curious Mez

[deird1]

So, I'm wondering:

For all you overseas folk, when you start planning your Exciting Trips To See Australia, what things do you think of seeing?


(brief digression approaching...)

When I went to Munich, everyone said "Oh, you've got to see [exciting landmark]! It's the best!" ...and they were always talking about
1) Neuschwanstein
2) Ludwig's (other) castles
3) Oktoberfest
4) Dachau

Whereas, when I got there, my favourite bits were
1) the Deutchesmuseum
2) the Residence
3) the English Garden

And, in fact, the vast majority of things I found interesting were barely mentioned in guidebooks at all.

(...back to Australia)


Anyway, it occurs to me that there's a big difference between:
a) What tourists want to see in Australia
b) What I think tourists want to see in Australia
c) What I think tourists should actually see in Australia

My answer to b would be the Sydney Harbour Bridge, Uluru, and possibly surfing.
My answer to c would be much longer and more rambling, but would definitely include an Aussie-animal sanctuary, the Great Ocean Road, Sovereign Hill, and Port Arthur.

But, for a? Not a clue.


So - when you think about the stuff you'd like to do as a tourist in Australia, what's on your list?

Comments

[next_to_normal]

I hope this doesn't hurt your feelings... but one of the reasons I've never visited Australia was because I couldn't really think of much I wanted to see there. ;)

Heh, yeah. Although some of that is ignorance on my part... I really don't know what there is to see, so I don't know whether I want to see it.

My criteria for travel: (1) GOOD FOOD, (2) old stuff - ruins are A+ but really old intact buildings are okay, too, (3) something really cool you can't find in the US, and/or (4) natural beauty.

I'm sure Australia has some of that (kangaroos, Great Barrier Reef, etc.), but in general, it hasn't intrigued me enough do the research to find out what's there...

[deird1]

My criteria for travel: (1) GOOD FOOD, (2) old stuff - ruins are A+ but really old intact buildings are okay, too, (3) something really cool you can't find in the US, and/or (4) natural beauty.

1) Definitely. Melbourne is rather renowned for its cuisine. (Huge Italian/Greek population, mixed with huge Chinese population, mixed with huge Anglo population...)

2) Not much, but we've got a fair few things from a couple of hundred years ago. If you're interested in convict-era stuff, or gold rush stuff, we've got plenty.

3) Kangaroos? Coral reefs? Rainforests? Cute penguins? Huge rocks in the desert? Vegemite?

4) Lots and LOTS. We are, in all modesty, a gorgeous country. We've got spectacular beaches, the outback, beautiful coastal regions, lovely valleys, nice mountains, and fun ski slopes.

Plus, I live here. What could be better? :)

[next_to_normal]

Hee! The Australian travel and tourism people should be paying you for the publicity! :)

The main deterrent for me, I think, would be the distance/cost/time thing stormwreath mentioned. Because the flight's so long, it'd have to be a long enough trip to make it worth it. And it's expensive.

[deird1]

Or, to elaborate...

We have great food.

We have gorgeous scenery.

We have interesting old stuff.

[stormwreath.livejournal.com]

The picture of Port Arthur had me thinking, "Hmm. That looks exactly like where I grew up, if you ignore the trees and lake in the background." Dilapidated Victorian industrial architecture is... well, technically it's what I left home to get away from. :)

But admittedly, England is short of rainforests, coral reefs, big rocks in the desert, desert, penguins, kangaroos and you. We also have Marmite instead of Vegemite.

[stormwreath.livejournal.com]

Addendum: that's 'Victorian' as in Queen Victoria, not the Australian region. Just realised the double meaning. :)