cultural tourism and social media: exploration or exploitation ?

Manon a écrit:

AurèleG a écrit:

Manon a écrit:

AurèleG a écrit:

Manon a écrit:I haven't ever experienced this kind of tourism, but I think its a good things to know better the Indian culture.
Cultural tourism should be continue because it's a way of information about Indian and to show their culture.

But most of the time, they're basically faking their old culture to look more traditionnal and be more appealing to tourists. It's not really their culture, but rather the culture the tourists expect to see.

Yes but visitors want to visit the real culture so they are a little bit informated about the Indian subject so they know what Indian culture looks like

Right, but sometimes it can lure tourists that aren't informed about it. And besides, the tourists shouldn't have to have researched the subject to know it is fake (or partially fake), it should be obvious to them, like if they were told "This does not represent the truth, the culture was modified to fit tourism". But then again, that's not something they'll do considering the main goal of this faking is to *not* look fake to tourists.

But do you think that if they have the real history visitors continue to visit this type of tourism ? They have many historical tourism who fake many part of history too interest people and to get money ?

True, the "history visitors" are more likely to visit museums and stuff. But I still think that the tourists should be informed someway or another (even though I think cultural tourism can be good ! But it has to be done in a way that is morally/economically acceptable for both the tourists and the Natives.)

Eden a écrit:I've never visit a reservation but I've already visit museums about autochtone's life in other countries. I think this kind of tourism is attractive because each tourist want to experience the reality of autochtone population's lives, but on another hand, many know that it's not the truth and don't know who trust to live a sincere experience. I would like to experience it because this kind of experience is a one-in-a-lifetime experience.

In my opinion, museums are more real because they show the background of Natives and the goal isn't to do business. Unfortunattely, Natives do tourism just for money. However, most of the money doens't go to the Natives but to the company owners

Even if you haven't visited a reservation, the question of tourism and photography is also an interesting one. When you travel, or even around home, do you sometimes take pictures of people? Do you ask them before you take their pictures? Or do you just take it?
The example of the Favelas in Rio is a good one, a lot of people take pictures of the houses because they are colourful, but it's actually the poorest place in Rio de Janeiro, it's quite a dangerous place to be for tourists, and does it really show respect to walk around just to take pictures of the houses and poor children in the streets ?

Admin a écrit:

Sandro Massambi a écrit:I've never been in an indian reservation. But in my opinion, this isn't a good idea to make tourism and money on cultures. You can easily bother the people that you will discover by steping on precious sites or by breaking a precious object.

I partly agree, BUT you've seen the state of Indian reservations in the US today, many of the people living there live much below the poverty level. For these people, tourism is sometimes the only source of income that they have.
+ what do you think about what they said in the video: "we have things to say". Without tourism, wouldn't many cultures and traditions be forgotten?

Yes, that could be could be the danger. But we could make things better by making respectfull tourism and help them to have income. They maybe want to show their culture but to have also privacy.

Pierre Raspaud a écrit:

@_paul_vtt_ a écrit:I don't think that is a really good idea because it bother for local populations

I think that your arguments are "aberrant" (GMK). Why doyou think it bother natives?

I can see his point. If a crowd of people comes to visit a small tribe, it can be overwhelming for them. They can also be pressured to perform shows or to show their culture.

Julie a écrit:On one hand, cultural tourism is a good way for the people in question to earn money and show their real culture and customs to the world, on the other hand, the tourists destroyed the site and could be really intrusive

I'm totally agree but they earn money than in certains period and not all the year

AurèleG a écrit:

Manon a écrit:

AurèleG a écrit:

Manon a écrit:

AurèleG a écrit:

Manon a écrit:I haven't ever experienced this kind of tourism, but I think its a good things to know better the Indian culture.
Cultural tourism should be continue because it's a way of information about Indian and to show their culture.

But most of the time, they're basically faking their old culture to look more traditionnal and be more appealing to tourists. It's not really their culture, but rather the culture the tourists expect to see.

