|
akira_akuma
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ


Registered: 08/28/09
Posts: 82,455
Loc: Onypeirophóros
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
|
|
natures is everywhere. what is the point of travelling if you can live a bit within the culture...enjoy their dining...visit historical sites and museums? what's the point of just camping? one can camp anywhere, and it's the same experience. you need to bring food, and water, and supplies, and you live like you would just about anywhere. if you can't afford to experience the culture, i don't see the point in travelling far and wide.
it's generally expensive, why try and save money on a trip that isn't worth it to begin with. might as well be able to afford a trip that's worth it -- not stay at a hostel and have only enough money to walk around and eat street food. i mean, one assumes that one can't even speak the language...seriously, what is the point? just to get lost? you can do that anyway, anywhere, no plane ticket necessary, just pick a direction and go.
my point is: that travelling abroad is not always feasible and is not always necessary, because travelling in-country can be just as fulfilling.
Edited by akira_akuma (10/21/16 03:33 AM)
|
azur
God of Fuck



Registered: 04/21/12
Posts: 28,103
Loc: Daid
|
|
Nature is different everywhere too dude
|
akira_akuma
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ


Registered: 08/28/09
Posts: 82,455
Loc: Onypeirophóros
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
|
Re: Advice on travelling? [Re: azur]
#23756408 - 10/20/16 10:36 PM (7 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
yes, but are you really seeing things differently simply being there, and not being able to experience the culture...you need money to spend to do that, and if you're strapped for money, your experience is limited to something you can find easily within your reach, currently, with no plane ticket needed.
sure the flora may be different elsewhere, but if that's all one is going to pay good money to travel for, i just...don't see what the big deal is. unless you're a botanist or interested in geography, i don't see how it's even relevant. i mean, travelling, in and of itself can be fun, but why spend lots of money on something you can do for less money? if travel is the only thing one is doing...again, seeing the sights and sounds of nature, in a different clime than one is used to, that might be cool -- but is it worth the expenditure if you can't do anything else in that new clime other than move around? that's not really exploring a culture, it's just exploring geography, at that point.
when there is plenty of geography unexplored by one, in one's almost immediate vicinity, ie, one's current landmass.
i'm just saying, if you can't afford to eat out, eat in, sleep in, roll with the natives, or at least afford to stay in the city to experience the culture, well, the "culture" you'd experience is similar to the "culture" you can explore in your own backyard. point is, there's no difference between the two places, if you can't understand the language, or at least pay to have a representation of the culture's finer points, such as cuisine, attractions, and amenities. such as wine, or dance....just sitting at a camp or hostel, deciding whether to eat out of a can, or fetch something you could have got in a corner of main street, anywhere, USA? if you can't stay in at least a decent hotel, it seems like one would be putting themselves out, for no good reason. -- basically just because they can. it's like going to Spain, not for the Tapas, not for the bars, but for the sake of sitting around a camp fire. it just seems like you can do that without going to Spain. point is, you need to be able to afford to have the trip and actually do shit on the trip, if you're not going to a kind of resort, and are actually going to trip around an exotic cityscape. (unless you can rely on someone to show you around, and introduce you to the culture, maybe a friend or someone -- that seems infinitely easier than going alone)
i might be over thinking it. i just wanted to add my thoughts here. (and of course, i don't see why someone can't go to Spain to sit at a campfire...i'm just wandering, is it really worth it?)
my point is: that travelling abroad is not always feasible and is not always necessary, because travelling in-country can be just as fulfilling.
Edited by akira_akuma (10/21/16 03:33 AM)
|
Repertoire89
Cat



Registered: 11/15/12
Posts: 21,773
|
|
The nature is completely different in different regions, and camping saves money on a hotel which could go to doing other things. When I travel, I'm more interested in meeting locals, going to local shows and being out in nature.
Restaurants and statues are very secondary, hotels are an ugly necessity if anything.
|
akira_akuma
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ


