‘These assumptions continued in COPESCO planning documents that estimated that the average traveler to Peru in 1971 would be “a business man or professional between thirty-five and forty, with a high degree of education and cultural level. It is almost guaranteed this man will travel with his family.”’ (Making Machu Picchu, p. 121)
Jon, I don’t know how old you are, but I think you nearly fit this description exactly! For reference, COPESCO is the Peru-UNESCO Tourist and Cultural Plan; a collaboration between Peru and UNESCO formed under the Velasco government of 1968 to 1975.
I think it’s interesting to note how much the target audience for tourism promotion, and the resulting demographic of tourists, has changed. I am not a man, definitely not a business man, nor am I a professional, and I’m only 21 and not travelling with my family. The only criteria we all fit is the “high degree of education”. (I’m unsure what exactly “cultural level” is referring to, but I’d like to think we all also have a high degree of cultural level.) Throughout our time in Peru, from what I’ve observed, I think most tourists no longer fit this description.
Indeed, the tourism industry surrounding the site was once oriented towards elite tourists, with much investment going towards luxury hotels and restaurants meant to support those who wanted to travel at the height of comfort while still experiencing “Indigeneity”. Rice writes, “Since the 1920s, cusqueños had employed tourism to illustrate how their region’s Indigenous character appealed to global elite travelers.” With the global countercultural movements of the 1960s, and with the restoration of the Inca Trail, followed a wave of hippie tourists and tourists specifically seeking challenge and discomfort on their trip to Peru.
I think in a way, the jipis of the 1970s (as described by Rice) and the luxury travellers are very similar, but they both refuse to admit it. Rice quotes a passage from El Comercio de Lima that describes hipis as people that “look to introduce themselves in the most tantalizingly distant from the West, that want to live like the Indians of Mexico, understand the misery of India, investigate socialism in Chile, or experiment Malaysian hospitality.” The jipis of these destinations are also born into the privileged conditions of the West (or perhaps more accurately, the global North?). They choose to experience suffering, but they can also choose when they want to leave this suffering. I think it was Orla who wrote about something similar in a previous blog post; these jipis seem to be able to put on and take off this “Indigenous” persona whenever they wish. Both the luxury and the jipi travellers are consumers/purchasers/buyers of the Indigeneity/Indigenous identity/Indigenous culture that is packaged and marketed to them. I’m still grappling with whether we are any different.
What began as a local effort to improve the economy in the Cusco area has evolved into a story of displacement and replacement, both physically and economically, by multi-national companies. I think this another way the tourism industry is no different than the extractive industries. Like mining, tourism in Peru seeks to dig out and cherry-pick the shiniest gems of Indigenous cultures and present them to the world for the taking.
6 replies on “The average traveler to Peru in 1971”
“They choose to experience suffering, but they can also choose when they want to leave this suffering.” This description is extraordinary, Cissy. Having a dollar credit card in your pocket changes everything. I share your distrust of hippies but also your suspicions about our own place. Seeing what we found yesterday, after so many regulations, who would be the ideal Machu Picchu tourist in June 2024? And to what extent does this desired image have to do with the Peruvian politics of the current moment (about which we have spoken very little in these weeks)?
Cissy this is a great post. I feel that I definitely fall into the description of the tourist that you quoted at the beginning, minus the family, and I am, of course, only 29, lol. I think it’s interesting the notion you raised that some people can choose when to leave or when to turn on and of their “indigeneity”. It’s a reflection that I think we can all take some time to have about our own journey here, especially today on National Indigenous Peoples Day.
Hey Cissy:)
What a great bog post! You bring up some interesting questions. As a psychology student, I can’t help but to consider the individual human behind each consumer-tourism interaction and wonder what their motivations are for participating. Though one could certainly make an argument for the objective harms that result from the tourism industry, within it lie countless individual interactions with cultures and communities, and these exchanges have the potential for helpful or hurtful outcomes. (eg. the testimonio and friendship that resulted from the work of Ricardo Valderrama Fernández and Carmen Escalante Gutiérrez with Gregorio Condori Mamani and Asunta Quispe Huamán). This may be wishful thinking, but I am hopeful that many tourists and travelers alike (ourselves included) are striving engage in our tourist transactions with care and the intention to learn and spread that knowledge.
Hi love 🙂
The comparison you draw between mining and tourism is an interesting way to frame how Peru has relied on various forms of extraction to survive in the global economy. In some ways it makes me think of the economic autonomy of Peru that seems to be very dependent on appeasing the global north. How much autonomy has Peru actually had in crafting it’s cultural narrative?
Hi Cissy, this was great.
You’ve made some excellent points. indeed, It’s not just about who is traveling but also how tourism shapes and reshapes cultural experiences and local economies. On one hand tourism can bring much-needed revenue and global awareness to cultural heritage sites. On the other hand, it often leads to commercialization and displacement, as you’ve said here. The comparison to extractive industries is quite apt both can strip away local resources, whether they’re natural or cultural, for external consumption.
Rereading this wonderful blog post, I was reminded that Jon is a very selective reader.
“Jon, I don’t know how old you are, but I think you nearly fit this description exactly!”
You clearly express that Jon fits the description except for his age. He is definitely not within the range. This is the sole reason why the “nearly” is needed. Jon saw what he liked and ran off to his letrados. But we know the truth. Your only miss was placing Jon at a “high cultural level.”