Yes but visitors want to visit the real culture so they are a little bit informated about the Indian subject so they know what Indian culture looks like

Right, but sometimes it can lure tourists that aren't informed about it. And besides, the tourists shouldn't have to have researched the subject to know it is fake (or partially fake), it should be obvious to them, like if they were told "This does not represent the truth, the culture was modified to fit tourism". But then again, that's not something they'll do considering the main goal of this faking is to *not* look fake to tourists.

But do you think that if they have the real history visitors continue to visit this type of tourism ? They have many historical tourism who fake many part of history too interest people and to get money ?

True, the "history visitors" are more likely to visit museums and stuff. But I still think that the tourists should be informed someway or another (even though I think cultural tourism can be good ! But it has to be done in a way that is morally/economically acceptable for both the tourists and the Natives.)

But if they truth the verity, I think that toursits didnt want to visit Indian reservations because its a culture like an other. Many elements are real

linarpz a écrit:

Julie a écrit:On one hand, cultural tourism is a good way for the people in question to earn money and show their real culture and customs to the world, on the other hand, the tourists destroyed the site and could be really intrusive

I'm totally agree but they earn money than in certains period and not all the year

They still earn money...

Eden a écrit:

Mathis.C a écrit: After i read all the documents, I think i would like to try this kind of tourisme in my life. Because it a once in a life time experience. I think the thing to do absolutely it's to discover the typical cultur of the native.  

but would you still do it if it bothers native's lives?

Obviously not all this tourism must be done in respect and sharing.

Admin a écrit:Even if you haven't visited a reservation, the question of tourism and photography is also an interesting one. When you travel, or even around home, do you sometimes take pictures of people? Do you ask them before you take their pictures? Or do you just take it?
The example of the Favelas in Rio is a good one, a lot of people take pictures of the houses because they are colourful, but it's actually the poorest place in Rio de Janeiro, it's quite a dangerous place to be for tourists, and does it really show respect to walk around just to take pictures of the houses and poor children in the streets ?

I think some people can take pictures of stranger, but they need their agreement. However I don't really agree with this practice.

paulinecarrio a écrit:

Sandro Massambi a écrit:I've never been in an indian reservation. But in my opinion, this isn't a good idea to make tourism and money on cultures. You can easily bother the people that you will discover by steping on precious sites or by breaking a precious object.

But sometimes, those countries are really poor and they need this money, if not, they don't earn money and keep living in poverty.

I understand your point if view, but maybe these people dont want to be disturbed even if they could win money.

I pretty like the idea that the reality isn't the truth. That's what happens in Reservations because of tourism. It's real you can see those Natives but that's not true because they change them way to life for tourists.
(A bit philosophic I consent)
(Lara)

Manon a écrit:

Eden a écrit:I've never visit a reservation but I've already visit museums about autochtone's life in other countries. I think this kind of tourism is attractive because each tourist want to experience the reality of autochtone population's lives, but on another hand, many know that it's not the truth and don't know who trust to live a sincere experience. I would like to experience it because this kind of experience is a one-in-a-lifetime experience.

What elements are not the truth ?

Sometimes they have to fake their customs to make it more realistic ! You understand?

Pierre Raspaud a écrit:

@_paul_vtt_ a écrit:I don't think that is a really good idea because it bother for local populations

I think that your arguments are "aberrant" (GMK). Why doyou think it bother natives?

Yes, my M7 is aberrant, but Yes, it bother natives because they were in their country since always, and visitors go in, and don't respect their customs, or their sacred places and ccreate stereotypes.

Admin a écrit:Even if you haven't visited a reservation, the question of tourism and photography is also an interesting one. When you travel, or even around home, do you sometimes take pictures of people? Do you ask them before you take their pictures? Or do you just take it?
The example of the Favelas in Rio is a good one, a lot of people take pictures of the houses because they are colourful, but it's actually the poorest place in Rio de Janeiro, it's quite a dangerous place to be for tourists, and does it really show respect to walk around just to take pictures of the houses and poor children in the streets ?

