Please read the quotation below carefully:
『Despite the fanfare and its modernity, Shanghai is only nominally an international city; it simply cannot compare with the effortless cosmopolitanism of cities such as Kuala Lumpur.』
~Quoted from Lonely Planet, China (United Kingdom: Lonely Planet Pty Ltd, 2009) page 234~
I read this in the backpackers' Bible around 2 months ago. I personally think that this is so wrong. At least in terms of the public transportation, Shanghai is far more advances than Kuala Lumpur, this applies to the city planning too.
What say you? Do you agree with the above statement?
9 评论 Comments:
well, I am sure whoever made this comment never been to Shanghai.
Ya, think so also, but it's wrote in the Lonely Planet, a backpackers' bible, it's impossible that the writer has never been to ShangHai and Kuala Lumpur...
Hmm, have you checked the date it was written? Could it be that the writer was talking about Shanghai in the late 1980s or early 1990s?
If not, maybe the writer was in a trance that took him/her back into the '80s or '90s while writing.
The last but not the least possibility is that the writer was a clone of the Tun Mamak who always twists & turns till he couldn't tell the difference between truth & lies.
Joker, please look at the publication date, its 2009 and Lonely Planet updates their contain in every version.
Besides this, before making some fancy comments about this, please at least know what is Lonely Planet about. The writers of the books are always regular traveler and of course traveled a lot. So don't take them as frogs under the well and are know nothing.
伟翔, I prefer to read your down to earth travel experiences than the commercially driven travel guide. I have a copy of 1990's European Lonely Planet (given to me by my sister) but I only used it as supplementary guide at best. I remember driving all the way to Dephi when we were in Athens but came back quite disappointed despite the good review by LP.
The LP writer is "Ang Moh", thus their view on Cosmopolitanism might be different from ours, i.e. all Chinese look like Han Chinese versus the multi-colors Malaysian (if we have one)
Aditionally, read
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/apr/14/10
Haha, sure, thanks for your like. But one thing, what is commercially driven travel experiences?? Do i wrote such articles?
Yup, this probably one of the most close-to-truth explanation.
Lonely planet is useful, not in terms of their recommendations (they don't have many recommendations inside the book though), it's their information, ie the maps, the direction, the location of backpackers inn etc.
Besides, regarding the fake information, i would say 每一個團體都有害群之馬。 I have several Lonely Planet books, its the most important tool for us when we travel around and i found that the information inside are really useful (much better than others in market).
If you frequently visits their website and read their every year updated book, you will know that the writers are not pay to visit a place and then write the book (similar to the news) but is actually some prominent backpackers in the community. And, one can also contribute via their website.
Anyway,盡信書不如無書,just like what i had mentioned above, the book is just a tool, the most important is the person who travel.
One thing, please remember that the comparison is merely an International city vs effortless cosmopolitan city, i think the normal meaning of the words should applies and no other.
Post a Comment