I’ve learned a lot from concerned feedback from Croatians and from Cameron Hewitt, the co-author of our Croatia & Slovenia and Eastern Europe guidebooks (and a driving force behind us getting that part of Europe up to speed with our coverage of the West). I’m fascinated by the Cold War and their struggles for freedom, and with the wars of the mid-1990s in the former Yugoslavia, but this is becoming old news. Here is an example of feedback to a recent article I wrote, and the response by Cameron (which I agree with a hundred percent):
Dear Mr. Steves,
It was painful to read your latest article on Dubrovnik and Croatia. I would have thought it was a reprint from 10 years ago. First of all the real story is that Dubrovnik has become a victim of its reputation. It is a laggard in post war tourism restructuring compared to other Croatian destinations. Much as energy wealth has kept Russia from reforming, Dubrovnik’s traditional reputation and hordes of Cruise Ship day trippers have lead to a town that is expensive, and offers second class amenities and value.
The real story of Croatian tourism and its successful rapid growth can be found in other areas, such as the Istrian peninsula, which offers high commercial standards of tourism, or the town of Zadar which is more than twice as old as Dubrovnik, and rapidly transformed itself to offer a far higher level of urban sophistication. National parks like Kornati, Plitvice, Krka, and Pakelnica, each offering unique splendor and are located less than two hours drive from each other. The town of Novalje on the island of Pag has become one of the top draws for the international party crowd with Ibixa-like 24 hour partying in one of the many mega clubs at the Zrce beach. The yacht charter industry is one of the largest and most competitive in the world, offering fantastic value, offering the most fantastic holiday experience. These are the real stories of the Croatian experience.
Milan Šangulin
Rick,
I actually agree with this reader. The point he’s making is that you should be cautious not to fixate on one (ugly) aspect of a destination — such as a war — when there’s so much more to the place. I think a similar case could be made about focusing too much on the communist chapter in former Soviet places, like Prague or Hungary or Poland.
Avoiding talk of old wars and communist times just to appease these critics is unreasonable. However, I would encourage you to think beyond these concepts. For example, I find Mostar at least as engaging for its mosques and Turkish houses and diving-off-the-Old Bridge traditions, as for its war damage and improvised cemeteries.
The more I travel in Croatia and Bosnia, the less I think about the war. The more I travel in Eastern Europe, the less I think about communism. There is so much richness of history and culture to learn about in these places, beyond those unfortunate blips on their history. It’s easy to still think of Eastern Europe as “behind the Iron Curtain,” or as the former Yugoslavia as war-torn—but that’s old news, man. As I say in the guidebooks and in my slideshows, people in Croatia think about the war only when a tourist brings it up. You’re doing readers (and the people who live in these places) a disservice to emphasize the negative/provocative factors too much. A solution might be to occasionally complement these weighty articles with a lighter, more tourist-friendly look at the same places (which you have certainly done before, in places like Dubrovnik). You could write a compelling article about Mostar, Dubrovnik, or the Serb parts of Herzegovina without ever mentioning the war.
Hope this helps.
Cameron