Registered: 08/28/09
Posts: 82,455
Loc: Onypeirophóros
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
|
|
local shows, that sounds great. meeting locals, sounds like a bore.
and nature is not different...as i said, the flora and fauna are different; the nature remains the same, however. you're not visiting an alien planet. you're switching between geographical locations...the nature of those two points are not any different...the ecology might be....
but the ecology in your own region can sustain your interest the same.
i don't see the point, unless you're interested in anthropology, to visit a culture to just mingle with the people. nothing is accomplished, save managing expenses, and expressing your inability to meld into the cultural experience...a total outsider. i don't see what there is to learn or value there, other than, i suppose, escapism. movement. but you can do that anywhere.
if i had a particular place i wanted to go and visit, and learn about, to experience the culture...that one place can make a whole lifetime of discovery...but unless you take time to experience the culture, you're merely skimming it's surface, skimming a surface that you can't penetrate, nor immerse yourself in...then where to next. it seems very superficial and surface, to me. and to me, it doesn't seem viable, unless you are well-off financially, to travel the world, and/or to visit a place simply to skim the surface.
unless there is a real reason to make the cost worthwhile, such as a real escape (no half-stepping), maybe finding romance (cavorting is always fun, and potentially life changing), being able to afford experience the whole culture, and not just a portion of it, whilst being incapable of communicating with anyone on a more than touristy basis. living there, staying there, for an extended period of time, for example.
if you're just visiting for a short time, there isn't enough time to really immerse yourself, and it just ends up being a moot attempt at escapism, and puts a hole in your wallet.
i see why people want to do it. i just think it's a waste. you're life isn't going to be any different after your travels, and will not have been any better than if you had just immersed yourself in your community at home...you have nature there. you have people there. you have everything you need there. to leave it, and explore, sounds like fun to just about anyone. that's why people flock for this idealised escapism.
but it ends up becoming a waste of time...to me. to me, that is enough to warrant me calling that a burden. it might not be a burden to you, to spend your time skimming the surface of experience a different culture...cultures that, the more you look at them, the less apparently apart they seem.
|
Repertoire89
Cat



Registered: 11/15/12
Posts: 21,773
|
|
Your perspective on travel is boring, I find it thrilling to travel and meet new people, experience diverse ecosystems, cultures and habitats. A few days or a few years.
Travel stimulates the mind and the emotions, there's nothing to analyze, and no reason to dichotomize.
|
Shroomism
Space Travellin



Registered: 02/13/00
Posts: 66,015
Loc: 9th Dimension
|
|
Quote:
akira_akuma said: local shows, that sounds great. meeting locals, sounds like a bore.
and nature is not different...as i said, the flora and fauna are different; the nature remains the same, however. you're not visiting an alien planet. you're switching between geographical locations...the nature of those two points are not any different...the ecology might be....
but the ecology in your own region can sustain your interest the same.
i don't see the point, unless you're interested in anthropology, to visit a culture to just mingle with the people. nothing is accomplished, save managing expenses, and expressing your inability to meld into the cultural experience...a total outsider. i don't see what there is to learn or value there, other than, i suppose, escapism. movement. but you can do that anywhere.
if i had a particular place i wanted to go and visit, and learn about, to experience the culture...that one place can make a whole lifetime of discovery...but unless you take time to experience the culture, you're merely skimming it's surface, skimming a surface that you can't penetrate, nor immerse yourself in...then where to next. it seems very superficial and surface, to me. and to me, it doesn't seem viable, unless you are well-off financially, to travel the world, and/or to visit a place simply to skim the surface.
unless there is a real reason to make the cost worthwhile, such as a real escape (no half-stepping), maybe finding romance (cavorting is always fun, and potentially life changing), being able to afford experience the whole culture, and not just a portion of it, whilst being incapable of communicating with anyone on a more than touristy basis. living there, staying there, for an extended period of time, for example.
if you're just visiting for a short time, there isn't enough time to really immerse yourself, and it just ends up being a moot attempt at escapism, and puts a hole in your wallet.
i see why people want to do it. i just think it's a waste. you're life isn't going to be any different after your travels, and will not have been any better than if you had just immersed yourself in your community at home...you have nature there. you have people there. you have everything you need there. to leave it, and explore, sounds like fun to just about anyone. that's why people flock for this idealised escapism.
but it ends up becoming a waste of time...to me. to me, that is enough to warrant me calling that a burden. it might not be a burden to you, to spend your time skimming the surface of experience a different culture...cultures that, the more you look at them, the less apparently apart they seem.
Spoken like someone who has never traveled outside their own city... The world is massive and extremely diverse. You can spend one hour in another culture and be transformed. It's about the experience. And the food. That's the first thing I do in another culture... and half the basis on which I judge them by... their food. And the people. The different customs and mannerisms. And the architecture. And about 5,000 other things You don't have to spend months/years living somewhere to get the "full experience", that's silly.
--------------------
|
akira_akuma
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ


