Too old to share?

I got my first real taste of travel back in 1999 when, thanks to the generous donation of the cost of the airfare from my brother, I headed off to Australia for 6 weeks. As a poor, penniless graduate, my only accommodation option was hostels. For less than $20 a night, I got a place to kip between adventures. Sometimes it was even clean....

Radeka's Underground Hostel, Coober Pedy, 1999

Such was the success of this trip, and my ability to overlook sharing a smelly, noisy room with anything up to 10 other people, as well as multiple cockroaches and (on one memorable occasion) a lizard, I have continued to stay in hostels from time to time simply to make the money go further. And although you definitely get what you (don't) pay for, these have been some of the most memorable holidays I've had. I mean, who could forget a week of cold showers in Toronto in October, because there was an issue with the plumbing. Which also caused every sink in the building to regurgitate every time a tap was run, but it also had a bar with cheap booze, which more than made up for the water issues.

Melbourne Metro YHA, 2007

Last year, though, I had to rethink my view that a hostel bed is the best way to make the most of a long haul holiday. It all started out well enough. The Sydney Harbour YHA is quite possibly the best hostel I've stayed in. For $40 a night, I got an en-suite room that I only had to share with 3 other people. And to top it all off, I got this view thrown in:

Sydney Harbour YHA, 2010

Then I moved on to Melbourne, and things started to go wrong. The hostel wasn't quite as shiny and new (and clean) as Sydney, it was over a bar, and none of the rooms were en-suite. I could overlook the lack of shiny and new, but found myself struggling to deal with the noise from the bar, and with the shared bathrooms at the end of the corridor. Especially the noise from the bar. After two nights, I checked out early and moved to a hotel for my last night in Australia.

So why did I struggle so much to deal with hostels when I've almost been evangelical in my praise of the joys of the budget experience? Is it that I'm getting too old for hostels? Is it even possible to be too old to stay in a hostel? I didn't think it was, having met plenty of 'older' travellers over the years, but it certainly seems to me now that I'm in my 30s I can't quite bring myself to overlook the small things that didn't seem to matter 10 years ago. 

Someone has suggested that, rather than being too old to stay in a hostel, I'm now too posh, too middle class to *do* budget travelling. But I don't think that's it. I have no issue with bunk beds, with sharing a room with strangers - I've met some really interesting people that way, and did so again last year - but now that I'm just that little bit older, the things I value on holiday have changed. I'm not a 20-something party animal whose only concern is somewhere to crash. I want to make the most of my holidays (and by that I mean I want to see and do as much as possible during the day), so my main priority is that the room is quiet enough to allow a decent night's sleep (actually my main priority is not sharing it with cockroaches and lizards, but that's not the sort of thing that gets mentioned on the hostel websites) I suspect I could even still deal with a shared bathroom, provided I still got a good 8 hours. Yes, if I'm being completely honest, I would prefer the luxury of a private room with flatscreen tv, turndown service and marble bathroom, but my budget doesn't quite stretch to this every night of every trip.

Kowloon Shangri-La, 2010

So until it does, I'll carry on going for the budget option, just as long as it's not above a bar..... or already occupied by a lizard.

NT Live

I've been intrigued by the National Theatre's production of Frankenstein since I first heard about it. Of course, by that point it was too late as the entire run had already long since sold out, and I don't have the opportunity (or desire) to queue outside the NT all night for day seats. 

Not to worry though, NT Live were going to broadcast two performances to selected cinemas in March. Sadly, even these sold out before I could book tickets, such is the popularity of the Benedict Cumberbatch and Jonny Lee Miller double hander. And I'll be honest, the reason that it sold out before I booked was because I wasn't sure that it was worth shelling out £16.50 just to watch it on a screen. By the time I made up my mind that I had to see what the fuss was about, it was too late.

Thankfully, today the Glasgow Film Theatre was showing a recording of one of the screenings, with Miller as the Creature and Cumberbatch as Frankenstein, and this time I managed to get a ticket.

Obviously, watching from the distance of a cinema screen is not the same as watching live in a theatre. In the theatre you are free to focus on whichever part of the action you like - in these screenings, the decision of what you watch at any given moment is made for you by the director. So it's more than a little frustrating to be treated to a close up of one actor over another, thus depriving you of the chance to see the reactions of the other performers.  Or to be shown aerial views of the stage - this is not what the set was designed for, and these shots only served to emphasise that this was not the true theatrical experience.

All that can be forgiven, however, as the strength of the acting overcame any quibbles about camera angles. Both Miller and Cumberbatch were extraordinary, and I feel privileged to have witnessed their performances, albeit from a slight distance.  And the atmosphere in the GFT suggests that the majority of the audience felt the same way, even if they were slightly confused as to whether they should applaud the recording at the end.

Perhaps my only quibble would be that, for some reason, the NT didn't record the version with Cumberbatch as the Creature and Miller as Frankenstein, so I still need to try to sell one of my limbs to see it next time I'm in London.....