UNESCO: Beckoning tourists since 1972

In light of my recent trip to Hoi An (and upcoming one to Angkor Wat in Cambodia), I was thrilled to read this New York Times article about UNESCO World Heritage Sites.  Does declaring something a UNESCO site help it or harm it, is the gist of the question raised by the article.  The article explains that UNESCO sites are inundated with tourists–certainly a boon for the area’s economy but simultaneously destructive with the increased pollution and tourists’ demands.  UNESCO World Heritage Sites were established in 1972 and include places like Yellowstone National Park in the USA, the Great Wall of China, Machu Picchu in Peru, and the medieval cities of Seville, Spain, and Provins, France.

Hoi An has been a UNESCO World Heritage Site since 1999.  It was never bombed so it’s traditional architecture still stands.  The town features temples and old houses preserved as museums to educate tourists about Hoi An’s mercantile history.  As a history lover and hopefully future art historian, I think UNESCO is great for that reason.

On the flip side, however, Hoi An is the single most touristy place I’ve ever been.  (Even more than Montmartre in Paris).  You know how when you go dancing in a gay bar no one grabs you ass?  For the first thirty minutes, you love it, then, suddenly, you miss being hit on even by the most obnoxious of drunkards?  Hoi An was the only place I’ve been to in Vietnam where no one shouted, “Hello, hello!” at me or pointed or commented about how damn white I am.

The paradox is this: In trying to preserve its authenticity, has UNESCO made Hoi An into the least authentically Vietnamese place I’ve ever visited or is it just preserving the town’s tranquil charm?  What is the effect of tourism on the character of a town?  And is teaching people about the history of the place they are visiting–and preserving old architecture and traditions–worth the headache tourism brings?


2 thoughts on “UNESCO: Beckoning tourists since 1972

  1. Paradox – good question – I had never seen tourism like in Prague over Christmas! It took me a while to get there, but wow – I never expected the volume of tourists everywhere – you pose a great thinker of a question! Perhaps it is the UNESCO listing, or perhaps all the feature articles in magazine and newspapers telling people they must go! With more people traveling – beautifully preserved places will change the tranquility of these places! (Perhaps Prague was never that quiet – but I am sure the more difficult places to get to have changed! I loved the trek to Macchu Piccu – 4 days of hiking – all those people arriving by train – I think they missed an integral part of the experience! Has the UNESCO listing made it a must go to stop – even if not experiencing it????? Great post – interesting topic!

    • Thanks for the comment. Since all the tourists–no matter what language they’re reading it in–in Vietnam use Lonely Planet, I’ll bet that LP has something to do with it. They sort of bill Hoi An as a refuge from the chaos of Hanoi or Ho Chi Minh City. These are definitely questions I’ll be puzzling over for eternity; it’s nearly impossible to escape them if you travel!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: