Landmarks: are they really a must-see?

By simonfalvo On March 24, 2010 · 1 Comment

Tweet

Rome Coliseum.jpg

http://matadornetwork.com/community/simonfalvo/landmarks-are-they-really-a-must-see/attachment/76/

vestmannaeyjar_342_228.jpg

http://matadornetwork.com/community/simonfalvo/landmarks-are-they-really-a-must-see/attachment/77/

The question might sound provocative, I know. But over the years I’ve
been increasingly asking myself what is really worth to be visited and
what not. I guess the question mark started arising because year after
year I began to realize how many amazing places and monuments I still
haven’t seen. And since life won’t be long enough, I know that I have
to choose.

I live in Italy, probably the country that has the highest amount of landmarks.
I’m amazed by seeing so many places greatly harmed and having lost a
great part of their nature and characteristics. I think at Venice,
full of made in China or Taiwan horrible souvenirs, at the countryside
around Siena that long ago became known as the ‘Chiantishire’,
at Rome and the ridiculous people dressed as Roman gladiators to
please tourists willing to go back home with an ‘original’ photo.

To read full post please go to eXplorer

1 response to Landmarks: are they really a must-see?

Rosalind Horne said on March 24, 2010

I think its all a personal thing. Personally I visit places like the Taj & Abu Simbel off season. As i have grown older I much prefer to be away from crowds & these days prefer to visit the smaller places not mentioned in guide books. I went to a toen not so far away from where I live. Lonely Planet & Rough Guide both say it is a must miss place! Just pass through… I found some amazing monuments untarnished by time & crowds. Wonderful…..