Khaosan Road

[phetaroi]

If you dont like it...DONT GO THERE...plenty of places you can stay in BKK that you can get noodles etc for 20 Baht and drink whisky with the locals then go home to sleep on the floor in your fan room with a hole in the floor for a toilet......if thats what you think the local culture is about do it.............however a lot of locals live in condos, have interent and UBC...bath tubs etc and will eat at Sizzler, Burger King Macdonalds etc.....good luck with whatever you are searching for.....

Chill out! It is a discussion forum!

But I agree with what I think you're saying in the latter half of your message. To begin with, Bangkok culture is different than upcountry culture, although under the surface Thai culture is Thai culture. As a former educator, I like watching the behavior of school students. I still see the wai, the gentle (for wont of a better term) attitude toward others, the courtesy, and so forth. But, the thousands hanging out at Central World and Paragon and the other malls (whether young or older) are all part of Thai culture. Those eating in western-style eateries and still Thai, just as those eating along the street. I think some posters sort of want Thailand and its people to be their own personal museum. While, on the other hand, Thais are moving toward modern life. It's all part of what Thailand is and the Thais are.

[bonobo]

If you dont like it...DONT GO THERE...plenty of places you can stay in BKK that you can get noodles etc for 20 Baht and drink whisky with the locals then go home to sleep on the floor in your fan room with a hole in the floor for a toilet......if thats what you think the local culture is about do it.............however a lot of locals live in condos, have interent and UBC...bath tubs etc and will eat at Sizzler, Burger King Macdonalds etc.....good luck with whatever you are searching for.....

Good post!

[Gaccha]

This a fairly typical post for people who like to show that they are somehow different than the typical run-of-the-mill tourist. And there is nothign wrong about not liking KSR. There is much not to like about it, after all. But I don't understand the need to infer how superior one is by not going to a tourist favorite like KSR.

KSR has an allure for young people, both Thai and foreign, has more westernized Thai food and many selections of foreign food, inexpensive rooms which are easy for non-Thai speaking people to rent, good exchange rates, and relaxed nightlife. It is a place for meeting prospective companions for a night or two or three without resorting to the typical sex-oriented bars. It offers low-end travel options.

Right.

The OP does not realise the extent to which he is being played. There is considerable literature on his desire for a true experience and the accompanying superioirty complex. See:

MacCannell, D. (1973). “Staged Authenticity: Arrangements of Social Space in Tourist Settings.” American Journal of Sociology, 79 (3): 589–603.

Despite what our traveller tells us, the people selling to his market (doing things on the cheap to see 'the real country') despite a great interest in new visual sites, they have very little interest in cultural absorption (new foods, local peoples) so Khao San suits them to a tee.

They seeked out this staged authentic experience. The locals disappoint them because they seek a mythical Thailand of the 'King and I.' While they, in turn, disappoint the locals, who expect Westerneres to be sharp suited and modern.

The tourists on Khao San are then uber -fakes. They stay with hot showers, 24 hour internet access and a real English breakfast at the ready. Why is it that these people with their tatoos and beards in their desire 'to find themselves' so often need to go via the very comfortable and easy-going SE Asia and not, say, Siberia.

As someone who travels to war zones as I really feel they are the only places you can experience times gone by, where locals invite you to drink tea, where you can engage in conversations in smoke rooms, and immerse in the local life, I can genuinely recommend the tribal areas of Pakistan, despite the sarcastic pitches of other forum users.

On my last travels I went to Algeria. In the middle of the Sahara desert I met an old man who looked like a scene of Lawrence of Arabia. He beckoned me into his house. He then produced some snaps of himself as a young man. He was wearing '70s fashion and was standing in Glasgow, where he was attending flight school. The school still sent him letters addressed to One Oasis, Sahara Desert. Poetic I felt.

Anyway, see the uploaded graph to understand the tourism dynamics.

Edited June 10, 2009 by Gaccha

[bonobo]

Right.

