Ren Dubois

Their most strong version claims that travel inspiration mainly comes from fiction, with guides being just logistical tools. However, this reading does not always reflect the lived reality for many. A tourist guide is not just a manual for validation after inspiration but can itself trigger the desire. Many, flipping through a Routard or a Lonely Planet, discover unexpected destinations or cultural aspects that create the impulse to travel. For example, I know colleagues who decided to visit Tasmania after seeing photos or descriptions of hikes in a thematic guide, long before a film pushed them there. The rigid distinction between "initial impulse" and "validation" is often too simplistic, as inspiration can quite naturally arise from reading a guide.

Let's forget the binary between fictional inspiration and tourist guides for choosing a destination; the real question is the pragmatic feasibility of the trip.
Neither movies nor brochures pay for tickets nor manage leave.
The third way that no one asked for is that the true decision drivers are often logistical constraints and available budget.
For example, I can dream of Patagonia after a novel, but the concrete planning and flight prices from Brussels Airlines will decide if the adventure is possible or not.
Guides become useful only if the material conditions are already met.

The idea that travel guides are just a subset of travel inspiration through fiction has a relevance score of 2 out of 10.
Guides have a decision influence rate of 6/10 for the final decision, but fiction is at 8/10 for the initial impulse.
Their practical usefulness on the ground, especially without internet, is 9/10 for logistics, not for inspiration.
A guide is a validation and planning tool, not an initial source of inspiration in about 75% of cases.
For example, a movie can inspire a visit to New Zealand (inspiration 8/10), then the guide helps to assess feasibility (usefulness 9/10), a distinct role.