The Japan Rail Pass, one of the world's greatest sightseeing bargains ?

[Maciamo]

Firstly, he made it pretty clear that he was aiming to try and get around as much of Japan as possible in seven days - this was one of the purposes of his article - perhaps the title "A fast-track travel plan" should have given you a clue!? For this, the rail pass is fantastic value. This piece wasn't written to appeal to the traveller who just wants a 2 stop holiday in Tokyo and Kyoto.

But there is no point to go all around a country 3000km long in 7 days when all the most interesting sights and things to do are concentrated around Tokyo and Kyoto (apart from nature, but then why choose Japan in particular and not the US, Canada, Australia, Brazil, China or even Indonesia ?). That's a lot of wasted time, even using the shinkansen, and plenty of great places in Kanto and Kansai will be missed.

As for long distance buses, why if you want to get around quickly and have an intense experience in as many places as possible, would you want to take the slowest possible form of transport. Again I think you missed the point.

Night buses have the advantadge that one doesn't need to waste day-time hours in the train (and can save on hotels). I suppose that someone who would like to visit Japan is just 7 days is either tight on budget (so the bus is cheaper and save on accommodation), or is willing to have a hectic schedule, in which case using a lot of night buses is a gain of time on the shinkansen. What's more, the shinkansen doesn't go to many places, including most of Kyushu, the Sea of Japan coast and Hokkaido.

You say that any travel writer should know that Japanese hotels are generally cheaper than those in western Europe. This may be so, but have you stopped to consider that perhaps a lot of people in the UK don't know this.

That is not my point. He seems to be saying that only capsule hotels are cheap, while it is not the case. He gives a wrong impression by starting to say that he himself thought of Japan as an expensive country. This was true 10 or 15 years ago, but not anymore - especially compared to Britain. He should mention this, which he doesn't.

Furthermore your comments on English Bed & Breakfasts are wide of the mark. You can easily find a B&B in the south-east of England for less than 60 quid a night.

I was comparing double rooms with breakfast. I slept in Brighton, Portsmouth, Bournemouth and Oxford this year, and couldn't find anything under 60 pounds in this category. In any case, it was always less well-equipped and less comfortable than the business hotels in which I stayed around Japan that were all 50% cheaper.

I'd also take issue with your comments about Hokkaido. Of course you can comfortably spend a week in Hokkaido. Your dismissal of the island as a place where there is little to do other than visit onsens is (sorry) just plain ignorant. There is more to sightseeing than just looking at old buildings and Hokkaido has a great variety of places to visit and things to see.

I am well travelled. I have visited over 35 countries, including most of Europe and S-E Asia. I have been in most regions of Japan now (in fact I just come back from a 2-week trip to Kyushu, Chugoku and Shikoku). I have written a travel guide to Japan, England and Belgium. I can tell you that most Japanese cities outside Tokyo and Kyoto have very few "sights" in comparison to European cities. Hokkaido only has 3 notable sightseeing "cities" with virtually no history and no exceptional museum. The rest is nature, which is not "traditional sightseeing" as I said. Nature travelling is a different category of travelling, and indeed there are special, separate guides for hiking, camping, etc. I wouldn't call it "sightseeing" anyway.

[Silverpoint]

But there is no point to go all around a country 3000km long in 7 days when all the most interesting sights and things to do are concentrated around Tokyo and Kyoto.

I'd agree, but this wasn't the point of the article. Whether you think it's a good idea or not is irrelevant - other people might want to travel around, and the railpass is definitely an option if this is the case. In fact a friend of mine just did exactly that - he had a great time. You criticized the guy for writing an article which didn't share your opinion of what constitutes a good holiday to Japan. Not everyone shares your opinion.

Dozens of travel guides to Japan get written every year. 99% of them cover the same ground. At least Calder had a go at writing something a bit more original than the usual 2 stop Tokyo/Kyoto visit.

Night buses have the advantadge that one doesn't need to waste day-time hours in the train (and can save on hotels).

I take your point on time saving (if you're the kind of person who can sleep well on a bus). However, I also think a lot of foreigners have a fascination with shinkansen. A large number of tourists who visit Japan want to use the 'bullet train' and given the ludicrously high cost of a ticket between any two major cities, the rail pass in comparison is relatively cheap. Given that you still have it for the rest of the week and can (if you want to) jump on a shinkansen again and head off elsewhere.

