Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
com/locate/atoures
doi:10.1016/j.annals.2004.07.008
INTRODUCTION
This paper aims to track and evaluate noteworthy developments in
the conceptualization of the tourist experience, which has been a
key research issue since its early days during the 60s. Generally speaking, the academic interest regarding this issue concerns the existential
dimension of tourists valuations of their personal experiences. Specifically, such analyses focus on tourism motivations and the meanings
that participants assign to their experiences in light of everyday life
in advanced industrialized societies. The subject is addressed in
numerous academic works carried out in various areas. Thus, an attempt to provide a complete literature review is beyond the scope of
Natan Uriely earned his Ph.D. in sociology at the University of Illinois, Chicago. He is
currently Senior Lecturer and the Chairman of the Department of Hotel and Tourism
Management at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev (Beer-Sheva, Israel 84105. Email
<urielyn@som.bgu.ac.il>). His research and teaching areas include the sociology of tourism,
leisure and sport, with a special interest in theory.
199
200
NATAN URIELY
201
202
NATAN URIELY
203
204
A similar process of de-differentiation between tourism and the routine of everyday life is delineated by Munt who argues that tourism is
everything and everything is tourism (1994:104). Specifically, he mentions the growing tendency to combine a variety of activities, such as
adventure trekking, climbing, skiing, and mountain biking with tourism. More significantly, he stresses penetrations, such as the proliferation of ecological, archeological, anthropological, and scientific types
of tourism. In addition to the intellectualization he points out a
process of professionalization in the consumption of tourism. In this
context, Munt suggests that the separation of occupational professionalism and the consumption of tourism are beginning to blur. With respect to the penetration by occupational features, Munt mentions the
development of tourism codes of ethics by travel-related and environmental organizations, such as Tourism Concern and Green Flag International. At the same time, he describes the growth of outdoor training
programs designed for managers as an example of the incorporation of
tourism practices in the work and professional domain.
The notion of tourism/leisure and work as contradicting experiences is also challenged by Ryan (2002) who points toward the invasion
of leisure and recreation-related aspects into the workplace of softwarebased industries, including gymnasia, spas, showers, and skateboard
spaces. In another study, Ryan and Birks (2000) address the inclination
of business tourists to combine tourism pursuits, such as seeing friends
and relatives, attending sport events, or taking a holiday, during their
work-related trips. Similarly, the interaction between work and tourism
is extensively introduced in recent studies that focus on situations in
which work-related and tourist-oriented activities are combined
(Pizam, Uriely and Reichel 2000; Uriely 2001; Uriely and Reichel
2000). In this context, a typology of tourists who combine work and
tourist pursuits during their excursion is developed (Uriely 2001).
Based on the meanings that these tourists assign to their experiences,
four categories are depicted on a continuum from the most work-oriented to the most tourist-oriented: touring professional workers,
who are mainly oriented toward work-related purposes and engage in
tourist-oriented activities only as a by-product of their excursion; migrant tourism workers, who travel in order to make a living and
have fun at the same time; noninstitutionalized working-tourists,
who engage in work while traveling in order to finance a prolonged
trip; and, working-holiday tourists, who perceive their work engagement as recreational that is part of their tourist activities. In line with
these orientations, members of the two former types of tourists are referred to as travelling workers, and members of the two latter working tourists (Uriely 2001).
Pluralizing the Experience. As part of an attempt to capture the essence
of tourism, early conceptualizations were not concerned with the variety of meanings and motivations. Thus, while different seminal theorists, such as Boorstin (1964), MacCannell (1973), and Turner
(1973), proposed different conceptualizations regarding the nature
of the tourist experience in modern society, all of them presented
homogenizing portrayals of it as a general type. This scholarly inclina-
NATAN URIELY
205
206
NATAN URIELY
207
be genuine. Constructive authenticity is associated with those who challenge the simplistic notion of objective authenticity and argue for a
more complex and constructive one (Bruner 1989; Cohen 1988;
Hobsbawn and Ranger 1983; Salamone 1997; Silver 1993). According
to this approach, displayed objects are considered to be authentic
not because they are inherently so but because of their construction
as such by tourists or service providers in terms of points of view, perspectives, or powers. Therefore, authentic experiences and the authenticity of displayed objects in tourism are considered to constitute one
another. While the early approach of objective authenticity concerns
the attributes of displayed object solely, the constructive perspective
highlights the role of people in the construction of attributes associated with displayed objects. Yet, both perspectives share the position
that authentic experiences derive from visiting attractions provided
by the industry. Unlike both objective and constructive authenticities,
Wangs (2000) existential authenticity has nothing to do with that of
the displayed objects. Instead, it corresponds to a potential existential
state of being, which is activated by the participant practices. According
to this perspective, tourists may feel that they themselves are much
more authentic when they engage in nonordinary activities, in which
they are more freely self-expressed than in daily life.
