Definitely. Pilgrimage is the opposite of tourism, and is a metaphor of life itself. Even today most pilgrims travel long distances and difficult terrain on foot.
In medieval times, they were crossing the Alps, the Pyrenees - and the seas, from Ireland to France, from Denmark to Spain, from France to Lebanon. Or from France to Lebanon the long way round.
Pilgrims perform individual acts of piety or penitence, often travelling alone. Pilgrimage was not a kind of travel-video in the bubble of family, friends, car or booze.
In the Middle Ages, pilgrims were serious. Their chances of dying en route were high. Tourism is flippant, usually disrespectful, destructive and demeaning for all concerned. It is intimately and horribly connected with money.
Pilgrimage is the opposite. At the very least it is 'self-improvement'. It is performed by people who think of life as a pilgrimage, whereas tourism is performed by people who think of life as a series of transactions and double-dealing.
2 comments:
Was pilgrimage less exploitative?
Definitely. Pilgrimage is the opposite of tourism, and is a metaphor of life itself. Even today most pilgrims travel long distances and difficult terrain on foot.
In medieval times, they were crossing the Alps, the Pyrenees - and the seas, from Ireland to France, from Denmark to Spain, from France to Lebanon. Or from France to Lebanon the long way round.
Pilgrims perform individual acts of piety or penitence, often travelling alone. Pilgrimage was not a kind of travel-video in the bubble of family, friends, car or booze.
In the Middle Ages, pilgrims were serious. Their chances of dying en route were high. Tourism is flippant, usually disrespectful, destructive and demeaning for all concerned. It is intimately and horribly connected with money.
Pilgrimage is the opposite. At the very least it is 'self-improvement'. It is performed by people who think of life as a pilgrimage, whereas tourism is performed by people who think of life as a series of transactions and double-dealing.
Post a Comment