Wednesday, January 30, 2008

A luxurious place to stay?

In all our travels over the years, I have realized that what really makes me happy is not completely what I expected, as in the most luxurious of digs don't make for a perfect vacation for me. I'd much rather stay in a more homely and personal place, which is what we did when we traveled for our summer and winter US trips in 2006. I've stayed at posh hotels in places like Bangkok, and while it was great it didn't make for a memorable vacation. In contrast we stayed at a wonderfully warm place in Pattaya, which was posh but not outwardly so. I guess, the point that I am trying to make is that I hate the snobbery associated with most luxury hotels, which you just can't seem to get away from. For some people having some luxury real estate is essential, but for me I'd rather have a place that was more personal and unique.


Anonymous said...

I completely agree with you. Staying in a posh/luxurious hotel does not necessarily mean "comfort" to me. I take pleasure in knowing the people, the culture and the flavor of the place that I visit - this seldom gets lost in the homogenized, "prepared only for tourism" type of hotels.

I visited Havana last year and the best part of the trip was staying in a small "Casa Particular" run by a grannish type of older lady. The daily chats with her about the Cuba and its metamorphosis over the last 50 years often occured over sips of Havana Rum and Mojitos, with a fine Cohiba cigar.

I wouldn't trade that experience for any ***** star hotel, anywhere.

Shalini said...

Yes, it's better being a traveler rather than a tourist.