Our stay in Nepal was compromised even before we have arrived there: to pay for our trip to Tibet we had to give up the trekking we would do. What to do then? Hang around Kathmandu, apply for the indian visa, do nothing for a while, think about the trip so far and maybe review the planning for the coming countries. More thant that, there’s plenty of things to do around the city and it would be our first glimpse of a society hinduist. It sounded good to me.

We found ourselves into the roof-top world of the Thamel quarter – the tourist guetto in the nepali capital. Everywhere we can find them: the roof-top restaurants, bars and cafés. It’s a re-segregation between the tourist and the mixture of ingredients called the local. First was this neighbourhood, a hub of tourist facilities and everything needed to make the traveller feel like he hasn’t arrived yet. Then, once it got too jammed with tiger balsam-dope-rickshaw vendors, the tourists were moved upstairs. Getting rid of the local again. I wonder when the passarelles between roof-tops will be built.

I always supported the idea of mixing authenticity and confort. Too much of the first, creates the cultural shock, the second comes to balance it out, in excess, confort inflates the bubble of isolation. Thamel tries to cut the tourist off the city and becomes extremely boring. Add to that, a seven-day wait for the indian visa, a food poisoning that obliged us to change the bus to Delhi for a plane, and you have an expensive and too long ten days sojourn.

An afternoon in Pashupatinah and Bodhnath weren’t up to erase the bad impression this city has left on our minds. Definitely, we should have  compromised even more our budget and go trekking instead of staying in a room at Buddha Hotel (20 US$) waiting for Incredible India.