I think it's disrespectful to take pictures of people without asking for their permissions, it makes look like they're animals, we're not in a zoo!!

Admin a écrit:Even if you haven't visited a reservation, the question of tourism and photography is also an interesting one. When you travel, or even around home, do you sometimes take pictures of people? Do you ask them before you take their pictures? Or do you just take it?
The example of the Favelas in Rio is a good one, a lot of people take pictures of the houses because they are colourful, but it's actually the poorest place in Rio de Janeiro, it's quite a dangerous place to be for tourists, and does it really show respect to walk around just to take pictures of the houses and poor children in the streets ?

I never take pictures of people because they are not the reason I travel and most, this is not respectful for us.
I take picture of houses because it's beautiful and its a caracteristic of the country i visit.

Manon a écrit:

AurèleG a écrit:

Manon a écrit:

AurèleG a écrit:

Manon a écrit:

AurèleG a écrit:

Manon a écrit:I haven't ever experienced this kind of tourism, but I think its a good things to know better the Indian culture.
Cultural tourism should be continue because it's a way of information about Indian and to show their culture.

But most of the time, they're basically faking their old culture to look more traditionnal and be more appealing to tourists. It's not really their culture, but rather the culture the tourists expect to see.

Yes but visitors want to visit the real culture so they are a little bit informated about the Indian subject so they know what Indian culture looks like

Right, but sometimes it can lure tourists that aren't informed about it. And besides, the tourists shouldn't have to have researched the subject to know it is fake (or partially fake), it should be obvious to them, like if they were told "This does not represent the truth, the culture was modified to fit tourism". But then again, that's not something they'll do considering the main goal of this faking is to *not* look fake to tourists.

But do you think that if they have the real history visitors continue to visit this type of tourism ? They have many historical tourism who fake many part of history too interest people and to get money ?

True, the "history visitors" are more likely to visit museums and stuff. But I still think that the tourists should be informed someway or another (even though I think cultural tourism can be good ! But it has to be done in a way that is morally/economically acceptable for both the tourists and the Natives.)

But if they truth the verity, I think that toursits didnt want to visit Indian reservations because its a culture like an other. Many elements are real

Right, there is always a part of it that is true. But I still it should be written somewhere (or told) that it's not 100% true ! (if it is not 100% true, that is) Otherwise, it kind of becomes a tourist trap that treats the natives badly.

Eden a écrit:

Manon a écrit:

Eden a écrit:I've never visit a reservation but I've already visit museums about autochtone's life in other countries. I think this kind of tourism is attractive because each tourist want to experience the reality of autochtone population's lives, but on another hand, many know that it's not the truth and don't know who trust to live a sincere experience. I would like to experience it because this kind of experience is a one-in-a-lifetime experience.

What elements are not the truth ?

Sometimes they have to fake their customs to make it more realistic ! You understand?

But what customs ? everything i see in Indian culture was real

teaumace a écrit:

Sandro Massambi a écrit:I've never been in an indian reservation. But in my opinion, this isn't a good idea to make tourism and money on cultures. You can easily bother the people that you will discover by steping on precious sites or by breaking a precious object.

You are making generality here. Yes in some reservation that's the case but not in all and not everywhere

Of course i need to make generality, we are talking about a broad topic. But it was just an exemple.

Admin a écrit:Even if you haven't visited a reservation, the question of tourism and photography is also an interesting one. When you travel, or even around home, do you sometimes take pictures of people? Do you ask them before you take their pictures? Or do you just take it?
The example of the Favelas in Rio is a good one, a lot of people take pictures of the houses because they are colourful, but it's actually the poorest place in Rio de Janeiro, it's quite a dangerous place to be for tourists, and does it really show respect to walk around just to take pictures of the houses and poor children in the streets ?

As far as I can see, this activity seems unrespectful for the poor populations. Indeed, you take pictures with an expensive phone/camera while you have people in front of you that are living in horrible situations. I usually don't take a lot of pictures and even less when they include people on it if it's not me and my family. If i'd take some with people on it, I would probably ask them before taking pictures because people don't always agree with the fact that you have a photography of them without their agreement.

paulinecarrio a écrit:

Admin a écrit:Even if you haven't visited a reservation, the question of tourism and photography is also an interesting one. When you travel, or even around home, do you sometimes take pictures of people? Do you ask them before you take their pictures? Or do you just take it?
The example of the Favelas in Rio is a good one, a lot of people take pictures of the houses because they are colourful, but it's actually the poorest place in Rio de Janeiro, it's quite a dangerous place to be for tourists, and does it really show respect to walk around just to take pictures of the houses and poor children in the streets ?

I think it's disrespectful to take pictures of people without asking for their permissions, it makes look like they're animals, we're not in a zoo!!

$
i totally agree with u! however, when it's in the public space i think it's not a problem but not when people are at them home.

AurèleG a écrit:

Manon a écrit:

AurèleG a écrit:

Manon a écrit:

AurèleG a écrit:

Manon a écrit:

AurèleG a écrit:

Manon a écrit:I haven't ever experienced this kind of tourism, but I think its a good things to know better the Indian culture.
Cultural tourism should be continue because it's a way of information about Indian and to show their culture.

But most of the time, they're basically faking their old culture to look more traditionnal and be more appealing to tourists. It's not really their culture, but rather the culture the tourists expect to see.

Yes but visitors want to visit the real culture so they are a little bit informated about the Indian subject so they know what Indian culture looks like

Right, but sometimes it can lure tourists that aren't informed about it. And besides, the tourists shouldn't have to have researched the subject to know it is fake (or partially fake), it should be obvious to them, like if they were told "This does not represent the truth, the culture was modified to fit tourism". But then again, that's not something they'll do considering the main goal of this faking is to *not* look fake to tourists.

But do you think that if they have the real history visitors continue to visit this type of tourism ? They have many historical tourism who fake many part of history too interest people and to get money ?

True, the "history visitors" are more likely to visit museums and stuff. But I still think that the tourists should be informed someway or another (even though I think cultural tourism can be good ! But it has to be done in a way that is morally/economically acceptable for both the tourists and the Natives.)

But if they truth the verity, I think that toursits didnt want to visit Indian reservations because its a culture like an other. Many elements are real

Right, there is always a part of it that is true. But I still it should be written somewhere (or told) that it's not 100% true ! (if it is not 100% true, that is) Otherwise, it kind of becomes a tourist trap that treats the natives badly.

But what elements are fake ??

Admin a écrit:Even if you haven't visited a reservation, the question of tourism and photography is also an interesting one. When you travel, or even around home, do you sometimes take pictures of people? Do you ask them before you take their pictures? Or do you just take it?
The example of the Favelas in Rio is a good one, a lot of people take pictures of the houses because they are colourful, but it's actually the poorest place in Rio de Janeiro, it's quite a dangerous place to be for tourists, and does it really show respect to walk around just to take pictures of the houses and poor children in the streets ?

When I travel, I'm taking zillion of pictures and specially picture of cities, villages. I do not really like to take photographs of local people: it is ambarrassing and I think it is something that they don't like. I also never visited dangerous places like Favelas, I don't want to get stripped of

Manon a écrit:

isciane.gns a écrit:Hey, I have never visited an Indian reservation because I have never travelled in the US. However, I would like to visit an Indian reservation because it allows to understand the lifestyle of these people.(Isciane)

Do you think they have too negative aspects of the Indian tourism ?

From my point of view, there are good things such as it creates jobs, it brings infrastructures and there is transparency about what American people did wrong like racism

isciane.gns a écrit:

Manon a écrit:

isciane.gns a écrit:Hey, I have never visited an Indian reservation because I have never travelled in the US. However, I would like to visit an Indian reservation because it allows to understand the lifestyle of these people.(Isciane)

Do you think they have too negative aspects of the Indian tourism ?

From my point of view, there are good things such as it creates jobs, it brings infrastructures and there is transparency about what American people did wrong like racism

So they don't have negative in Indian tourism