it's ironic how the mere sight of tourists immediately devalues the worth of a place (i mean this just to convey the indifference one feels, and not literally of course), regardless of its weight. from london to paris, this feeling pervaded. from the millennium bridge, to St Paul's, to the National Gallery, to the Lourve and Eiffel Tower, it's as if whatever bubbling of intrigue I had for the place immediately evaporated upon confronting the throngs. the queues, the selfie sticks, the China tourists with their shrieks, the cheesy poses, the lewd faces, the distaste. clearly, those weren't my favourite places. in fact, London felt more deadpan than I imagined. the city, in my impression, was painted in shades of caramel and dust, greys and browns. even bricklane didn't feel impressive. pity.
on the other hand, Amsterdam left a more pleasant taste. the dutch were truly friendly, and had an almost cheeky, sometimes cheesy sense of humour—which was endearing really. the canals were charming, and i felt an energy.
switzerland lived up to its buck, and was picture-perfect in every sense. we were lucky we caught the biggest, most magical rainbow on the way back from a rainy, gloomy tram ride up Mt Rigi. the misty lakes, the lovely houses perched hillside, the mountains in the background—everything was where it should be, as it should be. and with every passing second, each scene demanded to be captured. and we haven't even gotten up the mountains yet. well, that, together with Provence, is a story for another day.
No comments:
Post a Comment