While the growing attention that is given to the subjectivity of tourist
experiences is clearly evident in the contexts of typologies and the
study of authenticity, a similar development seems to be instigated
within the study of heritage tourism (Poria, Butler and Airey 2003)
and urban tourism (Page 2002). In this context, Poria and colleagues
have recently challenged the inclination of previous studies to focus solely on the supply of heritage attractions and its management (Crange
1999; Halewood and Hannam 2001; Hewison 1987; Garrod and Fyall
2000; Seale 1996). Instead, they suggest that individuals subjective perceptions and behaviors are the core elements of heritage tourism experiences and thus require emphasis. This point of view is also
highlighted by Ashworth (1998) who suggests that different individuals
perceive and encounter heritage spaces in different ways based on
their cultural background. Moreover, similar to Wangs notion of existential authenticity, Uzzell suggests that museums and interpretive
centers can be seen as places where people come to understand themselves (1998:16).
Toward Relative Interpretations. The question whether the distinction
made in the literature between modern and postmodern tourism reflects upon concrete developments in the nature of the tourist experience is a matter of intellectual debate. Yet, a comparison between the
early theories of modern tourism and later conceptualizations of postmodern tourism reveals significant differences in terms of style and
form of theorizing. Specifically, it is suggested that while the former
conceptualize the tourist experience in terms of absolute truths, the
latter make use of concepts of relative truths. Thus, unlike the debates
between competing theories of modern tourism, the discourse between different approaches of postmodern tourism is characterized
by compromising statements.
208
NATAN URIELY
209
CONCLUSION
The objective of this paper was to track and analyze conceptual developments in the study of the tourist experience. In light of the ample academic works regarding this subject and mainly its spread across several
subareas of tourism studies, an attempt to provide a complete literature
review was precluded in this paper. Thus, without claiming to capture all
of the developments in study of the tourist experience, this paper
identified four significant trends in its conceptualization: from differentiation to re-differentiation of everyday life and tourism; from generalizing to pluralizing portrayals of the tourist experience; from focusing
on the toured objects to the attention given to the role of subjectivity in
the constitution of experiences; and from contradictory and decisive
statements to relative and complementary interpretations.
In light of the first three conceptual developments the tourist experience is currently depicted as an obscure and diverse phenomenon,
which is mostly constituted by the individual consumer. This perspective regarding the nature of contemporary tourist experiences raises
several important issues that need to be dealt with by planners, managers, and marketers. For example, the availability of various aspects
of the tourist experience in the routine of everyday life seems to
threaten future demands. In addition, the impact of practitioners in
the industry needs to be reexamined in light of the supposedly
increasing role of subjectivity. For instance, the possible constitution
of various experiences within the established category of individual
mass tourists (Wickens 2002) requires rethinking in terms of planning, managing, and marketing resorts that host this tourist segment.
These, and other practical implications of recent conceptualizations,
need to be considered as important issues. Nevertheless, the analysis
carried out in this paper concerns mostly the consequences of the
four conceptual developments rather than on the practice of tourism
in real life.