Registered: 08/28/09
Posts: 82,455
Loc: Onypeirophóros
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
|
Re: Advice on travelling? [Re: Shroomism]
#23756721 - 10/21/16 01:22 AM (7 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
i mentioned the goddamn food. i think you're misapprehending what i am getting at. i think you can find transformation in escapism. sure. but is it the right kind of transformation; that's up to the individual.
i was more talking about weighing the value and costs of managing your time, and your finances, in regards to travelling the globe.
for example: you've picked your spot. have you visited many places other than Japan, and just how much more have you immersed yourself in THAT culture, relative to how much you've skimmed into other cultures, besides Nippon?
this is what i am talking about. i'm not saying people shouldn't travel, that it's a waste of time. i'm just saying, i think most people do waste their time thinking that travelling the globe is going to somehow automatically make their lives better, or help them gain insight about themselves and the world...this doesn't fucking necessarily happen. yet people presume to go the route all the time.
PS: i've been outside my own city. literally directly outside my own city, is plenty of unexplored tracks, trails, and forests...rivers, lakes, ect....i go to Quebec, boom, completely different than where i am now. so wtf do you say about that?
i don't have to leave my country, and there is plenty of exploring to be done and cultures to immerse in.
i never said it wasn't a fine thing to travel. you completely misapprehended my post. i know it's long and rambling but...it was fun to write. you could at least, if you're gonna presume that i don't know what i am talking about, address what i am saying directly, and not strawman me. but it's ok. i understand the misapprehension is not intentional.
my point is: that travelling abroad is not always feasible and is not always necessary, because travelling in-country can be just as fulfilling.
Edited by akira_akuma (10/21/16 03:33 AM)
|
akira_akuma
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ


Registered: 08/28/09
Posts: 82,455
Loc: Onypeirophóros
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
|
|
Quote:
Repertoire89 said: Your perspective on travel is boring, I find it thrilling to travel and meet new people, experience diverse ecosystems, cultures and habitats. A few days or a few years.
a few days is not enough to absorb anything. and sure it's thrilling to travel and meet new people. it's not always worth it. that's what i am talking about...what worth there is in it. not the thrill. the thrill is always there...it's intrinsic in the movement of travel, period. buy a travelogue.
or just be nomadic. i don't give a fuck. that's you, that's you. do you. but i'm not talking about your perspective, i'm talking about mine...and i'm not shitting on you for travelling...not even in the least. if you thought so, that's your own projections.
Quote:
Travel stimulates the mind and the emotions, there's nothing to analyze, and no reason to dichotomize.
exactly. there isn't any reason to analyse or dichotomize. travel stimualtes the mind, period. no need to leave the country. so what's your point? you're basically in agreement with the premise i am presenting here.
sorry if my thoughts made anyone upset with their perspective, or mine, on travelling the world. just thought i'd add something to the thread, to be sussed, instead of just repeating what we all already know.
travelling is fun!
yeah...no shit.
here ends the page of Akira's sussing.
we can all go back to the short posts of yore, of what is already foreknown. peace be upon you, and pieces of peace to appease the peas.
my point is: that travelling abroad is not always feasible and is not always necessary, because travelling in-country can be just as fulfilling.
Edited by akira_akuma (10/21/16 03:33 AM)
|
Shroomism
Space Travellin



Registered: 02/13/00
Posts: 66,015
Loc: 9th Dimension
|
|
Sometimes travel does make your life better though. It helps to get a different perspective on things and can give you time to sort your mind and provide you new experiences. Sitting in the same damn town for your entire life is fucking boring as fuck and stagnates the soul. I have friends I grew up with still living in the same small city we grew up in and have never really left or traveled much further than out of the state.. experience different things goddamn.
Considering the vast majority of Americans don't even have passports, I don't think this "travel is gonna make my life better" is some sort of prevalent mentality. Most people don't travel. Most people are perfectly content to live in the same city for most of their life and might move a couple times. If anything people need to do more of it, Americans/Westerners in particular are sheltered as fuck from the rest of the world and seem to have the same mentality you do.. why do I need to travel when I have everything here? That's not the point.
--------------------
|
falsereality


