My friend and I are actually taking a trip to Paris from the US with the university we attend and are just extending our stay two weeks. Do you think that this itinerary is doable? Any must see places/great stays that you know of in each place? We chose all places that Ryan Air serves I welcome your critique, it's my first time to Europe! Thanks for your time and suggestions! I look forward to them!
Paris, France 5 days (fly) Rome, Italy 3 days (rail) Pisa, Italy 2 days (fly) Barcelona, Spain 3 days (fly) Arrhus Denmark, 3 days (fly) London, England 3 days (fly) Paris, France 2 days Reply With Quote
I think your most enduring memory from this trip will be of the security lines in airports and checking in and out of hotels. You're trying to do way too much. Each of your travel days will end up taking most of a day by the time you check out of one place, go through all the hassle of flying and check in to your new place. That leaves you only 8 days in 5 locations.
You'd get so much more out of your time if you cut those five destinations down to two, spending 5 or six days in each (Barcelona and Rome, for instance).
When I looked at your itinerary, it reminded me a little of this joke tour we created for April Fool's Day in 2005!
Reminds me of the "tour" my wife and I took in 2001, about which my European friends said, "You Americans! You just don't understand relaxation."
Wife and I meet at hotel in London - she flew in from US, I bused in from Reading, UK. London - 2 days, one day by train to Windsor; Train to Paris - 2 days (lost my passport, thus taking up an entire afternoon getting another at the US embassy); Train to Lyon (great food!) - 2 days; Train to Amsterdam - 2 days; Flight to Heathrow - Sue back to US; me back to Reading, UK.
Posts: 428 | Location: New Hampshire | Registered: 12 September 2006
Hi Anna - welcome to the Slow Travel Talk forums that support the Slow Travel website.
If you guessed from our main site name that most of us here prefer a less hurried itinerary than you've outlined ... you'd be right.
Is your itinerary "doable"? Sure, but as others noted you'll be spending a lot of your time (IMO too much) traveling and dealing with the logistics of moving around so often. NOT seeing and NOT doing at your destinations. Is that how you want to spend your time during your first visit to Europe?
Take a look at the Slow Travel site in the link above, and think about what's really important to you.
Good luck with your plans!
Colleen
Posts: 13418 | Location: The Beautiful San Francisco Bay Area | Registered: 06 August 2001
Hey guys - I'm taking a wild guess that "Annatherappstar" is having a bit of fun with us. Maybe I'm just suspicious from teaching art at a university, but I can envision a couple of college students stumbling onto Slowtravel.com and thinking it would be funny to see the posts generated by her "slow" itinerary. Pretty clever! I recently had a student put up an intentionally VERY bad painting for critique to see the result. The signature "L. Trout" helped give it away. Ciao' "Anna." I think your itinerary is just fine! Buon viaggio!
Hi All Sorry for all the confusion! Actually this is no joke/april fools Perhaps I am an overexcited young student wanting to see as much of the world as possible! eeekk! I appreciate your advice greatly and more than you know... okay, so this is where I'm at... A group from my university is going for a week in Paris (flight/hotel/museums etc.). We had the option of extending our flight back, so we have two weeks in Europe. Because of the rush of finals and projects and traveling back home, we are now working on planning reserving these two weeks. The time on our own starts May 28th. We created this rather (as I see now, ill-prepared) schedule out of places that we want to go and that ryanair services... probably not the wisest thing to do, I know. While I achieve nearly straight A's at the University I admit I know very little about Europe travel! Would you help this student out? I sound rather helpless don't I?
-We would like to go somewhere in Denmark (this is where my grandfather was born) -We would like to travel rather cheaply (though we like safety over saving a buck or two) -the listed cities are of most interest to us, but we are open to others..
Thanks for your help! Much appreciation and respect, Anna
I do understand the urge to see it all, but I've tried it both ways, as many of our regulars here have, and you honestly will get more enjoyment and more memorable experiences out of a trip if you don't try to do so much.
Why not plan a week (or five or six days) in Denmark, giving you time to really get acquainted with the area your grandfather came from? Then a week in London, which is hardly enough to scratch the surface of what there is to see and do in that city.
That would minimize the number of days lost to travel and give you a lot of variety in your trip.
It does mean saving Italy and Spain for another trip, but you're young, and there will be other trips.
Or, you could do Rome and Barcelona, or Rome and Denmark, or some other combination.
Hi,Anna, This is what I would do for a two-week trip.
1. I would take trains as much as possible. Airports and planes are similar the world over. Your experience in a plane/airport will range from unpleasant to very unpleasant. On a plane or in an airport, you do not see Europe at all. I would take trains as much as possible and maybe buy a eurail pass if it is feasible. On a train you can look out and see landscapes, besides being able to move around. Train travel in Europe is great and is an experience by itself.
2. Especially with two weeks, I would try to eliminate from my mindset that seeing the largest number of countries somehow desirable. The opposite is true.
3. With two weeks, I would choose two "bases" within two interest-packed regions. The ideal would be an interesting major city with an array of day-trip options. Example: The French riviera would be a good region. The train system has good coverage on the whole coast. A good base would be Nice or Menton, both cities with inexpensive lodging and good food. And you can find something different to do and see everyday for a week (and longer, much longer), either in the city or in nearby areas. Depending on your interest, other good bases may be: Barcelona, Rome, Florence, Vienna. I can't list them all.