By reviewing the four trends as a whole, it is argued that while the
early theories of the tourist experience complied with the so-called
modernist form of theorizing in the social sciences, contemporary
conceptualizations of the same issue correspond to modes of analysis
referred to in the literature as postmodernist thought. In this
context, the association between postmodernist theorizing and practices of deconstruction (Denzin 1991; Frazer 1989; Ryan 2002) is illustrated in the first two developments, which emphasize processes of
210
de-differentiation. Specifically, the tendency of recent studies to de-differentiate everyday life and tourist experiences deconstructs the early
definitions which emphasize distinctiveness. Practices of deconstruction are also evident in the shift from generalizing toward pluralizing
depictions of the tourist experience, which involves two stages. In the
first, the early conceptualizations are deconstructed by the emergence
of tourist typologies. The second is manifested in recent studies that
deconstruct well-established typologies by stressing the diversity of tourist experiences within each of the existing categories in these
typologies.
The third development presented in this study indicates how the
attention of researchers was shifted from the displayed objects to the
tourist subjective negotiation of meanings. This clearly illustrates
the inclination of postmodernist thought to stress the role of subjectivity (Frazer 1989; Uriely et al 2002). The fourth development indicated
abovefrom debates that existed between competing standpoints of
modern tourism to the compromising nature of the discourse between
different interpretations of postmodern tourismcorresponds to the
nondualistic and anti-hierarchal intellectual attitude associated with
postmodernist modes of analysis (Bauman 1987; Denzin 1991; Lather
1991).
By utilizing the modernist/postmodernist dichotomy, this analysis
acknowledges that a general cultural change referred to in the literature as postmodernity is underway, and that it affects various domains
of cultural activity, including the fashion of constructing knowledge in
tourism studies. Specifically, the analysis presented above suggests that
the depicted developments are not detached from a contemporary
trend in the social sciences addressed as postmodernist thinking,
which is in itself a manifestation of a wider cultural change referred
to as postmodernity. Nevertheless, the modernist/postmodernist
dichotomy utilized in this analysis should not be grasped as a proposition regarding the extent of change or competition that contemporary
conceptualizations introduce to the literature on the tourist experience. Instead, it is suggested that contemporary conceptualizations of
the tourist experience introduce complementary extensions to the earlier theories rather than a contrasting new approach that invalidates
them. For instance, the essentialist views of Boorstin (1964) and
MacCannell (1973) are included in Cohens phenomenological typology of tourist experiences (1979), which is intersected with the differentiation between institutionalized and noninstitutionalized tourists
(Cohen 1972) in order to create the recent subtypology that captures
the diversity among backpackers (Uriely et al 2002). In this process, later conceptualizations seem to introduce additions rather than a contrasting alternative to the logic of earlier works. In this respect, the
current analysis challenges the notion of postmodernist thinking as a
contesting and sharp departure from earlier modernist theorizing
(Bauman 1987, 1992; Denzin 1991; Flax 1990; Frazer 1989). Thus, it
is suggested that with regard to the specific trends in the literature
the term late modernist (Giddens 1990; Wang 2000) seems to be more
appropriate than postmodernist.
NATAN URIELY
211
212
suggested that like all other social activities, tourism and leisure are
also subjected to processes of class, ethnic, or gender related domination, which impose constraints on the degree of freedom associated
with the tourist experience. Such a power-conflict perspective is applied by Hollinshead (2002) who criticizes postmodernist thought for
ignoring the power of the industry to shape the interpretation of heritage sites in line with the historical view of specific interest groups.
Third, ignoring the displayed objects provided by the industry assumes
that differences in interpretations are related solely to the characteristics of the individual tourist. Nevertheless, it is also possible to assume
that some objects or forms of tourism are open to a wider variety of
interpretation than others.
Thus, future research should not ignore the nature of the specific
visited object or the particular form of tourism as a determinant of
the subjective experience. For example, questions regarding whether
independent excursions may be experienced in more various ways than
organized tours, or if all museums are alike in terms of the variety of
experiences available in their visitation, are to be empirically addressed
in future studies. Moreover, future studies should focus on the nature
of the relations between the objects and the subjects that constitute the
tourist experience. Such an attempt is illustrated in a recent study of
backpackers narratives, which argues for a cyclic relationship between
the institutional discourse provided by the industry, the experience of
the tourist, and its impact on the individuals experience of self-change
(Noy 2004). Specifically, Noy suggests that a narrative of self-change
might be linked to the exceptionality of a subjective experience, which
could not separated from the uniqueness of the visited destinations as
constructed by the institutionalized discourse of tourism. Yet, the latter
is continually reshaped through the subjective narratives of adventure
and self-change that backpackers communicate to each other or wouldbe backpackers before, during, and after their trip.
