Exactly. We "need" to qualify that, but I don't think we really can. And that's the problem with all such grand generalizations.
There was a point in my life when I was very self-conscious about the fact I haven't really traveled by some people's standards. It kinda gave birth to that silly desire to "compete", to mark as "visited" as many countries as I could. And, I mean, traveling sure is nice, there was some void I filled doing that. But it was much quicker than I could expect, that this contest of sorts became totally meaningless, and I found out that I cannot even tell how many "countries" I visited.
First off, if the only time I was in a country was a long time ago on some guided tour, it somehow feels dishonest to me now to say I've "been there". I feel like I need a refresher for it to actually count. Like, otherwise it's as good as seeing a movie. Right?
Then, the mere saying that "I have visited a country" became kind of meaningless. What does it mean, to visit France? Nice is very different from Paris. Spending a couple of weeks in Alpine mountains (technically in France) kinda isn't what people mean when they say they've been in France. So, how much of it I need to see to say I've traveled France?
Ok, probably it makes more sense to count cities. But what does it mean to visit a city? Do 6 hours in the downtown while I wait for a connecting flight count? Do a couple of days meaninglessly wandering the city count? Does a work trip (which I mostly spent in some office and in some hotel) count? Does spending several night drunk and high in Paris count "visiting Paris" same as walking famous museums and such? What is "better"?
Maybe I should rather limit my accounting to specific places, like offices, restaurants, museums? Like, instead of saying that I've been to Paris, should I say "I've been in Louvre"? By the way, how many days do you need to "see Louvre"? How long do I have to stare at each paining for it to count? Does it count at all, if I have no fucking idea what I'm staring at, and there's nobody to tell me, why it's significant?
I don't want to sound cliche, especially in that way, but, honestly, I cannot even say that I'm completely familiar with the city I've been living in for the most of my life. There is not a "good enough" degree of "visiting a place". It doesn't exist. Your "traveling" isn't necessarily more meaningful than airline pilot's "traveling" (or "commuting", as another person in this thread tried to insult them). And there is no such thing as "experience other cultures and ways of life". Experience your life and culture first and then come back to talk. (I wish to add "in the next life", but it's not like that "next life" of yours can be totally identical to the one you live now, even if it is spent at the same place, so I guess you'll have to experience it first too.)
I wanted to also say a couple of things about reading the books, but this post is excessively large as it is. So, to summarize, all these "horizon broadening" contests are just vain and meaningless. Do whatever you want, read or visit whatever you want, and don't feel inadequate if you don't.
There was a point in my life when I was very self-conscious about the fact I haven't really traveled by some people's standards. It kinda gave birth to that silly desire to "compete", to mark as "visited" as many countries as I could. And, I mean, traveling sure is nice, there was some void I filled doing that. But it was much quicker than I could expect, that this contest of sorts became totally meaningless, and I found out that I cannot even tell how many "countries" I visited.
First off, if the only time I was in a country was a long time ago on some guided tour, it somehow feels dishonest to me now to say I've "been there". I feel like I need a refresher for it to actually count. Like, otherwise it's as good as seeing a movie. Right?
Then, the mere saying that "I have visited a country" became kind of meaningless. What does it mean, to visit France? Nice is very different from Paris. Spending a couple of weeks in Alpine mountains (technically in France) kinda isn't what people mean when they say they've been in France. So, how much of it I need to see to say I've traveled France?
Ok, probably it makes more sense to count cities. But what does it mean to visit a city? Do 6 hours in the downtown while I wait for a connecting flight count? Do a couple of days meaninglessly wandering the city count? Does a work trip (which I mostly spent in some office and in some hotel) count? Does spending several night drunk and high in Paris count "visiting Paris" same as walking famous museums and such? What is "better"?
Maybe I should rather limit my accounting to specific places, like offices, restaurants, museums? Like, instead of saying that I've been to Paris, should I say "I've been in Louvre"? By the way, how many days do you need to "see Louvre"? How long do I have to stare at each paining for it to count? Does it count at all, if I have no fucking idea what I'm staring at, and there's nobody to tell me, why it's significant?
I don't want to sound cliche, especially in that way, but, honestly, I cannot even say that I'm completely familiar with the city I've been living in for the most of my life. There is not a "good enough" degree of "visiting a place". It doesn't exist. Your "traveling" isn't necessarily more meaningful than airline pilot's "traveling" (or "commuting", as another person in this thread tried to insult them). And there is no such thing as "experience other cultures and ways of life". Experience your life and culture first and then come back to talk. (I wish to add "in the next life", but it's not like that "next life" of yours can be totally identical to the one you live now, even if it is spent at the same place, so I guess you'll have to experience it first too.)
I wanted to also say a couple of things about reading the books, but this post is excessively large as it is. So, to summarize, all these "horizon broadening" contests are just vain and meaningless. Do whatever you want, read or visit whatever you want, and don't feel inadequate if you don't.