Travel Guides - comparisons and opinions

devinejay

Hey guys,

Just back from 4 weeks in Colombia, and I was thinking about the age old travel guide dilemma. Essentially I was all set to buy the newest LP for Colombia when I was setting out, but then there were none in Hodges Figgis when I got there so I ended up buying a Footprint guide instead.

I know people often have their personal preferences, and there's plenty of practical considerations involved in buying a guide like how recent it was published and how heavy it is to lug about. (A quick practical note about the Footprint guide, I loved the hardback format - sturdy but light all the same)

However, I think it's important to note the differences in the tone of different guides, where possible. Practically everyone I met on the road was working off LP, and became apparent that LP could be much more negative than Footprint about certain places or experiences. I met more than one traveller who didn't do the Lost City Trek, one of the big attractions in Colombia, at least partially based on the "good but not great" verdict that LP gave it. Everyone who did do the trek raved about it, and often those who trusted in LP too much were left lamenting an opportunity lost. There were other examples like this, but that's the most obvious one for sure.

TL;DR Colombian travel guides, most recent editions - LP comes across as a bit negative and uninspiring compared to Footprint, I would avoid them.

Anyone else notice similar differences between guides? Considering how easily people let travel guides dictate their experience of a country, I reckon it's something worth keeping track of.

sarkozy

I usually go by Rough Guide. I like the style, format, recommendations are usually very good. But I've found this more to be the case with Europe and Asia than anywhere else. For South America, we were recommended the Footprints guide and found it excellent. Browsing before hand through the LP and RG, I could see why. LG was OK for Southern Africa, though. As a litmus test, I lived down there for a year and a half (Lesotho) and got to know the places it talked about separately to the book. Reading the guides later, I thought LP had the edge on this region, but haven't see the Footprints for the same region.

I also love Footprints' hardback format - it feels even lighter than the other paperback guides!

bazingaboom

I just go by the internet or word of mouth these days, sites like wikitravel have everything you need without lugging a big book around.

devinejay

sarkozy wrote: »

LG was OK for Southern Africa, though. As a litmus test, I lived down there for a year and a half (Lesotho) and got to know the places it talked about separately to the book. Reading the guides later, I thought LP had the edge on this region, but haven't see the Footprints for the same region.

That's exactly the kind of insight I'm after. I mean if you pick up a guide book and you're happy with the format etc, it'll generally get you around a country. The interesting bit I think is the difference in experiencing a country with the help of book A vs. B, or as you've mentioned, when you have enough time there to nearly write your own guidebook!

LiamMc

It's something that I am concerned with for every trip. Accurate hardcopy information.
For me it depends on the destination. Also the actual author of the book as the publishers may not have full control of the individual attitude of an author.

The OP was lucky to fall into the Footprint series, as Footprint guides are an offshoot of The South American Handbook a guidebook first published in 1921 and continuous until Footprint name. They also cover Central America and The Caribbean.

I have gone out of my way to find antique tourist guides(even as late as 1960' or 1970's) more for general travel as opposed to the specifics of public transport and accommodation.

I admire the stories of the founding of both Lonely Planet (Australian couple producing notes on popular linear routes through South-East Asia, the first books I seen of LP was Greenland, Iceland Faroes Islands, I think I understood what they wanted to provide.) and Rough Guide (individual English tourist to Greece couldn't find a budget travel guide option). But they can't be right for every edition of all their destinations. Also Tourists just end up following each other on the chosen routes through a region that are detailed in the books. Rough Guides don't appear to sit on the fence regarding cultural or political activity. This was certainly new for English language guides.

Brandt are trying to make a name for themselves as a pioneer destination publishers. Individual countries that are not covered elsewhere in English language. I have bought and read the Angola 1st edition. It's has comprehensive info that would not be available in other multi-country guides in English language. Of course by concentrating on Developing world countries, how quickly information changes should be a concern.
Bringing out an Iraq guide in 2004 is type of pompous pioneering travel I tend to avoid.

I have bought and used a second-hand French language Routard Guide (mustachioed walker with Globe as knapsack on his back) for Ireland (Irlande). Things like Place des velos as part of many of the towns made my mind up to purchase it. I have used it regularly for many different spots in Ireland (North and South).

I'm not loyal to any guide book and would certainly use a book that was associated with the region e.g. LP - Australia or SE Asia. But I would take a walking route guide for walking holidays and Michelin for France. I wouldn't exclude Fodor or Frommer neither.
But I would be attracted to a locally produced guide on arrival. Even ones sold outside tourist attractions, where buyer and seller meet,it normal to buy something.

Meathlass

Interesting topic OP. I have to admit to using LP guides, probably more out of habit at this stage than anything else. I'm familiar with their tone and layout so it's hard to change to another publisher.

I think it can also depend on what type of holiday you are on. E.G if I am backpacking I will use a LP as I want to know hostel and transport information. If however I am on a city break somewhere I'm not interested usually in accomodation, dining information etc but more in the history of any area and sightseeing so will use a smaller less text, more pictures guidebook if any.

My most recent trip was to Iran and the LP was invaluable there. It was also one of few guidebooks to the country though I did notice that other companies published in languages other than English. The negative effects of this was that if a hostel or attraction wasn't in the guidebook it was impossible to find out any information about it owing to a lack of tourism information in Iran in general.

I do wonder though with the rise of smart phones whether people will bother with physical guidebooks anymore when they can download relevant chapters to their phones or laptops to use on the go.

sarkozy

Good points, LiamMc. I particularly liked your point about the political angles different guides take. I would agree that Rough Guides at the least tend to be ironic or 'hmmm' about their description of politics and recent current affairs, and sometimes come down very decisively on certain issues. I found the Lonely Planet guilty of panglossism - tricky issues are treated in a generic, sleight-of-hand way to avoid offending anyone, which i think is political in its own way. I noticed this particularly in the case of how it described Lesotho and South Africa, which I came to know quite well. I did also notice this in the Footprints guide to SA, but less so. I did find myself wishing we had a RG when reading about country and historical contexts.

LiamMc

I have noticed from an early time that Rough Guides do concentrate on minorities within a region or country. It is admirable to keep the short-term visitor mindful of different views within the destination. But whether the mention of minorities within communities is over-magnetised or not is perhaps up to the reader.
Where do you start with Romania or Hungary, it may put in the mind of the reader that either country is divisive.
Also the 'Lesbian/Gay Visitors' sections reminds the visitor that they is different experiences. Even though I have rarely read a 'Lesbian/Gay Visitor' section, not fully anyway.

About specialised guides, there's some quality armchair guides. Photograph-filled Insight guides or the intense Architectural based Blue Guides. Certainly if a visitor brought a Blue Guide to Florence, Athens, Paris or Rome the book would keep the tourist looking up for their entire trip.