The OP does not realise the extent to which he is being played. There is considerable literature on his desire for a true experience and the accompanying superioirty complex. See:

<FONT face="Times-Roman"><FONT size="1"><FONT face="Times-Roman"><FONT size="1"><DIV align="left">MacCannell, D. (1973). "Staged Authenticity: Arrangements of Social Space in Tourist Settings." American Journal of Sociology, 79 (3): 589–603.

Despite what our traveller tells us, the people selling to his market (doing things on the cheap to see 'the real country') despite a great interest in new visual sites, they have very little interest in cultural absorption (new foods, local peoples) so Khao San suits them to a tee.

They seeked out this staged authentic experience. The locals disappoint them because they seek a mythical Thailand of the 'King and I.' While they, in turn, disappoint the locals, who expect Westerneres to be sharp suited and modern.

The tourists on Khao San are then uber -fakes. They stay with hot showers, 24 hour internet access and a real English breakfast at the ready. Why is it that these people with their tatoos and beards in their desire 'to find themselves' so often need to go via the very comfortable and easy-going SE Asia and not, say, Siberia.

As someone who travels to war zones as I really feel they are the only places you can experience times gone by, where locals invite you to drink tea, where you can engage in conversations in smoke rooms, and immerse in the local life, I can genuinely recommend the tribal areas of Pakistan, despite the sarcastic pitches of other forum users.

On my last travels I went to Algeria. In the middle of the Sahara desert I met an old man who looked like a scene of Lawrence of Arabia. He beckoned me into his house. He then produced some snaps of himself as a young man. He was wearing '70s fashion and was standing in Glasgow, where he was attending flight school. The school still sent him letters addressed to One Oasis, Sahara Desert. Poetic I felt.

Anyway, see the uploaded graph to understand the tourism dynamics.

Interesting graph, but we probably need to read the referenced article to be able to digest it. But it seems to point out a fairly reasonable stance.

However, you don't need to go to a war zone to be able to get a grasp of etimes gone by. If you are lucky and able to mingle, you can experience life in the American small-town agricultural community, a Russian logging town, a Thai hill tribe, a Peruvian highlands village, or a Gabonese jungle village.  Yes, all will have trappings of modern ammenities, but they all can give you a flavor of what day-to-day living is like in those areas.  The problem is that most tourists would find those excrutiatingly boring.  How many people really want to spend their vacation waking up early and helping Gullah fishermen harvest "oshtas" (oysters) in South Carolina's Sea Islands?  Tourist rarely get closer to Gullah culture than the Charleston market on a Saturday afternoon.  How many tourist want to spend a week in a Monglian yurt drinking yoghurt?

And even if a preson wanted to experience this type of interaction, it is hard to accomplish.  If you go through a tour company, then by the very natrue of the evolution, it becomes contrived.  In order to do this, you ahve to ahve the ability to get on the road and be gregarious enough to talk to those you meet, and nice enough to be invited to join those people.  You were able to do this in Algeria, but most people would never have the personality nor capability to experience something similar.

Tourists, by-and-large, want comfortable, easy accomodations, and if they think they want "local culture," that means taking in the Hula Show at the Morman Polynesian Center or getting off the tour bus for 20 minutes to take a photo of a Long-neck Karen.   For most, vacation means relaxing on the beach or ski slopes, hitting the bars and clubs, and eating and drinking to excess.  Nothing wrong with that, of course.  But very few people actually attempt to really see a local culture and lifestyle.

Edited June 10, 2009 by bonobo

[BugJackBaron]

Right.

The OP does not realise the extent to which he is being played. There is considerable literature on his desire for a true experience and the accompanying superioirty complex. See:

<FONT face="Times-Roman"><FONT size="1"><FONT face="Times-Roman"><FONT size="1"><DIV align="left">MacCannell, D. (1973). "Staged Authenticity: Arrangements of Social Space in Tourist Settings." American Journal of Sociology, 79 (3): 589–603.

Despite what our traveller tells us, the people selling to his market (doing things on the cheap to see 'the real country') despite a great interest in new visual sites, they have very little interest in cultural absorption (new foods, local peoples) so Khao San suits them to a tee.