The aforementioned shift from contradictory and decisive statements to relative and complementary interpretations of the tourist
experience is another matter of concern that needs to be addressed.
In this context, one might grasp this development as an indication
of the liberal approach and the sense of modesty on behalf of contemporary researchers. Nevertheless, it is suggested that the debates that
existed between the early conceptualizations of modern tourism stimulated further studies which support or challenge one of the conflicting aforementioned theories. In contrast, the inclination of current
scholars to avoid debates and to accept seemingly conflicting phenomenon under the category of postmodern tourism is congruent with the
statement that under postmodernism anything goes (Hollinshead
2002:198).
In conclusion, the shift toward postmodernist or late modernist theorizing in the literature on the tourist experience was considered in
this paper as a complementary extension of earlier theories rather than
as a sharp and contrasting departure from earlier modernist theorizing. However, it was also suggested that further steps in this direction
might threaten the possibility of structuring future knowledge in a
NATAN URIELY
213
214
Elsrud, T.
2004 Taking Time and Making Journeys: Narrative on Self and the Other
among Backpackers. Lund: Lund University Press.
Featherstone, M.
1991 Consumer Culture and Postmodernism. London: Sage.
Feifer, M.
1985 Going Places. London: Macmillan.
Fjellman, S.
1992 Vinyl Leaves: Walt Disney World and America. Boulder: Westview Press.
Flax, J.
1990 Thinking Fragments: Psychoanalysis, Feminism, and Postmodernism in
the Contemporary West. Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Frazer, N.
1989 Talking about Needs: Interpretive Contests as Political Conflicts in
Welfare-State Societies. Ethics 99:291313.
Garrod, B., and A. Fyall
2000 Managing Heritage Tourism. Annals of Tourism Research 27:682708.
Giddens, A.
1987 Structuralism, Post-structuralism and the Production of Culture. In Social
Theory Today, A. Giddens and J. Turener, eds., pp. 195223. Stanford CA:
Stanford University Press.
1990 The Consequences of Modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Gitlin, T.
1989 Postmodernism: Roots and Politics. Dissent 36:100108.
Goffman, E.
1961 Encounters: Two Studies in the Sociology of Interaction. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
1967 Interaction Ritual. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Gottdiener, M.
1995 Postmodern Semiotics: Material Culture and the Forms of Postmodern
Life. Cambridge: Blackwell.
Halewood, C., and K. Hannam
2001 Viking Heritage Tourism: Authenticity and Commodification. Annals of
Tourism Research 28:565580.
Harvey, D.
1989 The Condition of Postmodernity. Oxford: Blackwell.
Hewison, R.
1987 The Heritage Industry: Britain in a Climate of Decline. London:
Methuen.
Hobsbawn, E., and T. Ranger
1983 The Invention of Tradition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hollinshead, K.
2002 Playing with the past: Heritage Tourism under the Tyrannies of
Postmodern Discourse. In
The Tourist Experience, C. Ryan, ed., pp. 172200.
London: Continuum.
Kaplan, A.
1988 Introduction. In Postmodernity and its Discontent
, A. Kaplan, ed., pp. 19.
London: Verso.
Krippendorf, J.
1984 The Holidaymakers: Understanding the Impact of Leisure and Travel.
London: Heinemann.
Lash, S., and J. Urry
1987 The End of Organized Capitalism. Cambridge: Polity Press.
1994 Economies of Signs and Space. London: Sage.
Lather, P.
1991 Getting Smart: Feminist Research and Pedagogy with/in the Postmodern. London: Sage.
MacCannell, D.
1973 Staged Authenticity: Arrangements of Social Space in Tourist Settings.
American Sociological Review 79:589603.
NATAN URIELY
215
Morgan, W.
1995 Incredulity Towards Metanarratives and Normative Suicide: A Critique of
Postmodernist Drift in Critical Sport Theory. Sociology of Sport Journal
30:2543.
