Even the stories used to be better
The experience and act of traveling has changed. I occasionally comment on this, here and elsewhere, sometimes leaning towards favouring how many things have changed for the better, more often leaning towards the opposite end; destinations have become more and more unified, standardised, while everyone longs for a unique experience. We all suffer from overtourism.
One often heard complaint, check out Reddit’s travel subreddit, is that hostels aren’t what they used to be. It’s true; they used to bustle, as meeting places for weary travelers on a low budget. Now, most of the guests are lost in their phones, talking, not to the people next to them, but to the same friends they always talk to, online. And on top of that, so many more things, activities, have become standardised and painfully expensive.
However, this behavior, is as much, if not more, a consequence of societal shifts, as it is a driver for those shifts. Capitalism exploits, and there’s always more to squeeze from individuals who don’t have a choice; there’s only one Eiffel Tower, after all, meaning a monopoly on experience. And the same marketing tropes, easily communicated from one end of the world to another, work everywhere; the reason every hipster cafe, anywhere in the wold, looks pretty much the same.
Meanwhile, third spaces, locations suitable for hanging out without the need for participating in the capitalist process, away from home and work, have dwindled in numbers. Seating in public spaces has, in many cities, nearly evaporated (though not everywhere, Lisbon being an exception). Last minute budget travel, once a necessity due to the inefficiencies of the market, no longer exists, as prices have been optimized for profit, as a consequence of extensive data collection and analysis.
So, one consequence has been that those staying in hostels have also changed their behaviour as a consequence of society changing the parameters of public interaction.
And then, to add more of the burden of the responsibility for this on the shoulders of capitalism, it’s now not uncommon for the cheaper hostels to be overrun by the precariat; gig workers, not always of legal status, who can not rent accommodation on the regular market, end up in accommodation originally designed for temporary travellers.
On this trip, I’ve got two nights at a hostel, staying in a dorm, both in Lisbon. On both occasions, I’m flying out of Lisbon airport very early, and I wanted to get up as late as possible, while still sleeping in a bed, and not paying airport hotel prices.
This time, I couldn’t find affordably priced hotels near the airport, so I ended up in small dorms, in hostels, but, in both cases, with very little social interaction with the other guests, finding them hanging out in areas with wifi, individually on their own phones.
At the first hostel, I also encountered another bugbear.
Cost savings abound, receptions are fewer and further between, communication happening through WhatsApp, entrance through an access code, or a lockbox, with the host only communicating the necessary information hours before arrival.
If you’re European, are in Europe, and have European roaming, this is not necessarily a huge deal. If you don’t have a working phone abroad (and also don’t use WhatsApp), this quickly becomes problematic.
I arrived early at my hostel, and my access code didn’t work, which, I later found out, was because it only became active after checkin time. Not completely unreasonable, but that would have been good to know beforehand, as I had arrived on a morning flight.
Back to my earlier point; with no one at reception, and common areas in hostels being reduced in their utility, there is also less of a public space in hostels to interact. So, the behaviour of travellers has changed, but, at least in some part because the conditions of travel have changed.
Is there a solution? Is a solution even required? Surely, at least some don’t see a problem; not everyone travels in order to encounter the liminal. In fact, most probably the majority of tourists seek the familiar, being served by finding what they recognize, while feeling comfort in the procedural, not having to deal with the messy situations that are a consequence of cultural or linguistic challenges.
This does mean, of course, that when one doesn’t fit the predefined framework, the consequences can be much more invasive. What happens when check-ins and -outs are designed to avoid human contact, and your phone dies, or the lockbox is broken?
We make the assumption that the systems that are put in place are immutable. But then when they do fail, the consequences are much more problematic, as they might not, will not, fit the predefined moulds.
But, for those that do lament this mythical past, there is a way to cope; to introduce friction, to seek the periphery, to not rely on that Internet connection, and to avoid the tourist hotspots. Even if there is only one Eiffel Tower.