CHAPTER 2 - Discussion

Why should Dark Tourism be discouraged?

I. Definition of Dark Tourism

Dark tourism is a type of tourism in which tourists specifically target destinations or exhibitions highlighting death, morbid suffering or atrocities. It is one of the many types of tourism that has arisen in the development of modern niche tourism.

According to an article online entitled “What is Dark Tourism”, Dark Tourism is derived from Greek word Thanatos (meaning Death) and has grown to become a popular and profitable travel niche. By definition, the website stated that “Thanatourism is about traveling to places that were once (or still are) associated with pain, suffering, horrible living conditions, natural and manmade disasters or death.”(http://www.vacationideas.me/travel-tips/thanatourism-definition-dark-tourism/)

Another definition synced with dark tourism is the term "black spots", which according to a field study conducted by Rojek is a "...commercial developments of grave sites and sites in which celebrities or large numbers of peoples have met with sudden and violent deaths" (http://repository.tamu.edu/handle/1969.1/89)

Both the expressions "dark tourism" and "thanatourism" will be used in this research, because they have the same meaning, but are differently interpreted. Thanatourism is based on the motivational aspect, while dark tourism is attraction respectively location based. In contrast, black spots are a parts of the dark tourism spectrum and rather describe places of sudden and violent death.

The researcher also noticed that some academics interpret dark tourism under more general auspices and do not measure intent in defining dark tourism. For example, some may classify World War II camps or haunted houses as dark tourist attractions, as these exhibits emphasize the tragic or frightening moments of human history. Other academics make a clear distinction between dark tourism and other types of adjectival tourism. They narrow the definition to exclusively include exhibits and attractions solely associated with the gruesome or morbid historical events or exhibits that strongly appeal to the darker, curious side of human nature.

Most definitely, dark tourism in its truest form generally differs from other types of special interest tourism, such as war tourism or grief tourism. Many tourists visit war memorials to pay respects to veterans or to remember the honorable sacrifices made on a battlefield. This type of visitation is generally not considered "dark." Dark tourism relates specifically to the act of traveling for the entertainment value of a morbid interest in death, suffering and disasters.

II. Kinds of Dark Tourism  

A. Horror tourism involves the visitation of sites associated with murder, torture and infamous crime. Thus, examples would various horror tours which take place around the city, during which it is possible to visit sites associated with murderers such as Jack the Ripper, Sweeny Todd and Dennis Nielsen. This

type of thanatourism is extremely commonplace.

According to an article entitled “Dark Tourism: A Fine Line Between Curiosity and Exploitation” written by Amanda Kendle, “Horror is a highly saleable tourism commodity and tourists have a particular appetite for sites and artifacts related to atrocity, it is both a highly marketable combination of education and enjoyment and a powerful combination of education and enjoyment and a powerful instrument for the transference of political or social messages” (http://www.vagabondish.com/dark-tourism-travel-tours/).

B. Hardship tourism relates to the visiting of sites where individuals have experienced or are experiencing human hardship, struggle and in many cases death. Thus, as well as the elements of death which exist at the site, the location is also ‘dark’ in nature in relation to its ability to crush the human spirit through depravity.

An article entitled “Poverty Tourism” defined Hardship tourism as “sites that include specific areas for example slavery sites, slums and prisons.” And therefore “Touring a squatter camp in Soweto, South Africa, or similarly poor settlements in India, and driving through the favelas of Rio de Janeiro all belong to this category.” (http://www.vagabondish.com/dark-tourism-travel-tours/#CdBJtPeoQIZGgVHk.99)

C. Tragedy tourism is defined as the kind of Thanatourism that involves natural/ accidental or deliberate/premeditated disasters or accidents,whether on a global or local scale to individual or mass effect. Examples of this kind of tourism would include visits to Ground Zero in New York, the proposed accident museum in Paris (the site of Princess Diana’s death) and exhibitions concerning and the actual sites of the Hurricane Katrina, Pompeii and Chernobyl.

According to an article entitled “Developing a New Concepceptual Framework for Thanatourism by Ria Dunkley “It is perhaps because of the increased awareness of unavoidable acts of nature and human accidents proved by the very technology that we celebrate which represent the dark face of human progress that in recent times there has been a growth in tourism of site.” (https://www.academia.edu/1904407/A_shot_in_the_dark_Developing_a_new_conceptual_framework_for_thanatourism)

D. Warfare Tourism A researcher who conducted a study on warfare tourism named Tony Walter  argues that it is as a result of  “consumer-led, postmodern tourism that today’s battlefield tour has emerged”. Included within this category are sites portraying every aspect of war, including battlefields, war museums such as the Imperial War Museum (UK), the Museum of Remembrance (France) and ‘war experiences’ such as ‘Britain at War’ in London, as well as battle re-enactments and war memorials. War has important implications in terms of present and future societies and Walter notes:

“Wars are the time-markers of society, and the effects of war covertly invade our cultural beliefs and human behaviour… Remembrance and commemoration are the essence of the past that fashioned today. Tourism to war-related sites is honorific, not maudlin; and by our knowledge of war, its meanings and mechanisms, we better understand our roles in the global society.” ((http://www.vagabondish.com/dark-tourism-travel-tours/).

III. Ethical Issues of Dark Tourism

A. Voyeurism - Visiting memorials dedicated to some tragic event has always formed part of tourism, as has gazing at the often-dramatic effects of natural disasters such as volcano eruptions. And that should be OK. However, if it's about goggling at the misery of others that is the result of very recent or still ongoing disasters, then the aspect of voyeurism does indeed come to the foreground.

