Comments on: Travel trivia

By: Ambrand Dot Com

Ambrand Dot Com — Tue, 24 Apr 2007 14:08:07 +0000

Does name and shame really work outside of Japan?

By: Ross Wynne

Ross Wynne — Mon, 23 Apr 2007 09:30:22 +0000

“Thou shalt not question Stephen Fry” … Genius!

By: Damien Mulley

Damien Mulley — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 20:35:16 +0000

Damn damn damn that video is great.

By: Owen Lipsett

Owen Lipsett — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 18:04:40 +0000

Daithi, I couldn’t agree more. Unfortunately this is pretty standard for the New York Times’ travel section. I tend to regard their destination articles as handy lists of places to avoid, although I will concede that quite a few of the attractions they mention are must-sees for the first time visitor to Dublin.

That said, I would be keen to acquire a Guinness Storehose that Eoin has mentioned, although I expect this invention is merely the result of my imagination making far too optimistic use of a typo!

By: Daithí

Daithí — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 18:03:16 +0000

Ah, it’s more that it’s unrealistic as an itinerary - I mean, Book of Kells and Dublin Writers’ Museum in 2.5 hours? It strikes me as having emerged from a close study of a guidebook rather than actual experience. I don’t see why anyone would go to the Abbey other than for a specific play (so why include it?), and the Saturday evening (Ely followed by The Village - what?) is uninspiring.

I have had quite a few occasions to do ‘a city in 24 hours’ due to self-inflicted flying visits…but I don’t think trying to tick off as many attractions as possible gives you much of a flavour (if anything, I’d recommend that a visitor to Dublin spend less time indoors than they recommend - although to be fair they mention that walking is recommended at the end).

Oh, and the prose is so purple it is post-purple - “Draped in wrap dresses, cashmere sweaters and stone-washed jeans, Dublin’s fresh-faced professionals pack the dining room”, “A pint of beer in Dublin will run you 4 to 5 euros, but the famed Irish wit is free”, etc.

By: Eoin

Eoin — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 17:51:31 +0000

Ok, so this will damage whatever credibility I have; but what exactly is wrong with the NYT article? It seems entirely straightforward to me, it has a few obvious ideas (Guiness Storehose, Book of Kells, Abbey Theatre, National Gallery), a few very good ones (Hughes’s Bar, Queen of Tarts, Solas ) - and of course a howler (Bruxelles), but only one that I can see. Ok, it’s inoffensive; but it’s not twee; and it will prove a helpful guide to your average NYT reader (or me: I’d happily spend a weekend like that in a foreign city of which I knew nothing before arrival; I’d enjoy myself, and believe that I’d seen something of the city).