I'm sure there's a solution, I just hope it isn't simply increased prices to lower the number of people who can visit.
You may get cold and rain in the winter months, but those can be worked around: a sweater and an umbrella will do the job. When it's 40ºC outside and 60% humidity, there's nothing you can do.
I cannot talk about the secret entrance at the Lions Gate because it would not be secret anymore.
For what it's worth, that's the entrance Google maps brought me to when I asked for walking directions to the Louvre when I was in Paris last.
But on a serious note, this is the best entrance when there are crowds at the pyramid. The only drawback is that you land at the end of a wing, so there is a lot of walking to do to reach the Egyptian or Middle Ages section for instance. There are great paintings on the way, though.
Also "parts of the building are 'no longer watertight'" is not really a problem of mass tourism.
epolanski•7mo ago
There's many overcrowded spots on one hand, on the other hand, there's plenty of amazing places that get very little tourism, and if they do, they get it like 1/2 months per year at best. Florence vs the rest of Tuscany is a great example of this. Florence gets the lion share of the tourism in the region, despite all the provinces having major attraction places during all seasons for different reasons.
It's also time more governments and municipalities do something to increase prices in very hot spots. Squeeze those that want to spend properly and try to keep out lower budget travellers to less crowded places?
Low cost airplanes are part of the problem but privates renting their own apartments are the worst. They effectively double the places to sleep in major cities while also having locals abandon them completely.
kmarc•7mo ago
I am happy that I can explore rather "unknown" places without having to look at the Instagram idiots taking their template selfies.
As for the Airbnb-problem, I agree it's a shame that tourist spots are becoming places exclusively for tourists, and not being able to maintain even lowest amount of authenticity.
Thankfully, Italy and France are also full of tinier towns which are delights to visit, but thankfully not interesting enough for the Instagram herds.
mmsimanga•7mo ago
I am not in favour of making popular spots like the Louvre so expensive so that only rich people can visit. As much as I hate the thought of it the only suggestion I can think of is to have some sort of booking system that limits the numbers yearly. With spots for schools, locals and so on...
epolanski•7mo ago
You're not snotty, it's hard to enjoy very crowded places. Florence is probably the place I've enjoyed visiting less on this planet for this reason. It's too small for the number of people.
Also, you really don't get to see any real city, it's a theme park, same for Venice. Locals are hard to come by/see.
I feel lucky as an Italian/European to be able to visit the less known places with ease, having the time and being in proximity is great.
But often I read tourists on reddit asking for those tours of Rome/Florence/Venice over 7/8 days and I struggle to imagine how they can really enjoy such a tour de force in very overcrowded places..
benchly•7mo ago
Other similar travelers we have talked to have given me the (possibly false) impression that there is also an underlying current of preservation in how we travel. Let the masses go to the Louvre or see what Venice wants them to see, etc...it keeps the other areas pure in a way that augments the experience for the savvy traveler that is trying to gain a better understanding of the place itself as opposed to just sightseeing. Tourism tends to cheapen the experience overall, leaving one with a few photographs of expensive memories and a t-shirt. I just don't find that appealing.
Perhaps now I sound snotty, but that is how I feel.
BrandoElFollito•7mo ago
dagw•7mo ago
While I don't disagree with you per se, it is also worth remembering that most super popular places are super popular for a reason, and there often is a good reason to see it for yourself. I was indifferent towards Eiffel Tower for example, until I actually was in Paris and climbed up it and got to really see and experience the scale and design and engineering that went into building it up close. Now I get why the Eiffel Tower is considered impressive.
Same with Venice. You can read about it and look at pictures, but until I walked up and down all the streets and alleyways, and went into the old buildings, I never really got what a truly interesting and unique piece of urban planning Venice really is, and what efforts must have gone into building and maintaining it. Now when I read about the history of Venice it comes alive in a much different way than before I visited.
Same story with Sagrada Familia, Notre Dame, St Peter’s Basilica, most of the major art museums etc. etc.
So as much as dislike 'tourist traps' I'm at the same time super glad that I've gotten a chance to visit most of the big ones, and don't regret the time I had to spend to do so.
friendzis•7mo ago
1. Discoverability, which is going to be majorly affected by LLMs. On one hand they already feed on preexisting corpus of recommendations, naturally biased towards the popular pots, on the other hand part of business model is bound to be "sell biases", therefore better known spots are going to be at an even higher disadvantage. Even if you do try to go out of the beaten path for e.g. wine tastings, information regarding those is going to again be biased towards the ones selling mediocre wines with an overpriced "we ship a box to your country, just give us an address" service.
2. Reachability. Suppose you want to visit the relatively famous Gelateria Dondoli at San Gimignano. Starting at Florence using public transport it's IIRC two transfers with a transport mode change! If your goal is any agriturismo-style spot - car is the only reasonable option. Spending a bunch of time traveling already limits tourism opportunities, doing that by car is definitely not for everyone as you are effectively limited to enjoying wines at home. This dynamic naturally biases towards larger spots, covering variety of touristic needs.
johncoltrane•7mo ago
BrandoElFollito•7mo ago
I would say that the small places are not advertized as the next place to go after the famous one.
Take Paris. Everyone will obviously go there first, than Versailles which is nearby.
But people will not possibly know that there is Chartres nearby. Or Normandy where you can spend a great week. Or the Loire region.
They will not replace Paris, but could be advertized as the next adventure, a great one very different from Paris