They seeked out this staged authentic experience. The locals disappoint them because they seek a mythical Thailand of the 'King and I.' While they, in turn, disappoint the locals, who expect Westerneres to be sharp suited and modern.

The tourists on Khao San are then uber -fakes. They stay with hot showers, 24 hour internet access and a real English breakfast at the ready. Why is it that these people with their tatoos and beards in their desire 'to find themselves' so often need to go via the very comfortable and easy-going SE Asia and not, say, Siberia.

As someone who travels to war zones as I really feel they are the only places you can experience times gone by, where locals invite you to drink tea, where you can engage in conversations in smoke rooms, and immerse in the local life, I can genuinely recommend the tribal areas of Pakistan, despite the sarcastic pitches of other forum users.

On my last travels I went to Algeria. In the middle of the Sahara desert I met an old man who looked like a scene of Lawrence of Arabia. He beckoned me into his house. He then produced some snaps of himself as a young man. He was wearing '70s fashion and was standing in Glasgow, where he was attending flight school. The school still sent him letters addressed to One Oasis, Sahara Desert. Poetic I felt.

Anyway, see the uploaded graph to understand the tourism dynamics.

Interesting graph, but we probably need to read the referenced article to be able to digest it. But it seems to point out a fairly reasonable stance.

However, you don't need to go to a war zone to be able to get a grasp of etimes gone by. If you are lucky and able to mingle, you can experience life in the American small-town agricultural community, a Russian logging town, a Thai hill tribe, a Peruvian highlands village, or a Gabonese jungle village. Yes, all will have trappings of modern ammenities, but they all can give you a flavor of what day-to-day living is like in those areas. The problem is that most tourists would find those excrutiatingly boring. How many people really want to spend their vacation waking up early and helping Gullah fishermen harvest "oshtas" (oysters) in South Carolina's Sea Islands? Tourist rarely get closer to Gullah culture than the Charleston market on a Saturday afternoon. How many tourist want to spend a week in a Monglian yurt drinking yoghurt?

And even if a preson wanted to experience this type of interaction, it is hard to accomplish. If you go through a tour company, then by the very natrue of the evolution, it becomes contrived. In order to do this, you ahve to ahve the ability to get on the road and be gregarious enough to talk to those you meet, and nice enough to be invited to join those people. You were able to do this in Algeria, but most people would never have the personality nor capability to experience something similar.

Tourists, by-and-large, want comfortable, easy accomodations, and if they think they want "local culture," that means taking in the Hula Show at the Morman Polynesian Center or getting off the tour bus for 20 minutes to take a photo of a Long-neck Karen. For most, vacation means relaxing on the beach or ski slopes, hitting the bars and clubs, and eating and drinking to excess. Nothing wrong with that, of course. But very few people actually attempt to really see a local culture and lifestyle.

Interesting. I guess it depends on what you mean by "seeing". I have stayed with the Lisu tribe

near Chiang Mai(nearer to Pai actually) and even there there were a two westerners with Lisu spouses in that village alone.

.It was fun for a week but yes it would have been boring to stay there longer.

But I do think that Thailand has retained more of its culture than many other Asian countries. If you want a comparison try visiting South Korea. They are practically totally westernized.

[dmax]

I hear the tribal belt in Pakistan is quite exiting and real at the moment particularly the Swat valley...............Not so may tourists and what you get to see is less of a beaten path.

Plenty of beards there to respect also ............

nice one

[dmax]

ksr has plenty of good decent guesthouses /hotels plus good bars and nightlife and not expensive in a taxi to go to nana, silom or patpong . i like it and allways stay here when in bkk, i love the many second hand book stalls. also plenty of beautifull farang girls for eye candy when sitting enjoying a few beer leo at the bar. nice!!

[TheLaughingMan]

Omg I just got owned by myself responding to posts couple years old, why do people revive these threads? Bored? Gah.

Edited August 30, 2010 by TheLaughingMan

[mmh8]

wrt beards I believe the spitting image version of zz top says it all

nuff said