That is not my point. He seems to be saying that only capsule hotels are cheap, while it is not the case. He gives a wrong impression by starting to say that he himself thought of Japan as an expensive country. This was true 10 or 15 years ago, but not anymore - especially compared to Britain. He should mention this, which he doesn't.

Firstly, his comment about capsule hotels was a throwaway one-liner. I find it hard to believe anyone else would extrapolate this in the way you did, into some major issue. Err, secondly how did you manage to presume that he thinks only capsule hotels are cheap when he said "Low-cost accommodation is easy" and went on to talk about cheap hostels. It really looks that by this point in the article you had clearly decided you didn't like his view and were just going to pull out anything you could find to have a go at. Thirdly, he says he thought of Japan as a cheap country and then found that it doesn't have to be. What on earth is wrong with saying that? Personally I'd find that reassuring if I was a tourist who had the same preconceptions about Japan and wasn't sure if I could afford the trip.

I am well travelled. I have visited over 35 countries, including most of Europe and S-E Asia. I have been in most regions of Japan now (in fact I just come back from a 2-week trip to Kyushu, Chugoku and Shikoku). I have written a travel guide to Japan, England and Belgium. I can tell you that most Japanese cities outside Tokyo and Kyoto have very few "sights" in comparison to European cities. Hokkaido only has 3 notable sightseeing "cities" with virtually no history and no exceptional museum. The rest is nature, which is not "traditional sightseeing" as I said. Nature travelling is a different category of travelling, and indeed there are special, separate guides for hiking, camping, etc. I wouldn't call it "sightseeing" anyway.

I don't really care about how well travelled you are. Your point was that it was virtually impossible to stay for 7 days in Hokkaido without getting bored. I've lived here for 3 years, and I still find new and interesting things to do and see on a weekly basis. On the assumption that you've actually been here, then just because you can't find something to do, doesn't mean it isn't there. Try looking a bit harder.

p.s. I was a bit surprised to find you used the reputation system to inform me that you weren't happy with my views. Surely there are better ways to pass on your opinions about my reading ability in a public forum.

[Maciamo]

You criticized the guy for writing an article which didn't share your opinion of what constitutes a good holiday to Japan. Not everyone shares your opinion.

It's not even a personal opinion, it's an advice. Personally, I didn't leave the Kanto the first year I stayed in Japan. Now, I have seen quite a bit of it, but I don't think it is rationally justified in terms of finance, time-management and sightseeing satisfaction, to travel in the four corners of Japan in 7 days.

Dozens of travel guides to Japan get written every year. 99% of them cover the same ground. At least Calder had a go at writing something a bit more original than the usual 2 stop Tokyo/Kyoto visit.

Most of those I know (Lonely Planet, Rough Guide, Frommer's, Routard...) cover most of the country. In fact, I can only think of the French "Guide Bleu" which is limited to Tokyo and Kyoto (but the title is not "Japan Guide" either). Among online guides, both JREF and Japan-Guide cover all the country. So what guide books do you read to claim that 99% of them are limited to Tokyo and Kyoto.

However, I also think a lot of foreigners have a fascination with shinkansen. A large number of tourists who visit Japan want to use the 'bullet train'...

Does the word "foreigner" here mean North American, or people from developing countries ? There are "shinkansen" in many European countries and they have nothing to envy to their Japanese counterpart. In fact, I was quite disappointed by the Japanese shinkansen as it is less comfortable and slower than the Thalys, Eurostar, the French TGV or the Spanish AGV. I'd say that I was more surprised by some Limited Express trains than the shinkansen in Japan. But that's not something one would know from reading most guide books.

Personally I'd find that reassuring if I was a tourist who had the same preconceptions about Japan and wasn't sure if I could afford the trip.

Whether I can afford travelling abroad is mostly linked to the current currency exchange, not really the nominal cost of life in that country. When I came to Japan 4 years ago, many thing seemed expensive because the Euro was weak against the yen (1 euro = 98 yen). Now that the Euro has gone to to nearly 140yen, it seems 40% cheaper. A huge difference is such a short period (it actually changed a lot in just 2 years). Add to this a slight inflation in Europe and slight deflation in Japan, and the fact that I have become better at finding good deals in Japan (some of which are shared in this thread), it really shows how relative "cost of travelling" can be.

Your point was that it was virtually impossible to stay for 7 days in Hokkaido without getting bored. I've lived here for 3 years, and I still find new and interesting things to do and see on a weekly basis. On the assumption that you've actually been here, then just because you can't find something to do, doesn't mean it isn't there. Try looking a bit harder.