Registered: 04/01/13
Posts: 4,112
|
|
Akirabot activated:
Quote:
i mentioned the goddamn aliment. i cerebrate you're misapprehending what i am getting at. i cerebrate you can find transformation in escapism. sure. but is it the right kind of transformation; that's up to the individual.
i was more verbalizing about weighing the value and costs of managing your time, and your finances, in regards to travelling the globe.
for example: you've picked your spot. have you visited many places other than Japan, and just how much more have you immersed yourself in THAT culture, relative to how much you've skimmed into other cultures, besides Nippon?
this is what i am verbalizing about. i'm not verbally expressing people shouldn't peregrinate, that it's a waste of time. i'm just saying, i cerebrate most people do waste their time cerebrating that travelling the globe is going to somehow automatically make their lives preponderant, or avail them gain insight about themselves and the world...this doesn't fucking obligatorily transpire. yet people surmise to go the route all the time.
|
akira_akuma
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ


Registered: 08/28/09
Posts: 82,455
Loc: Onypeirophóros
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
|
Re: Advice on travelling? [Re: Shroomism]
#23756748 - 10/21/16 01:40 AM (7 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Considering the vast majority of Americans don't even have passports, I don't think this "travel is gonna make my life better" is some sort of prevalent mentality.
most people, if their life is off the rails, tend to want a different locale. this can be as simple as moving down the road, but...it usually isn't that simple.
Quote:
If anything people need to do more of it, Americans/Westerners in particular are sheltered as fuck from the rest of the world and seem to have the same mentality you do.. why do I need to travel when I have everything here? That's not the point.
i get you. but i am not saying the point is in having everything at home. my point was that travel is intrinsic...you need not travel far or to any specific place. that is a mere predilection, a predilection that makes you feel better...but travelling alone, without any predilections, can produce the same "life altering", "perspective changing" effect -- and that is to say that travelling even within the borders of a nation can produce the same effect...and what i am arguing is that the means to travelling the world is not cost effective.
i'd argue that public transportation should be free, at least within the state or province one resides in, so that people could actually more readily afford and be more apt to travel, and for longer periods of time...not just for "vacation".
so you see, i'm not dissing travel...i think my point may have just got muddled in the thought process. i am getting tired. i write more then i am tired.
Quote:
falsereality said: Akirabot activated:
although yet he understood me quite clear enough.
PS: someone, please, tell me, is this thread sacred? let me know, so i can continue to postulate how much travel needs be travelled and how much recreation is so recreational.
PPS: my point is: that travelling abroad is not always feasible and is not always necessary, because travelling in-country can be just as fulfilling.
Edited by akira_akuma (10/21/16 03:33 AM)
|
Repertoire89
Cat



Registered: 11/15/12
Posts: 21,773
|
|
You used a lot of words to say nothing
Traveling 20miles isn't the same as 2000, I've lived in 6 states, visited who knows how many states, and something like 9 countries.
Many of the highlights of my life are on one day escapades through a foreign country, or on weekend hikes through other states, a disproportionate amount of the highlights are during distant travels.
Everything you invest in travel, you're getting back with interest.
|
Shroomism
Space Travellin



Registered: 02/13/00
Posts: 66,015
Loc: 9th Dimension
|
|
Agreed on all counts.
I've lived in 17 different states. US is fucking huge. Been to Mexico, Canada, Japan. Will eventually go to Italy, Spain, Switzerland, Germany, Netherlands, New Zealand and beyond. Most of the highlights of my life are during travels as well.
--------------------
|
akira_akuma
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ


