The Ill-Paid Should Not be Guardians of Antiquities
On paper, the rules for tourists at Luxor's famed Valley of Kings seem pretty strict. No photos inside or outside the tombs, no speaking or even fast walking inside, and definitely no touching of any walls. The reason is plain and simple: after 3000 years sealed underground, the world is lucky to just see the colorful wall painting of the royal tombs at all; the paintings are so fragile that anything that can possibly damage it must be avoided. The strict rules, at least in theory, are the main ways to keep the paintings alive for posterity while keeping the tourists coming.
In practice, however, the rules are routinely ignored. The guards of the individual tombs lurk around the few foreign visitors, discreetly telling them "loopholes" to the rules. Looking around to make sure their managers are not looking, the guards make hand gestures of money, followed by another for taking pictures. The interpretation is straightforward, "hand over cash, and the rules mean nothing." Tourists (the author included), so willing to leave some permanent photographic evidence of their visits, are only too willing to hand over cash to the guards.
Apparently things were not always this way. On the horse carriage ride in town, the author's driver was talking about good business "before." "Business was so good before, that there was no need to hassle around tourists like now, just wait and people come," he would lament, "now even feeding the horse is a problem." By "before," he meant the Egyptian Revolution some five years ago. In the process of overthrowing President Hosni Mubarak, the biggest victim of the process was the previously bustling tourism industry.
With international travelers (and their governments) quick to label the country "too dangerous to travel," arrivals tanked and have yet to recover to anything close to pre-Revolution levels. The result is steep decrease in income for those who are dependent on influx of tourist money, much like the guards at the Valley of Kings and the horse-carriage drivers on the streets. For the few tourists that do come though, it means more unpleasant, persistent, and aggressive hassling for money, but it also means much cheaper tourist services.
With such changes on the ground, both the tourists and the tourism resources suffer. For tourists, the townsfolk of the tourism-based town seem so much more desperate, chasing after travelers with tales of misfortune about how families go unfeed and no better opportunities for earning money. No one likes being pushed to part with their money, whether it be unwanted services being forced onto them or sad stories locals tell that completely destroy the happy mood of travels. Words of mouth cannot possibly be good, and more tourists will probably stay away even if they think Luxor is safe.
But what is worse is the damage done to the physical sites themselves. The ancient leftovers, the temples, the tombs, and monuments of a glorious pharoahic era, are the only thing that distinguish Luxor from all the other agriculture-based towns of the Nile Valley in Upper Egypt. It is the source of the town's relative wealth and continued potential to become wealthier in the future generations as the country become more stable while more and more of world populations will be able to afford international travels.
When the local population receive bribes and intentionally turn a blind eye to tourists damaging the historical sites, they are simply trading future sustainability of the town as a center for global tourism for meager incomes in the short term. Some tourists, especially the Chinese ones that will only show up to a certain destination once in their lifetimes, have no qualms about destroying local sites for their personal enjoyment. Once more of these people decide to show up with their happy-to-bribe, happy-to-destroy attitude, it will be beginning of the end for Luxor as an important historical destination.
It is all the more unfortunate, though, when one considers the sheer effort developing countries have been put into getting back national treasures from Western colonizers who pillaged them for their respective national museums. It is the actions of the guards that vindicate Western suspicion that developing countries cannot keep these treasures in good conditions. Indeed, the task of saving history for future generations cannot be left to those who can barely feed themselves today. For them, a 3000-year-old tomb is just a building, something worthy of sacrifice to ensure that their families can survive now.
In practice, however, the rules are routinely ignored. The guards of the individual tombs lurk around the few foreign visitors, discreetly telling them "loopholes" to the rules. Looking around to make sure their managers are not looking, the guards make hand gestures of money, followed by another for taking pictures. The interpretation is straightforward, "hand over cash, and the rules mean nothing." Tourists (the author included), so willing to leave some permanent photographic evidence of their visits, are only too willing to hand over cash to the guards.
Apparently things were not always this way. On the horse carriage ride in town, the author's driver was talking about good business "before." "Business was so good before, that there was no need to hassle around tourists like now, just wait and people come," he would lament, "now even feeding the horse is a problem." By "before," he meant the Egyptian Revolution some five years ago. In the process of overthrowing President Hosni Mubarak, the biggest victim of the process was the previously bustling tourism industry.
With international travelers (and their governments) quick to label the country "too dangerous to travel," arrivals tanked and have yet to recover to anything close to pre-Revolution levels. The result is steep decrease in income for those who are dependent on influx of tourist money, much like the guards at the Valley of Kings and the horse-carriage drivers on the streets. For the few tourists that do come though, it means more unpleasant, persistent, and aggressive hassling for money, but it also means much cheaper tourist services.
With such changes on the ground, both the tourists and the tourism resources suffer. For tourists, the townsfolk of the tourism-based town seem so much more desperate, chasing after travelers with tales of misfortune about how families go unfeed and no better opportunities for earning money. No one likes being pushed to part with their money, whether it be unwanted services being forced onto them or sad stories locals tell that completely destroy the happy mood of travels. Words of mouth cannot possibly be good, and more tourists will probably stay away even if they think Luxor is safe.
But what is worse is the damage done to the physical sites themselves. The ancient leftovers, the temples, the tombs, and monuments of a glorious pharoahic era, are the only thing that distinguish Luxor from all the other agriculture-based towns of the Nile Valley in Upper Egypt. It is the source of the town's relative wealth and continued potential to become wealthier in the future generations as the country become more stable while more and more of world populations will be able to afford international travels.
When the local population receive bribes and intentionally turn a blind eye to tourists damaging the historical sites, they are simply trading future sustainability of the town as a center for global tourism for meager incomes in the short term. Some tourists, especially the Chinese ones that will only show up to a certain destination once in their lifetimes, have no qualms about destroying local sites for their personal enjoyment. Once more of these people decide to show up with their happy-to-bribe, happy-to-destroy attitude, it will be beginning of the end for Luxor as an important historical destination.
It is all the more unfortunate, though, when one considers the sheer effort developing countries have been put into getting back national treasures from Western colonizers who pillaged them for their respective national museums. It is the actions of the guards that vindicate Western suspicion that developing countries cannot keep these treasures in good conditions. Indeed, the task of saving history for future generations cannot be left to those who can barely feed themselves today. For them, a 3000-year-old tomb is just a building, something worthy of sacrifice to ensure that their families can survive now.
Comments
Post a Comment