The Tourist as Pil g rim 
East African Safari 
The quarry may be a lost identity 
that cannot be found in game parks 
by Colin Turnbull 
What is there about East Africa 
that drives thousands of tourists every 
year from comfortable homes in Ja- 
pan, the Americas, and Europe and 
sends them flooding to Nairobi? What 
is it that transcends the cultural dif- 
ferences that these groups often seem 
to wish to exaggerate, rather than con- 
ceal, and gives them all the same air 
of expectancy and hope? And what 
is it that for many of them brings 
ultimate disappointment? 
The search for an answer leads in 
many unexpected directions and shows 
how much the tourist is underestima- 
ted; how even when avowedly seeking 
escape, relaxation, and “fun,” the 
tourist may be a pilgrim in search 
of something far greater. Some tour- 
ists deny this, insisting on their he- 
donism; others suspect the truth and 
are made uncomfortable, for the 
thought means that they may not, 
after all, have gotten what they came 
and paid for. The streets and hotels 
and bars of Nairobi are full of tourists, 
as are the cocktail lounges of every 
safari lodge. In one morning, in Bar- 
clay’s Bank on Kenyatta Avenue, I 
met enough tourists to fill a book. 
They all had the same stated objec- 
tives: to see the animals, to see Africa, 
to see Mount Kilimanjaro. Since one 
would have to be blind not to see 
all of these things within twenty-four 
hours of arrival if desired, how is it 
possible to meet so many disillusioned 
tourists in one morning in one bank? 
During a one-hour period I met two 
young French tourists who had aban- 
doned their three-week safari after six 
days and were returning to Paris “be- 
cause it is all too artificial . . . like 
an animated picture postcard”; a Brit- 
ish couple who complained that 
“things are more natural and a bloody 
sight cheaper on the Yorkshire 
moors”; and a group of Californians 
who were already planning next year’s 
holiday at Disneyland. It was difficult 
to find a tourist who did not suffer 
some disappointment, although it was 
often concealed beneath loudly voiced 
complaints directed at frustrating 
bank procedures or under enthusiastic 
comment on the grandeur of the scen- 
ery and the quantity of wildlife seen. 
There was plainly something lacking 
in the quality of the experience. One 
Frenchman said he had expected 
something more alive, more vital. The 
British couple kept harping on the 
“holiday camp” atmosphere and on 
human interference with nature. The 
Californians, interestingly, said they 
expected to find Disneyland both more 
“real” and more “natural.” 
There is, of course, something ironic 
in the very supposition that a game 
park is natural in any way. And the 
reference to Disneyland alerts us to 
the problem of separating most peo- 
ple’s conception of reality from fan- 
tasy, which is often more powerful 
than empirical reality. Perhaps these 
tourists missed what they sought be- 
cause they came prepared to rely pri- 
marily on one sense alone, that of 
sight. The came to see animals, Africa, 
and Kilimanjaro, and that is what they 
had accomplished. When I asked them 
what they had smelled, they were af- 
fronted. When I asked what they had 
heard, they recounted gossip, political 
comment, and barroom stories. And 
when I asked what they had touched, 
they considered the question too stu- 
pid to answer. Their awareness might 
have been greater had they been blind, 
for then they would have been forced 
to use their other senses, to interpret 
their own experience through the eyes 
of others. But at least they knew they 
had missed something. 
Governmental policies and travel 
agencies are partly to blame. Thanks 
to lavish brochures and color posters, 
most tourists have “seen” it all long 
before they set out. The main dif- 
ference is that in real life the game 
moves, the waterfalls fall, and the 
dancers jump and gyrate. In East Af- 
rica, the brochure is animated. The 
experience is like looking at a familiar 
home movie, sharing it with a large 
audience of other tourists seated in 
clusters of Land Rovers, minivans, and 
air-conditioned coaches. Governmen- 
tal sensititivy to Africa’s tribal past 
adds to the sense of artificiality and 
disappointment. Taking their cue from 
the West, most African governments 
equate tribalism and tradition with 
“backwardness.” Yet, knowing the ap- 
peal of the so-called primitive, the 
same governments perpetuate the very 
myth of the backward native that they 
wish to dispel. Here we get a glimpse 
of some of the enormously powerful 
side effects of tourism, of its impact 
on governmental policy and the lives 
and welfare of whole populations. To 
satisfy the tourist demand for tangible 
evidence of Africa, the gift shops and 
boutiques are filled with tawdry trin- 
kets that even at the most expensive 
best only barely resemble the great- 
ness of a lost tradition. “Traditional” 
dances are staged that are a travesty 
26 
