Understanding the Tourist Gaze in John Urry's Sociological Theory

Makhova Kseniia Borisovna Postgraduate student; Department of History and Theory of Sociology; Lomonosov Moscow State University 119991, Russia, Moscow, Leninskie Gory str., 1 mkb-science@yandex.ru

Tourism became a massive social phenomenon after World War II, encompassing almost all social classes in industrialized Western societies, especially the more affluent. Being a tourist meant keeping up with the times, for many it symbolized peace, prosperity and the possibility of bringing people together. The expansion of the tourism industry was made possible by an increase in living standards and a reduction in working hours, which was associated with an increase in the duration of paid holidays and the rapid development of transport infrastructure.

The work of British sociologist John Urry occupies a special place in the field of sociological research of tourism. The researcher has written several notable works on tourism, such as "Economies of Signs and Space" (1994) ^[3], "Consuming Places" (1995) ^[6] and "Performing Tourist Places" (2004) ^[1], some of them published in co-authorship.

The originality of J.'s approach. Urri is to develop the concept of a tourist look. In 1990, the scientist introduced the concept of the "view" of the French philosopher Michel Foucault into the discourse on tourism. Urry focused on the visual aspect of the tourist's gaze, without delving into the issues of power and authority that the French thinker considered.

The main ideas of this concept are outlined in the book "The Tourist Gaze". This work has been reprinted three times, and each edition implied changes in content. The first two editions are almost identical in structure, except that the second one adds a section on the impact of globalization on the tourist's view and a discussion with critics of the concept, as well as updated statistical data ^[4]. The third edition, written jointly with Danish sociologist J. Larsen, has been significantly revised, in particular, it examines the tourist view of photography and digitization, analyzes the achievements of tourism theory and other scientific research, as well as various risks associated with tourism in the future ^[8].

John Urry examines the formation of the tourism industry through the prism of historical context and argues that "mass interest in tourism originated in the backyards of industrial cities in the north of England" ^{[8; p. 31]}, and in order to realize the attractiveness of the seashore for the working class in the XIX century, it is extremely important to understand the urban, industrial life of that era. Rapid urbanization, environmental pollution and overpopulation have made urban life an unpleasant and unhealthy social practice.

Gradually, leisure trips became accessible to a wide range of the population: disposable income gradually increased, the working day gradually decreased, non-profit associations helped to promote and develop tourist traffic, railway transport made it easy to get to the seaside. In addition to socio-economic changes, there was a transformation of social attitudes. Since the 17th century, doctors have praised the healing properties of nature and the sea, but in the 19th century, more and more attention was paid to rational recreation in order to "civilize" the urban working class, based on a romantic belief in the power of nature.

The system of mass tourism for the working class that arose in the north of England, in particular in the textile towns of Lancashire in the second half of the 19th century, was the result of economic, technological, cultural and social processes. There were favorable conditions for a week-long vacation in the north of England, which the urban population enjoyed. For one week, tourists lived in a place that was very different from their overpopulated, polluted and unhealthy cities. On the seashore, they were greeted by beaches with clean air, walking trails and entertainment. As a result, there was a clear spatial and temporal separation of monotonous work and the pleasure of a tourist trip.

The tourist view and its forms

John Urry identifies nine characteristics that make it possible to call a specific social practice "tourism". Firstly, tourism as a form of leisure implies having a job as its opposite. Secondly, tourism relations arise as a result of people's movements and their stay in various destinations. Thirdly, these places are located outside of daily living and work, and staying in them is short-term. Fourth, these places are designed for purposes unrelated to paid work, and usually contrast with it. Fifth, tourism practices are widespread. Sixth, the anticipation of the tourist visual experience is supported by the media (cinema, literature, television). Seventh, the tourist's gaze is particularly sensitive to the elements of the landscape and the urban landscape. Eighth, the tourist's view is formed through symbols, assuming their interpretation. Ninth, representatives of the tourism industry are constantly creating new facilities to attract the attention of tourists ^{[8; p. 4]}. These characteristics help to better understand the nature of tourism and its social functions.

The central idea of the concept of the tourist view is that the desire to visit certain places and the way they are perceived are not completely individual and autonomous, but at the same time socially organized, and, consequently, changes in tourism are associated with large-scale transformations in society.

Explaining this thesis, Urri proceeds from the fact that an important element of the perception of tourist places is the visual dimension, which is socially conditioned. The scientist defines the tourist view as "a view suggesting a system of social actions and signs that define tourist practices not through their internal characteristics, but through contrasts with non-tourist social practices, especially those based on domestic and paid work."

Initially, John Urry identified five types of tourist view: romantic, collective, spectator, ecological and anthropological (see Table 1).

Table 1.

