The Niagara Philosphy

My long time scepticism about waterfalls was born on this day. Having fully put this to the test around the world, with a few notable exceptions, waterfalls are a great disappointment, and none more so than Niagara. Surrounded by concrete, overcrowded and hugely commercialised (and that was 45 years ago). The visit to Niagara had been built up as a highlight of my holiday, and poor old Bill Grand, who took me along, and must have been there dozens of times must have been disappointed with my underwhelmness.

My long time disappointment with waterfalls stems from what you get. At Niagara you get to shuffle around a concrete surround with thousands of others draped in plastic ponchos seeing something that looks exactly the same as all of the pictures you ever saw, and where nothing happens. In fact this has framed a greater part of my travel philosophy, and it is only writing it down now that makes me think Niagara was the first part of this theory. Where is the wonder? Where is the excitement? Where is the learning? Where is the culture, the wildlife, the adrenaline, the food?

Though it is important that Niagara, Seattle, The Acropolis, even Florence, exist and attract the millions and millions that they do(Even though a good percentage of people who visit these icons only do it to take a selfie to show to their 'followers' rather than to appreciate to history or work involved), as it keeps the good bits clear for the rest of us. And that is a part of the attraction - Kaiteur, Trujillo (Spain), Kuelap and Arequipa are at the least the equals and mostly vastly superior to the above, but hardly anyone goes. And when you visit these kinds of places, something interesting or unexpected might happen.

An extension of this narrow mindedness is down to Tripadvisor and other similar review sites, or more accurately the people that use them slavishly. You can only get a good meal in a restaurant listed 5 out of 5, and the only places worth visiting are those listed in guidebooks.Baca lagi