According to article entitled "Slumdog Tourism" by Kennedy Odede, it states that slum tourism is a one-way street: tourist get photos and the locals lose a piece of their dignity. Odede is a Kenyan from Nairobi’s Kibera slum. In the article he narrates his experience with slum tourism. He was 16 when he first saw tourist roaming around his neighborhood taking pictures of everything they find interesting; It didn't bother him at first but the moment of enlightenment of the real situation happened when he turned 18. He founded an organization that provides education, health and economic services for Kibera residents. While doing a documentary for a Greek filmmaker, Odede realized the real condition of Kibera: feces, rats, starvation, houses so close together that no one can breathe. He then realized that he didn’t want the people to see it, didn’t want to give them the opportunity to judge his community for its poverty — a condition that few tourists, no matter how well intentioned, could ever understand.

"Slum tourism turns poverty into entertainment, something that can be momentarily experienced and then escaped from. People think they’ve really “seen” something — and then go back to their lives and leave me, my family and my community right where we were before." Kibera said. (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/10/opinion/10odede.html)

It's indeed ethically dubious to go to places suffering from ongoing disaster just to ogle (it's different if you're there to help, of course). It's often a question of how much time has elapsed since a given catastrophe. (The Lonely Planet Bluelist 2007 called the issue "going back to early"). The time that needs to pass before dark tourism to recently affected areas can be justified is a difficult issue in itself, however. For example, when people flocked to New Orleans in the wake of Hurricane Katrina to look around and take pictures of the devastation, this caused some outrage. In short: it was regarded as unethical voyeurism. The same happened after the disastrous earthquakes in southern China a few years ago.

B. Safety Risks - to risk your own health and safety, or even your life, is "danger tourism" and NOT dark tourism. And obviously enough it's not just about yourself – you should not jeopardize anybody else's safety either. But that applies generally, not specifically to dark tourism. However, certain categories of dark tourism do involve specific risks, first and foremost so-called nuclear tourism (e.g. going to Chernobyl, Trinity or Semipalatinsk). The issue of potentially exposing yourself to risky levels of radioactivity really has to be taken into consideration.

According to an article entitled “Health and Safety Risk of Tourism”, one health risk aspect comes as a distinctive element of one particular form of dark tourism, namely that part of nuclear tourism that includes radioactively contaminated destinations. Chernobyl or Semipalatinsk are prime examples.

The article also mentioned that “Such places can be visited reasonably safely, though, provided you observe certain safety guidelines – and don't expose yourself to elevated radiation levels for a prolonged periods of time. In the case of Chernobyl, tours offered to tourists are restricted to a few hours in the area anyway, and during that time you don't get any more exposure than the naturally elevated levels of radioactivity you are exposed to on a transatlantic flight. Other places, such as Mayak/Lake Karachay in Russia, are complete no-go areas – absolutely too dangerous.” (http://www.dark-tourism.com/index.php/imprint/18-main-menus/mainmenussubpages/601-health-and-safety-risks)

C. Wrong Conduct - when going to a place such as former concentration camps or any sites of persecution and genocide, it is essential that one behaves appropriately, and not as if at a funfair or a touristy beach. You'd think that this would go without saying – though often such sites also erect signs explicitly demanding respectful conduct (and often a restrained "dress code" too). But sadly, what some people consider to be acceptable behaviour at such sites leaves a lot to be desired!

A similar situation was encountered by travel blogger named Derek Earl saying that “All too often did I have to witness some unbelievable conduct at sites even as sombre and chilling as Auschwitz, Sachsenhausen or the Killing Fields in Cambodia – such as prancing about and posing for snapshots with the apparently prerequisite "cheese" grin as if the site was just some theme park; people just being loud and boisterous or munching junk food etc.” (http://www.wanderingearl.com/when-tourism-goes-terribly-wrong/)

However, such misconduct is more often seen in what could be called "secondary" dark tourists, meaning people who only "take in" some dark site simply because it's somehow part of the relevant place's general tourism itinerary (as in Cambodia), and not because they're specifically interested in it, let alone travelled there with the actual aim of seeing it. The latter applies to what, in analogy, could then be called "primary" dark tourists. And you can probably assume that such primary dark tourists will come with a better awareness of what the place in question is about. They come to be informed or are already well informed and want to finally experience the place for themselves.

D. Exploitation - According to the World Tourist Organisation, one billion people are expected to travel in 2012, so the increase in the number of travellers opting for slum tourism is likely to rise. Businesses who established attractions in Dark Tourism took advantage of the growing number of tourists. One example would be the Slum Tours in Mumbai. For $10, people get a two-and-a-half hour taste of slum living: navigating alleys that cannot fit two people side by side, visiting bakeries and recycling plants, climbing onto rooftops and treading through playgrounds made of trash.

However, when a local slum resident named Prasad, who is a local trader in Dharavi, India, was asked about his opinion on this tours, he replied "It doesn't help me at all, we see foreigners several times a week. Sometimes they come and talk to us, some offer us a bit of cash, but we don't get anything from these tours," (http://www.bbc.com/news/business-19546792)

We can see from here on that residents see these tours as a one-way street; An excuse for businessmen to exploit the local communities. Invading people's privacy and showcasing poverty for personal gain; it will only degrade the morality of the people living in the area.