Tourism, performance, and place: a geographic perspective
what 'we learn' in cities (68) As such the work lacks a nuance and subtlety that serves only to weaken its arguments, because the absences are so very present. In other places ideas are worthy of more depth in explanation. For example, there is mention of Andrei Tarkovsky's 1979 film Stalker as a contribution to illustrations that people are interested in sites of the macabre, horror or disaster as a holiday destination (127) While it is not the book's purpose to deconstruct Stalker from a 'tourism perspective' the rather cursory, one sentence summation of the film's story is so reductionist it renders the example rather meaningless, especially for the reader familiar with the film. However, the most damning drawback to the book is the lack of engagement with academic tourism (per se) literature. Dean MacCannell is mentioned, as is John Urry (perhaps the two obvious stalwarts of undergraduate theorising in tourism studies) but not being able to acknowledge the critique of these old arguments in the tourism literature means that Stavans and Ellison miss points to which they appear to be saying that we should all be directing our attention: embodiment, performance, process. Even the very basic question of tourist traveller distinction to which they draw attention would be enriched by reference to existing discussion and insight, not least that perhaps regardless of what it is called all forms of movement real or metaphorical require motivation, mobility and ability. As I have stated the book has its interesting moments, but its, at times, obviously over generalist approach means that it can only ever at best be a polemic.