Wednesday, 11 May 2011

Lonely Planet on UK tourism

I see the Lonely Planet has had its annual 4 pennies' worth on the state of the UK tourism industry. Its owned now by the Bolshevik Broadcasting Corporation, who for some reason decided a state broadcaster should get into the guidebook market with taxpayer's money. Anyhooo… It says Stonehenge is great, whereas I reckon it’s a small crappy pile of rocks that needs moving somewhere more suitable - as its blocking the expansion of the A303. Druids and assorted hippies have plenty of time on their hands – how many hours a day do you need to be manning your shop selling Placebos like bird seed and Goji berries to cater to the “Alternative” health market. As a result Stonehenge doesn’t need to be anywhere near a main road – move it.

The guide says Scotland is great – especially for food and doesn’t deserve its “Deep Fried Mars Bar” reputation any more. And yet the life expectancy for the average Jock hovers stubbornly around the Sudan level. They also fail to give credit where credit is due regarding Stoke as “a sprawl of industrial townships tied together by flyovers and bypasses” whilst failing to point out that it is those Flyovers and bypasses that enable you to drive through this undoubted shithole very quickly. They say Manchester is “truly Special” – they need to proof read their book as they missed off the word “Bus” in the sentence. Manchester is a toxic hovel. Yet at the same described Surrey as dull – I assume in a “unlike Manchester you’ll keep your hire car’s hub caps” kind of dull.

But bitching about Britain being expensive is getting a bit tired. Is Caviar from endangered Sturgeon expensive, a hand made Riva speed boat, flat beads on a trip to Australia? Its not expensive – its exclusive. This is why I buy Rough Guides; as they don’t write for unwashed students trying to eke out their last 85p in the Hair-Beading district of Bangkok. They direct me to Cultural sites, 5 star hotels and liveried barmen who can make a cocktail that doesn’t have the word “Sex” in the title.



4 comments:

cheap essays said...

yeah it seems pretty much betterment in the same regard.

Anonymous said...

concur, but unfortunately the maps could always be better

Tar Mac said...

"...Stonehenge doesn’t need to be anywhere near a main road – move it."

Never been there, but, perhaps, wasn't Stonehenge there first (possibly)?

stevehem said...

it's flat 'beds', not 'beads'. That threw me for a moment.

There was an error in this gadget