Munt, I.
1994 The Other Postmodern Tourism: Culture, Travel and the New Middle
Class. Theory, Culture and Society 11:101123.
Noy, C.
2004 The Trip Really Changed Me: Backpackers Narratives of Self Change.
Annals of Tourism Research 31:78102.
Page, S.
2002 Urban Tourism: Evaluating Tourists Experience of Urban Places. In
The Tourist Experience, C. Ryan, ed., pp. 112136. London: Continuum.
Pearce, P.
1982 The Social Psychology of Tourist Behavior. International Series in
Experimental Psychology (vol. 3). Oxford: Pergamon.
Pizam, A., N. Uriely, and A. Reichel
2000 The Intensity of TouristHost Social Relationship and its Effect on
Satisfaction and Change of Attitudes: The Case of Working Tourists in Israel.
Tourism Management 21:395406.
Plog, S.
1977 Why Destinations Rise and Fall in Popularity. In Domestic and International Tourism, E. Kelly, ed., pp. 2628. Wellesley: Institute of Certified Travel
Agents.
Poon, A.
1989 Competitive Strategies for a New Tourism. In Progress in Tourist
Recreation and Hospitality Management (vol. 1) C. Cooper ed. London.
Belhaven.
Poria, Y., R. Butler, and D. Airey
2003 Claryfing Heritage Tourism: A Distinction between Heritage Tourism
and Historic Places. Annals of Tourism Research 30:238254.
Pretes, M.
1995 Postmodern Tourism: The Santa Claus Industry. Annals of Tourism
Research 22:115.
Rojek, C.
1995 Decentering Leisure Theory. London: Sage Publications.
Ross, A.
1988 Universal Abandon? The Politics of Postmodernism. Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press.
Ryan, C.
2002 Stages, Gazes and Constructions of Tourism. In The Tourist Experience,
C. Ryan, ed., pp. 126. London: Continuum.
Ryan, C., and S. Birks
2000 Passengers at Hamilton International Airport. Unpublished Report for
Hamilton International Airport. Hamilton: University of Waikato.
Salamone, F.
1997 Authenticity in Tourism: The San Angel Inns. Annals of Tourism
Research 24:305321.
Seale, R.
1996 A Perspective from Canada on Heritage and Tourism. Annals of Tourism
Research 23:484488.
Silver, I.
1993 Marketing Authenticity in Third World Countries. Annals of Tourism
Research 20:302318.
Smith, V.
1978 Hosts and Guests. Oxford: Blackwells.
Turner, V.
1973 The Center Out There: Pilgrims Goal. History of Religion 12:191230.
Turner, L., and J. Ash
1975 The Golden Hordes. London: Constable.
216
Uriely, N.
1997 Theories of Modern and Postmodern Tourism. Annals of Tourism
Research 24:982984.
2001 Touring Workers and Working Tourists: Variations Across the Interaction
Between Work and Tourism. International Journal of Tourism Research 3:18.
Uriely, N., and A. Reichel
2000 Working Tourists in Israel and Their Attitudes Toward Hosts. Annals of
Tourism Research 27:267284.
Uriely, N., Y. Yonay, and D. Simchai
2002 Backpacking Experiences: A Type and Form Analysis. Annals of Tourism
Research 29:519537.
Urry, J.
1990 The Tourist Gaze: Leisure and Travel in Contemporary Societies.
London: Sage.
Uzzell, D.
1998 Interpreting our Heritage: A Theoretical Interpretation. In Contemporary Issues in Heritage and Environmental Interpretation, D. Uzzell and
R. Ballantyne, eds., pp. 1125. The Stationary Office: London.
Wang, N.
2000 Tourism and Modernity: A Sociological Analysis. Oxford: Pergamon
Press.
Wickens, E.
2002 The Sacred and Profane: A Tourist typology. Annals of Tourism Research
29:834851.
Submitted 17 November 2003. Resubmitted 14 April 2004. Accepted 29 June 2004. Final
version 01 July 2004. Refereed anonymously. Coordinating Editor: Ning Wang