Registered: 08/28/09
Posts: 82,455
Loc: Onypeirophóros
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
|
|
i used a lot of words to write what i wanted to write. you don't have to fucking read it. your head is full enough, clearly. so just ignore me. i am going to write what i want to write.
case in point: if you can't afford to experience all the culture has to offer, the travelling is merely escapism, and fruitless at that. you go to a Mexican resort, that's fucking boring...you stay at a hostel and traverse the streets looking for people to listen to and watch speak their mannerisms...that's fucking boring. to me. (i can just watch a documentary and get the same effect. what is the point just watching people's mannerisms? get involved or what is the fucking point....)
which is just my goddamn opinion.
Quote:
Everything you invest in travel, you're getting back with interest.
clearly not. there is no return of investment in travelling. it's all expense. which is what i am talking about, and what i wish I could personally change, which if i could, i would...free public transport...hell, even free international transport. save on expenses. make travelling easier and better.
i am just thinking ahead. sorry. 
Quote:
Many of the highlights of my life are on one day escapades through a foreign country, or on weekend hikes through other states, a disproportionate amount of the highlights are during distant travels.
a result of your cognitive awareness. of course a memory of a single day in a foreign place is going to be more memorable, more of a highlight. no fucking shit. but is it worth it, in the end, well, not necessarily. you travel through some foreign country for a day, and you've only spent a day of your live living...not HARDLY that important, but just simply more MEMORABLE.
i'm sure you've had MORE important and memorable times in places where you've spent more time and effort to immerse yourself there; regardless of how much you tend to ingrain yourself in your travels. the more, the merrier...after all, that's your perspective on distance...i don't see how that doesn't correlate with time spent, as well. 
Quote:
Shroomism said: Agreed on all counts.
I've lived in 17 different states. US is fucking huge. Been to Mexico, Canada, Japan. Will eventually go to Italy, Spain, Switzerland, Germany, Netherlands, New Zealand and beyond. Most of the highlights of my life are during travels as well.
yes, highlights...not the most important moments in your life, however. those moments come from fortitude and time. not whim. and if it stems from whim, it's whim with the knack of fortitude. afterall, whim, by definition, does not last.
my point is: that travelling abroad is not always feasible and is not always necessary, because travelling in-country can be just as fulfilling.
Edited by akira_akuma (10/21/16 03:34 AM)
|
Shroomism
Space Travellin



Registered: 02/13/00
Posts: 66,015
Loc: 9th Dimension
|
|
lol you are such a goddamn negative nancy. How much have you traveled, since you are the expert on it? I assume you've been around the world 3 or 4 times to be able to make these claims that everywhere is basically the same and it's all escapism?
--------------------
|
akira_akuma
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ


Registered: 08/28/09
Posts: 82,455
Loc: Onypeirophóros
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
|
Re: Advice on travelling? [Re: Shroomism]
#23756777 - 10/21/16 01:59 AM (7 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
see, i knew you'd call me that. i told you already...SORRY. i just put too much thought into a muddled idea i was propounding. no need to get YOUR panties into a twist, for me sharing my thoughts...afterall, this is a forum, right? no need to read my post if they'll just inherently piss you off. for me querying, frankly, the instance of travel being far too expensive for most people to get the full experience of another culture.
which is all i was getting at. which is full-well true.
that and one can easily stay in their country of origin and have as fulfilling a life as someone who's travelled alot. ie, "it's all a matter of perspective". which i'd wager you cannot inherently disagree with...so i don't know why the panties. but whatever. too much words, hurt brain ARGH@! 
my point is: that travelling abroad is not always feasible and is not always necessary, because travelling in-country can be just as fulfilling.
Edited by akira_akuma (10/21/16 03:34 AM)
|
Repertoire89
Cat



Registered: 11/15/12
Posts: 21,773
|
Re: Advice on travelling? [Re: Shroomism]
#23756779 - 10/21/16 02:00 AM (7 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Shroomism said: Agreed on all counts.
I've lived in 17 different states. US is fucking huge. Been to Mexico, Canada, Japan. Will eventually go to Italy, Spain, Switzerland, Germany, Netherlands, New Zealand and beyond. Most of the highlights of my life are during travels as well.
That's a lot of moving around, sounds like a good time
|
akira_akuma
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ


Registered: 08/28/09
Posts: 82,455
Loc: Onypeirophóros
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
|
|
Quote:
Repertoire89 said:
That's a lot of moving around, sounds like a good time
case in point: it's a good time to you, because you find inherent value in the moving around part. you're nomadic.
good for you. seriously. good for you.
but i bet you do most of your moving around within the states. am i wrong?
my point is: that travelling abroad is not always feasible and is not always necessary, because travelling in-country can be just as fulfilling.
Edited by akira_akuma (10/21/16 03:34 AM)
|
Shroomism
Space Travellin



Registered: 02/13/00
Posts: 66,015
Loc: 9th Dimension
|
|
I don't wear underwear and they aren't in a twist, I'm just making observations. Travel can be expensive yes but it doesn't have to be. I traveled all around the US on nothing. I moved to CA with $40 in my pocket. But I'm cool like that because I have street knowledge and stuff.. you know, from traveling. But it's all bullshit right. You can get a plane ticket to Iceland for $99.
--------------------
|
|