4. Decide what your areas of interest are, which will determine your regions to visit.
5. You have a life time ahead of you. You will come back to see what you don't get around to see this time. Don't ruin your travel by cramming too much into it. Don't you want to savor good food instead of swallowing without chewing? Bon voyage.
Hi Anna, I think it is wonderful that you will be making this trip. I totally understand your enthusiasm for wanting to see as much as possible on your first trip but I must echo the thoughts and concerns voiced by the others that have written to you. Americana in Parigi had alot of good points. I guarantee once you make this trip you will be planning your next trip to Europe as soon as your feet touch American soil! So you can be sure this will not be your only trip nor will you keep too much time between this trip and your next. With that in mind I'd totally do Paris and surrounding areas and see some parts of Aarhus (I believe that's where you said your grandfather was from). I've taken trains from Paris all the way up to Copenhagen and this mode of transportation is very pleasant. It takes longer, yes, but you will see so much along the way. Narrow the field by alot I'd say and if you can find it in your heart to postpone Rome then I'd say save Italy for one summer that you can focus on that country alone. I'm very, very excited for what you have in store. This will be a summer you will never forget (in a good way!) Have fun and safe travels. Barb Cabot PS Will you let us know how it all turns out when you return?
Posts: 281 | Location: Long Beach, California | Registered: 27 August 2007
Because of the rush of finals and projects and traveling back home, we are now working on planning reserving these two weeks. The time on our own starts May 28th.
What year are you talking about? 2008? You will be trying to stay in Italy at the height of the season June-Aug. Most of the cheap lodging in rome will have been snapped up months ago.
A lot depends on you budget for those 2 weeks. All that traveling around costs more money than flying in and staying in one place. My last trip to Rome in Feb 2008 was for 12 days. These spring break trips with my daughter are on a budget. We stayed in one apt in Rome the whole 12 days. We were never bored.
Posts: 3561 | Location: St Paul, MN | Registered: 10 February 2006
I think it would be wise to stick to the continent for this trip and hold the UK for another trip when you have more time. If you like museums and art galleries there are probably more free ones in London than ant other two countries in Europe. The British Museum alone can take days. I once spent a whole day just looking at the books on display.
Remember for longer train journeys you can travel overnight and sleep on the train, you save a hotel cost for a night that way and don't lose as much time traveling.
I suppose if you're young and enthusiastic, an overnight train trip wouldn't be so bad. But I've taken 3 overnight train trips and have never managed to get much sleep on any of them. I arrive so tired that that day is a loss anyway.
But I do agree with the others that you might want to rethink your itinerary. Two weeks, starting and ending in Paris can really give you lots of options that are closer to Paris. How about a week in Amsterdam? That is an easy train ride away - same with London via the chunnel. The French Riviera idea proposed by Americana in Parigi sounds great, too. If you picked one of those options, I'm sure you could still work in Denmark without making your itinerary too crazy.
I'm with the others that say save Spain and Italy for another trip.
Sorry Anna - My apologies. Your proposed itinerary was so extreme that I really thought you might be joking. I suggest only two or at most three locations for a two week trip. Try to keep locations as close as possible. If you are on a budget less traveling will also cut down on your expenses.
A long time ago, I travelled to Europe for the first time for two weeks--one week in Paris and one week in Burgundy. I had a Paris itinerary as long as my arm. By the third day I was sitting on the edge of the hotel bed blubbering: "Everybody lied when they said they loved Europe! They just wanted to justify spending a lot of money." My husband sat down on the bed next to me and said: "Let's ditch the itinerary and just sit in cafes and do one other thing a day . . . if we feel like it." That changed the whole trip. That's what slow travel is all about--depth, not breadth; savoring, not gulping.
On a practical basis, Ryanair or no Ryanair, the "travel day" is lost with packing, getting up the dark, checking out, getting to the airport, enduring security, flying, checking into a new place, unpacking. On a recent trip to Dublin, I saw young travel mates sniping with each other in the nightmarish Ryanair Beauvais facility. They were just wiped out and sick of racing around. Just envision that and multiply that experience by three or four days if that's how many places you want to squeeze in. People seriously, seriously underestimate how much time all that takes. Lost days.
In the same vein, travelers trying to see a lot, even in one city like Paris, don't reckon on the amount of time it takes to get into, say, the Louvre or Versailles or the Eiffel Tower. We've had some visitors who've arrived with ambitious itineraries then hit the wall on Day Three when they find themselves tired, cranky, and not having a good time. When I saw your itinerary, I thought of Chevy Chase in "National Lampoon European Vacation." The family is en route to the Louvre and "Clark" says: "Come on kids, we've got 3700 paintings to see, and the museum closes in fifteen minutes."
I hope you think about settling on two places, three tops then digging in with joy. Bon voyage(s).
How exciting to be planning your first trip to Europe. Like the rest of us, you'll fall in love & be back time & time again.
Your initial itinery is far too quick - you won't get a feel for any of your destinations. It would be best to limit it to 2 or 3 locations. The family link to Denmark is a good place to start - Copenhagen is 'wonderful' and other areas are easily accessible. I think your return flight is from Pisa? If so, perhaps select an area in Italy that you can fly to from Copenhagen (perhaps Milan or Torino?) and explore one area for a few days before getting a train to Pisa to spend the last couple of days.
Whatever you end up doing, make sure you take time to sit & watch the world go by - you'll remember those days as much as the museums.
Enjoy!
Posts: 410 | Location: Adelaide, South Australia | Registered: 08 May 2005