Types of tourist view and their features

_________

Source: Urry, J. (1995). Consuming places. Routledge. — P. 191

However, in subsequent works, the scientist paid more attention to two of them: romantic and collective. It was probably these two types of tourist views that Urry deepened, as they were most important for understanding the social and cultural aspects of tourism that were the focus of his research.

The romantic view is associated with the perception of landscapes as aesthetic phenomena that have their own "aura", expressed in terms of the German philosopher Walter Benjamin. This view is aimed at assessing the greatness and beauty of a particular landscape or object. It is characteristic of a solitary wanderer who seeks aesthetic impressions and turns them into a contemplative experience.

The collective view stands in stark contrast to the romantic view, as it is determined by the tourism industry and not by the natural landscape. Tourist attractions are created as public spaces, and their value is determined by the number of people who visit and admire them. The attractiveness of these places is confirmed by the mass attention and collective consumption of space.

Tourism and consumption

Considering tourism as a consumer industry, J. Urry turns to the analysis of consumption by British sociologist Colin Campbell and notes that the influence of mass media on the formation of consumer preferences cannot be ignored. John Urry identifies two ideal types of consumption: Fordist mass and post-Fordist differentiated, accompanying the latter type of consumption with examples from the tourism sector (see Table 2). Fordism is characterized by the dominance of producers, while post-Fordism is characterized by consumption. 

Table 2.

The transition to post-Fordist consumption

_________ 

Source: Urry, J. (1995). Consuming places. Routledge. — P. 151

Thanks to the development of information and telecommunication technologies, representatives of the tourism industry have the opportunity to make travel services more individual and flexible. New digital platforms allow us to offer a travel product directly to the consumer, bypassing travel companies.

Tourism and globalization

Such changes in the tourism industry do not go unnoticed in the context of globalization. With increased access to information and online booking opportunities, global travel markets are becoming more interconnected and interconnected. Global digital platforms and online services provide not only convenience and ease of use, but also create conditions for global competition and standardization of the travel experience.

According to Urri, the globalization of the tourist view leads to a similarity in the perception of various cultural and natural sites. Tourism practices are becoming more standardized, and the visual experience of tourists is often guided more by global standards of beauty and attractiveness than by local features.

This process is also associated with the increasing influence of mass media and digital technologies, which shape public perceptions of tourist destinations and facilities. The globalization of the tourist outlook leads not only to the standardization of consumer expectations, but also to the creation of certain cultural and economic consequences for local communities and the natural environment.

In this regard, Urry and Larsen pay attention to forecasts and risks of the future. In one scenario, by 2050, the era of hypermobility and intensive tourist consumption may begin, where social status is determined by extraordinary consumption and long-distance travel, as well as the opening of new tourist sites. In another scenario, a global reconfiguration of the economy and society around the idea of "local sustainability" is possible, where long-distance travel becomes socially frowned upon, and it becomes popular to raise children in small towns. In this case, traveling to distant countries becomes the prerogative of people with low social status. The third scenario assumes decivilization due to climate change, lack of resources and deterioration of living standards, which makes tourist trips rare due to environmental and cultural problems.

None of these scenarios is desirable. To avoid the realization of one of these future options, Urry and Larsen propose to abandon "exotic" tourism and develop local economies in order to keep people in their places and not create the need for long-distance travel.

The legacy of J. Urry

John Urry's concept of tourism suggests analyzing tourism not only as an economic or cultural phenomenon, but also as a process of social construction of perception, where visual experience plays a key role. The advantages of this theory include: an innovative approach and in-depth analysis. However, since the release of the first edition, the concept has been criticized for, in particular, ignoring non-Western ways of perception and forms of recreation; bodily experience and gender aspects.

By applying M. Foucault's concept of "gaze" to the phenomenon of tourism, Urry made an important theoretical contribution to sociology, and other scientists followed his example, focusing on the study of the body and other sensory organs. Later, in 2000, Urri continued to explore travel, connections and flows (both physical and virtual movements) using mobile theories and mobile methods, making this a priority of the research agenda ^{[2; 5; 7]}.

The concept of the tourist gaze continues to inspire researchers to further explore the visual dimension in tourism. In particular, this concept became the basis for the work "The tourist gaze 4.0: uncovering non-conscious meanings and motivations in the stories tourists tell of trip and destination experiences" by American researchers Arch George Woodside and Drew Martin. In it, scientists tried to formalize the concept of a "tourist view" using a Venn diagram and identified five results of a tourist view: understanding, evaluation, indexing, description and intentions ^[10].

At the time of publication, the originality of J. Urry's book was to bring together seemingly disparate discussions about culture, consumption, class, services, architecture, heritage, technology, leisure and the environment around the visual consumption of places.