It all depends what you expect. Justly because I have travelled a lot means that I get bored more easily because I can compare sightseeing from country to counyry or city to city. Coming from a history-rich region, I can only find that there are less historical attraction in the whole of Hokkaido than in some villages or towns in the countryside where I grew up. Nature ? I admit that Hokkaido has some nice natural attractions, but it is maybe too similar to the place I grew up to be so special for me. I think many British people would agree too.

[Silverpoint]

It's not even a personal opinion, it's an advice. Personally, I didn't leave the Kanto the first year I stayed in Japan. Now, I have seen quite a bit of it, but I don't think it is rationally justified in terms of finance, time-management and sightseeing satisfaction, to travel in the four corners of Japan in 7 days.

Advice is advice, and always welcome. You say your comments were advice and not personal opinion, but advice is drawn from opinion - that's the whole point!

However the main thrust of your original post was to say how much you disagreed with the article (and seemingly to inform everyone of how much more than the writer you know). You started by ripping into how 'new' the guy was and how he had never been to Japan before, an assertion you repeated later. Sounds a lot like personal opinion to me.

You still haven't really addressed the fact that his article was written for a specific purpose (getting around as much of Japan as possible in 7 days using a rail pass). You felt that this wasn't what you or other tourists would want to do, but this doesn't make his article wrong. It's just a different perspective on travelling - one that you don't share, but valid none the less. Scoffing at someone who has a different opinion or gives a different focus on something, doesn't make for a good critique.

Most of the French "Guide Bleu" which is limited to Tokyo and Kyoto (but the title is not "Japan Guide" either). Among online guides, both JREF and Japan-Guide cover all the country. So what guide books do you read to claim that 99% of them are limited to Tokyo and Kyoto.

My point was about newspaper guides rather than books, however I accept that this may not have been clear to you. I concur that a travel guide book would be pretty useless if it only covered 2 cities from an entire country. From my experience of reading about travel to Japan in British newspapers, articles do tend to be very Tokyo-centric, which was the point I wanted to make.

Does the word "foreigner" here mean North American, or people from developing countries ? There are "shinkansen" in many European countries and they have nothing to envy to their Japanese counterpart. In fact, I was quite disappointed by the Japanese shinkansen as it is less comfortable and slower than the Thalys, Eurostar, the French TGV or the Spanish AGV. I'd say that I was more surprised by some Limited Express trains than the shinkansen in Japan. But that's not something one would know from reading most guide books.

In the intended context, the word 'foreigner' means anyone from outside Japan. It's of no concern that other countries have high speed trains. The shinkansen or "bullet train" is a symbol of Japan, is world famous (probably the most famous train of modern times) and is something that a large number of tourists wish to experience when visiting the country. Whether you like it or not is your own business.

Whether I can afford travelling abroad is mostly linked to the current currency exchange, not really the nominal cost of life in that country. When I came to Japan 4 years ago, many thing seemed expensive because the Euro was weak against the yen (1 euro = 98 yen). Now that the Euro has gone to to nearly 140yen, it seems 40% cheaper. A huge difference is such a short period (it actually changed a lot in just 2 years). Add to this a slight inflation in Europe and slight deflation in Japan, and the fact that I have become better at finding good deals in Japan (some of which are shared in this thread), it really shows how relative "cost of travelling" can be.

Again, how you do things is up to you - as you (frequently) point out, you've travelled a lot which doesn't make you the average 'man in the street'. Most casual newspaper readers who are considering their next holiday want to hear things like "it's cheaper than you might think", or "here's an affordable option for hotel accomodation". They're really not concerned about macroeconomics and exchange rates until they go to the bank to get some currency for their holiday.

It all depends what you expect. Justly because I have travelled a lot means that I get bored more easily because I can compare sightseeing from country to counyry or city to city. Coming from a history-rich region, I can only find that there are less historical attraction in the whole of Hokkaido than in some villages or towns in the countryside where I grew up. Nature ? I admit that Hokkaido has some nice natural attractions, but it is maybe too similar to the place I grew up to be so special for me.

So what you're saying is that it's you that would get bored. It seemed very much before, that you were suggesting most people would get bored. This is quite a shift of emphasis.

I think many British people would agree too.

Well I'm British, I don't, and I doubt I'm particularly unique.