to everyone who replied to my previous post with their definitions of ‘authenticity’ & were patient enough to indulge me by answering my follow-up questions, thank you ever so much, i really appreciate your efforts, but…it isn’t over yet.
it seems from my previous post that peoples’ general definitions are that it is quite flexible: something can be authentic by design; so something that isn’t authentic in the sense of being original can become authentic through process, through the manipulation of materials to form an authentic thing, in its own right. some define it as something true, so something original, but are persuaded that as we deconstruct what that truth is, it seems to them that it can be reconstituted using methods, behaviour or materials that don’t belong in their first definition of authenticity before they are questioned further.
i want to move to more specific topics to try & gauge particulars. so i want to ask: what do you think is involved to make an ‘authentic’ travel experience? we all have in mind what we expect from travelling, from a country, from its architecture, food, from the behaviour of the locals, the weather, the culture, the objects of a place, the customs & even clothing etc. this may be informed from our reading of guides, blogs or seeing photographs in magazines. they may even inform our search for authenticity when we commit ourselves to a destination, which whether positive or negative, set expectations we wish fulfilled to have had an authentic experience. i am not here investigating the rights or wrongs, or political correctness, i am not judging opinions, i need honesty from you all.
regardless of how our opinion is persuaded i would like to know you experiences or definitions, your expectations or your disappointments. even if you never visited a place, what do you expect it to be like? what would disappoint you if you experienced it, but didn’t expect it? it could be something like seeing a monk using a cell phone. anything at all related to authentic travel.
in case you are wondering why i am doing this, i’ll try to explain. i want to write an essay based largely on publicly gathered knowledge. you & me together are discussing this topic so as to be formulated into an essay format that will detail what authenticity is, how it works & what it means to us. writers develop a theme alone, thinking they may be addressing the thoughts of a body of people, but perhaps by actually discussing something with a large body of people before writing, may actually create a more hones, shared idea of a topic that actually gets to the center of how people feel about it; rather than if it is done with a perceived notion of what people may or may not think. blogging is an ideal platform for the sorts of discussion that Krishnamurti dedicated himself to trying to begin with people. his reaching out to people was usually in regards to a term, a word or something that is collectively experienced. he seemed to have had little success, from what i can see in his numerous talks, despite his popularity, which may have been the hindrance. people i have learned don’t like looking stupid, they don’t want to embarrass themselves, this is understandable, but it shouldn’t be. we are an international community & blogging allows us to trade ideas & that is really my aim, its just that at the end of it i want to have produced an essay.
i don’t think i’ve done a good job of explaining myself, i hope i can clarify more in a future post as i attempt to render more acceptably my intentions. i have it on the tip of my tongue, but as i never considered how to explain this, i find myself lacking.
thank you all again & i look forward to your opinions.