Ryan Ver Berkmoes

Lonely Planet's `California Trips' offers 68 themed itineraries and 1,147 local places to see. And, if California isn't enough, side trips to Nevada and Mexico are also offered. Trips range from two to seven days and information is also provided on traveling with children and/or pets.

The guide seems to attempt to offer a new, edgier approach to travel advice, and I would assume that the target audience is the 20-35 age range. It's most effective if viewed as a weekend/short trip guide for show more Californians; it's not detailed enough to serve as the sole guide for out of state visitors. But it can be a good starting place for planning a brief visit to the Golden State.

Thematic trips - iconic trips, route oriented trips, food and wine lovers trips, outdoor trips, history and culture based trips, offbeat activities, trips for urbanites, and day trips within two hours of San Francisco, Los Angeles, and San Diego - are provided. This was, for me, an effective method of organization, and the strong point of the guide.

Small maps outlining individual trips are included in the chapters, but these are at best a general guide and wouldn't be adequate for a traveler new to the area. Driving times and directions are often included.

And in what I assume is an attempt to liven things up a bit, local `experts and celebrities' such as David Keene, Jennifer Godwin, and Douglas Fir offer tips. [I did recognize Alice Waters' name among the celebrities, but I have no idea who these people are. Nor do I care.] On this vein of attempting to offer something a little different, regional music playlists are provided, as well as family-friendly and pet-friendly listings. A `Green Index' of the most environmentally friendly options ends the book.

When I carefully read the suggestions for the areas I'm familiar with, they weren't bad. The ideas here are good, but definitely not all inclusive. They verge on superficial. But [and it's hard not to type this in all caps], this is not a travel guide meant to stand alone for the traveler unfamiliar with the area. There's just not enough real concrete information; too much time is wasted on being 'different.' By all means read `California Trips' and get some good starting points, then buy a good thorough travel guide, and a good map, and have a great trip.

It's not a bad book. It's just not an especially good one. show less

Very good general guide to Chicago. Helpful hotel and restaurant listings, good coverage of neighborhoods, with very good detail maps and walking tours. Less thorough on museums than Michelin. Also, as with Michelin, architecture buffs will want a more detailed guide. Overall, however, this is broadly useful, and appealingly small -- fits right into a purse or pocket.

http://pixxiefishbooks.blogspot.com/2...

Yes, everyone and their brother uses Lonely Planet guides. But there's a good reason. I am a big fan. For the most part, they are well laid-out, have easy-to-use maps, and give you good starting points for restaurants, accommodations, etc. I think the problem arises when people fail to look outside their Lonely Planet. Or when - and it happens - a restaurant or hotel gets complacent about its appearance in the Lonely Planet and lets its quality slip. show more But I see guidebooks as a great way to start. They are a great way to get you started in a new country, a way to figure out the key first things to see and do. But you must also let serendipity guide you, at least some of the time.

The Netherlands Lonely Planet guide provides a very good introduction to the Netherlands and Dutch culture. I read this, of course, in anticipation of our trip to Amsterdam in May. At the time, this meant I read all of the introductory material, including cycling trips around the Netherlands, as well as the lengthy entry on Amsterdam itself and the shorter (but still quite detailed) entries on Den Haag (The Hague), Rotterdam and Maastricht, all of which we planned to go to but never made it, since there is so much to do in Amsterdam itself.

The trip was, of course, more enjoyable than the book, but that certainly isn't a reflection on the quality of this book - I wouldn't leave home without it. show less

I travelled around Java in about 2006 and found "Lonely Planet Indonesia" rather helpful. I checked out Jakarta, Yogyakarta, Java Man, Borobudur and Prambanan, and although I did get bitten on the scrotum by a Javanese fire ant, which hurt like all buggery, I can’t really blame this guidebook or Lonely Planet for that.

I miss the hardcopy travel guides (my partner has an irrational hatred for them) but I pledge to buy one for my next trip.