Mar
7
36 Hours in Madrid
The New York Times seems to run a travel story about Madrid about every six months and I think I know why. Newspaper and TV reporters can get their vacation trips subsidized (or paid in full) by their employer if they can generate a feature story out of it. And what better kind of story to kill one bird with two stones than a travel story telling people what to see and where to go.
This New York Times travel sttory hits all the predictable spots the tourist guides always mention, (Prado Museum, Parque Retiro, Plaza Mayor, a flamenco club, etc.) but this time the Times did turn me on to a few places in Madrid that I was unaware of, such as Matadero Madrid. So I give their article a thumbs up, although the couple of mentions of shopping at trendy boutiques and eating overpriced dinners at haute cuisine restaurants just seemed so 2006. Crisis, ¿qué crisis?
NYTimes photos of a “Weekend in Madrid”
March 16th, 2009 at 11:25 pm
I wonder why they pick Madrid over other tourist spots? Either it is just a great place to visit or we just notice it more because we are interested in Spanish so much? Either way, great article.
March 17th, 2009 at 10:59 am
NuLengua,
Thanks for commenting. I think it’s because Madrid is so easy to get in and out of and has tons of attractions, which is appealing to tourists who only have a few days to visit. But I do wish that the big newspapers devoted more ink to places less well-known in Spain. A lot of times these big city newspapers cover the exact same terrain and recommend the exact same places as the conventional travel guide books.