Take a photo of a barcode or cover
A review by christopherc
Morocco by Paula Hardy, Lonely Planet, Mara Vorhees
2.0
For a recent trip to Morocco, I bought the 2007 edition of Lonely Planet's MOROCCO guide alongside its major competitor, THE ROUGH GUIDE TO MOROCCO. While Lonely Planet's guide covers the major sights and will be just the thing for casual holiday makers, it unfortunately continues the publisher's trend of abandoning "travel as lifestyle" readers, once Lonely Planet's target demographic.
If you intend on slowly working your way through the whole of Morocco, seeking contact with the locals at all cost, and traveling cheaply, then Lonely Planet guide is not really worth it. LP seems to assume that the reader is rich: it recommends expensive hotels and suggests that one hire guides. It also doesn't push people to meet ordinary Moroccans. Hammams (Turkish-style baths) are a great way to enter into local custom, but instead of listing ones patronized by the locals, LP often lists expensive spa-type locations. Morocco is also a paradise for hitchhiking, where again one is brought directly into contact with people not in the tourist trade, but LP doesn't pitch it.
Comparing the LP to the Rough Guide to Morocco, the Rough Guide comes out on top. Sure, the presence of a few ads in the text, and the fact that the Rough Guide line is published by the faceless corporation Penguin, are annoying. Nonetheless, the Rough Guide caters to all audiences, both the wealthy and shoestring travelers. The Rough Guide also describes Morocco in considerably more detail than the Lonely Planet guide, gives substantial recommendations on music, books, and film from or about Morocco, and even includes a few tales by Moroccan traditional storytellers.
Ahough both publishers have put out 2007 editions, the Rough Guide is more up to date than the Lonely Planet. An increasing number of travelers are heading down through Western Sahara to Mauritania and beyond. This route has gotten easier, with transportation now easy available from Dakhla. But Lonely Planet's coverage of this entire area seems to have changed little since the 2005 guide, and the authors still claim you have to provide your own transportation.
I found really only two points in favour of purchasing the Lonely Planet guide. One is a large section dedicated to trekking, which the Rough Guide lacks (though here it again assumes that the readers are wealthy). The other is that LP's maps are slightly more detailed for some cities than those in the Rough Guide. All in all, if you are a wealthy traveler looking for a relaxing but exotic vacation, you can ignore all that I've written and buy LP's guide with confidence. If you are an independent traveler planning on trekking, get both the LP and the Rough Guide. But the backpacking and hitchhiking crowd can just get the Rough Guide and pass the LP by.
If you intend on slowly working your way through the whole of Morocco, seeking contact with the locals at all cost, and traveling cheaply, then Lonely Planet guide is not really worth it. LP seems to assume that the reader is rich: it recommends expensive hotels and suggests that one hire guides. It also doesn't push people to meet ordinary Moroccans. Hammams (Turkish-style baths) are a great way to enter into local custom, but instead of listing ones patronized by the locals, LP often lists expensive spa-type locations. Morocco is also a paradise for hitchhiking, where again one is brought directly into contact with people not in the tourist trade, but LP doesn't pitch it.
Comparing the LP to the Rough Guide to Morocco, the Rough Guide comes out on top. Sure, the presence of a few ads in the text, and the fact that the Rough Guide line is published by the faceless corporation Penguin, are annoying. Nonetheless, the Rough Guide caters to all audiences, both the wealthy and shoestring travelers. The Rough Guide also describes Morocco in considerably more detail than the Lonely Planet guide, gives substantial recommendations on music, books, and film from or about Morocco, and even includes a few tales by Moroccan traditional storytellers.
Ahough both publishers have put out 2007 editions, the Rough Guide is more up to date than the Lonely Planet. An increasing number of travelers are heading down through Western Sahara to Mauritania and beyond. This route has gotten easier, with transportation now easy available from Dakhla. But Lonely Planet's coverage of this entire area seems to have changed little since the 2005 guide, and the authors still claim you have to provide your own transportation.
I found really only two points in favour of purchasing the Lonely Planet guide. One is a large section dedicated to trekking, which the Rough Guide lacks (though here it again assumes that the readers are wealthy). The other is that LP's maps are slightly more detailed for some cities than those in the Rough Guide. All in all, if you are a wealthy traveler looking for a relaxing but exotic vacation, you can ignore all that I've written and buy LP's guide with confidence. If you are an independent traveler planning on trekking, get both the LP and the Rough Guide. But the backpacking and hitchhiking crowd can just get the Rough Guide and pass the LP by.