept borrowed from earlier ideas developed by Ludwig Klages (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_Klages).[7] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Work_of_Art_in_the_Age_of_Mechanical_Reproduct ion#cite_note-7)[8] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Work_of_Art_in_the_Age_of_Mechanical_Reproduct ion#cite_note-8)He looks at the changes in society's values over time, "the manner in which human sense perception is organized, the medium in which it is accomplished, is determined not only by nature but by historical circumstances as well."[6] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Work_of_Art_in_the_Age_of_Mechanical_Reproduct ion#cite_note-benart-6) Benjamin goes on to describe shifts in taste and style in art history and how this interacts with his concept of aura.
Despite the effect of a reproduction on the original, Benjamin writes "The uniqueness of a work of art is inseparable from its being embedded in the fabric of tradition,"[6] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Work_of_Art_in_the_Age_of_Mechanical_Reproduct ion#cite_note-benart-6) which speak to the separation of the original from the reproduction."

I would suggest that the best way to experience a work of art like the Sistine Chapel frescoes, given the size, and the fact that you can't get very close, is to first look at detailed, high quality reproductions, and then go to see it in place. The reproductions help in appreciating the work, but it has to be seen in its place, as it was meant to be seen, to get the effect that was intended. Looking at it in its setting, getting the total impact of all those hundreds of human figures, makes for a visceral experience which shouldn't be missed. Of course, it's best if you can arrange for a smaller group viewing.

I had much the same experience when I saw my first Van Gogh. I thought I knew what to expect, but the texture from the thick layers of paint, the visible brush strokes, the colors as seen in natural light, all made for a totally different experience than looking at a flat representation on a page.

Joey D
21-12-16, 10:36
Those are hilarious comments.

Now, some of you might put me in the same category as these tourists mentioned above when you read what I am about to write...but...bear with me.

At around the age of 25, I was lucky enough to get four months of leave from my job, and I did a massive trip to Europe, travelling with two uni friends, and we just explored Europe by train, with only a rough idea of where we were going next and it was probably the most memorable thing I have ever done in my life.

Some ten years later, I went on a trip to Europe with my wife-to-be, but we only had 9 weeks, so I applied this loose guide to our trip: no churches, no museums, no galleries.

Some people appreciated this (when I told them upon our return), others less so.

I didn't want to rush the 9 weeks, didn't want to stand around looking at what everyone else was looking at, I wanted to do my favourite activity: potter. I just like to potter.

And in the immortal words of the great futurist, Marinetti:

Perché dovremmo guardarci alle spalle, se vogliamo sfondare le misteriose porte dell'impossibile? Il Tempo e lo Spazio morirono ieri. Noi viviamo già nell'assoluto, poiché abbiamo già creata l'eterna velocità onnipresente.
...
Noi vogliamo distruggere i musei, le biblioteche, le accademie d'ogni specie....


Although, I must admit, I don't agree with what follows....actually, maybe I don't agree with any of it.

Would Marinetti have approved of pottering?

Angela
21-12-16, 16:42
Those are hilarious comments.

Now, some of you might put me in the same category as these tourists mentioned above when you read what I am about to write...but...bear with me.

At around the age of 25, I was lucky enough to get four months of leave from my job, and I did a massive trip to Europe, travelling with two uni friends, and we just explored Europe by train, with only a rough idea of where we were going next and it was probably the most memorable thing I have ever done in my life.

Some ten years later, I went on a trip to Europe with my wife-to-be, but we only had 9 weeks, so I applied this loose guide to our trip: no churches, no museums, no galleries.

Some people appreciated this (when I told them upon our return), others less so.

I didn't want to rush the 9 weeks, didn't want to stand around looking at what everyone else was looking at, I wanted to do my favourite activity: potter. I just like to potter.

And in the immortal words of the great futurist, Marinetti:

Perché dovremmo guardarci alle spalle, se vogliamo sfondare le misteriose porte dell'impossibile? Il Tempo e lo Spazio morirono ieri. Noi viviamo già nell'assoluto, poiché abbiamo già creata l'eterna velocità onnipresente.
...
Noi vogliamo distruggere i musei, le biblioteche, le accademie d'ogni specie....


Although, I must admit, I don't agree with what follows....actually, maybe I don't agree with any of it.

Would Marinetti have approved of pottering?

I most emphatically don't agree I'm afraid. Art doesn't move you, or architecture? You had no desire to see the places where so many important events not only of Italian history, but world history took place? Your wife didn't mind missing those experiences either?

As for Marinetti and the futurists in general, I have absolutely no sympathy with them. Philistines, and worse than philistines, in my opinion. No surprise to me that he became a fervid supporter and ally of Mussolini. It's all of a piece, in my opinion: the antithesis of humanism.

What kind of man could have written "The Manifesto against past-loving Venice"?
He advocated "fill(ing) the small, stinking canals with the rubble from the old, collapsing and leprous palaces" to "prepare for the birth of an industrial and militarized Venice, capable of dominating the great Adriatic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adriatic), a great Italian lake"."

If some people like or even prefer this, fine:
http://cdn.archinect.net/images/650x/6e/6e8969936a8149e464caa17df125a5d4.jpg

Does it mean this should be destroyed?
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-4Pwt3_13fEo/VjNI7seInRI/AAAAAAAAaVg/hQmBcBYsppc/s1600/St.%2BMark%2527s%2BSquare.jpg

So, we agree on this point.



As for exploring the past, I'll repeat a facile, perhaps trite comment: if you don't understand the past you are doomed to repeat it. Plus, for me, history provides such opportunity for inhabiting other realities and for understanding humanity. Just as an example, every time I go to Rome, I make time to visit The Basilica of San Clemente . On top is a 12th century Basilica, next level down is an early 4th century church, one of the first in Rome. The bottom level is a Mithraeum: sixty feet of human history. It's like taking an elevator down both in time and into the inner-springs of the human psyche.

Nothing wrong with "pottering" around, of course. I like that too. :)

Ed. I should also add that my immediate family doesn't go as far as I do. They usually go with me to my museum or church or historical site of the day for two or three hours and then go back to the hotel to relax or swim or to a piazza to people watch. I prefer it that way to be honest. Their chattering distracts me, and I don't want to be tour guide all the time. :) My favorite companions for these kinds of experiences are some of my friends, friends with either training or a deep interest in art, history or music. Of course, part of the reason I enjoy my trips with my friends so much is that they're also stress free. Unlike when I'm with family, I don't have to take care of anyone else. I find it quite relaxing in and of itself. :)
You know, sort of like an extended "girls' night out".