S T A N D A R D F R O N T P A G E F O R E X A M I N A T I O N P A P E R S To be filled in by the student(s). Please use capital letters. Subjects: (tick box) Project Synopsis Portfolio Thesis X Written Assignment Study programme: Tourism Master Semester: 10 Exam Title: Master Thesis Name and date of birth/ Name(s) Date(s) of birth Names and dates of birth of group Vordís Rut Valsdóttir 25-05-1992 members: Hand in date: 03-06-2019 Project title /Synopsis Title/Thesis Challenging the metaphor: A critical assessment of tourist traps in Iceland Title According to the study regulations, 192.000 the maximum number of keystrokes of the paper is: Number of keystrokes (one standard 136.942 page = 2400 keystrokes, including spaces) (table of contents, bibliography and appendix do not count)* Supervisor (project/synopsis/thesis): Martin Trandberg Jensen I/we hereby declare that the work submitted is my/our own work. I/we understand that plagiarism is defined as presenting someone else's work as one's own without crediting the original source. I/we are aware that plagiarism is a serious offense, and that anyone committing it is liable to academic sanctions. Rules regarding Disciplinary Measures towards Students at Aalborg University (PDF): http://plagiat.aau.dk/GetAsset.action?contentId=4117331&assetId=4171389 Date and signature(s): 3rd June, 2019 Vordís Rut Valsdóttir * Please note that you are not allowed to hand in the paper if it exceeds the maximum number of keystrokes indicated in the study regulations. Handing in the paper means using an exam attempt. VORDÍS VALSDÓTTIR MA TOURISM, 2019 AALBORG UNIVERSITY SUPERVISOR: MARTIN TRANDBERG JENSEN CHALLENGING THE METAPHOR A critical assessment of tourist traps in Iceland Abstract The purpose of this project is to nuance the embodiment of tourist traps by examining the perspective of locals rather than tourists, using the Golden Circle attractions in Iceland as a case in point. As such, this project will attempt to suggest an updated version of the tourist trap metaphor, one which offers a more nuanced and precise metaphor to that of a tourist trap. Accordingly, this project contends that metaphors, such as tourist traps, reduces places to ‘simple versions of reality’. In terms of popular tourism areas, tourist traps can be viewed as a one-sided representation of how these areas are experienced. In other words, tourist traps represent a tourist-centric understanding of how destinations are affected by tourism. Applying the theoretical approach of the local gaze, derived from John Urry’s original notion the tourist gaze, this project will analysis the local experience of the Golden Circle attractions through both a mediatized representation and the lived experience of locals. The overall findings of the analysis suggest that the Golden Circle attractions are largely characterized by an underlying power struggle between the hosts i.e. the dominating tourism industry and the tourists. However, while locals are not actively engaged in these popular tourism areas, these places still pertain value and cultural sentiment for the locals. The sentiments that locals carry towards these places become lost in the overshadowing relationship between the hosts and the tourists. As such, while locals are not necessarily visible features of tourist traps, they are still impacted by the monopolizing effects of such enclaves of tourism, leading to resistance towards wider tourism development for non-industry actors such as locals. Accordingly, while the locals do not experience a physical barrier to the Golden Circle attractions, the findings showed that there can be identified a symbolic barrier as the locals do not see a place for themselves within a perpetuating landscape of host and guest dynamics. Table of Contents Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................... 1 Theoretical Framework ..................................................................................................................................... 5 Metaphors in tourism .................................................................................................................................... 5 Host & Guest in Tourism................................................................................................................................ 9 The Tourist Gaze & The Local ...................................................................................................................... 11 Research Methodology.................................................................................................................................... 14 Qualitative Content Analysis ....................................................................................................................... 16 Semi-structured interviews ......................................................................................................................... 18 Methodological Limitations ......................................................................................................................... 20 Analysis ............................................................................................................................................................ 21 Tourism in Iceland ....................................................................................................................................... 22 The Golden Circle as ‘Tourist Traps’ ............................................................................................................ 24 Content Analysis .......................................................................................................................................... 26 The Tourist ............................................................................................................................................... 27 The Host ................................................................................................................................................... 29 Interview Analysis ........................................................................................................................................ 32 The Mediatized Gaze ............................................................................................................................... 32 The Relational Gaze ................................................................................................................................. 35 The Sensuous Gaze .................................................................................................................................. 38 Discussion of Findings ...................................................................................................................................... 40 Managerial Considerations .......................................................................................................................... 45 Conclusion ....................................................................................................................................................... 46 Introduction Metaphors have been a stable in the realm of academic tourism and have played an essential role in how tourism scholars have attempted to make sense of the world. Rhetorical tools such as narratives, metaphors or general discourse surrounding a given area of tourism has been argued to have the power to shape our understanding of a given social setting. In the classic work by Lakoff and Johnson, the metaphors we live by (1980), rhetorical tools such as conceptual metaphors can be observed everywhere. From informal everyday language use to intentional strategies as can be observed in marketing, our social reality and the way we navigate through it can be shaped through the way it is framed and subsequently perceived (Adu-Ampong, 2016). Yet, while metaphors can be useful tools to understand certain social realties, there is always a risk of generating a somewhat simplified version of an otherwise complex and dynamic tourism landscape. Accordingly, this calls for the development of new metaphors to capture a more nuanced understanding of certain issues in tourism (Coleman & Crang, 2001, p. 195). The following project seeks to explore the notion of popular areas of tourism through a metaphorical lens. Accordingly, this project will critically approach the metaphor of a tourist trap. Due to the informal nature of the phrase, there can be identified several definitions of what constitutes a ‘tourist trap’. Having examined various definitions some common features can be identified. According to the Oxford dictionary of Tourism and Travel, the definition of a ‘tourist trap’ is a “Deprecatory description of shop, site, area, or resort that has lost or is losing its appeal because of its popularity” (Beaver, 2012). Other definitions of the concept include “a place that attracts and exploits tourists” (Merriam-Webster, 2019) and “a crowded place that provides entertainment and things to buy for tourists, often at high prices” (Cambridge Dictionary, 2019). As mentioned, while there are several definitions of the term, there are several commonalities that can be identified. Additionally, the various definitions highlight various concepts that have been explored in the academic realm of tourism research. Central to each individual definition is the concept of commodification and consumption reflected through