Grand Tour

Generally speaking, the 18th-century Grand Tourist had expectations of gaining encyclopedic, exhaustive knowledge from his journey. In this the traveler was comparable to an experimental philosopher of «exceptional voracity» (Brilli, 1987), who aspired to a systematic understanding. Equipped, when scrupulous, with a sound theoretical preparation acquired through the reading of a series of methodological manuals designed to teach him how to “organize his vision,” he had a quantitative idea of time and believed that the more he saw the more he had done what he was required to. Reactions, tastes and opinions that were too personal were put aside. What prevailed were descriptions of places and things in an objective and accurate style that set out to be a faithful mirror of reality.

A reliable indication of the way this literary genre was regarded in the Age of Enlightenment is provided by the Critical Review : «A travel book in which the subjects are of general importance and adequately presented is one of the most interesting and informing literary products. In such a book you recognize the well-balanced mixture of utile and dulce; it entertains and stimulates fantasy without having to take refuge in a novel like fiction; it presents to us a plethora of useful information without the boredom of a systematic treaty [...]» (Brilli, 1987).

Such a documentary intent differs from the practice of writing in the previous century, when it was considered acceptable to report facts at second hand and draw on a fund of anecdotes – relating to the writer’s own “incredible” adventures, to the dangers overcome, to the difficulties encountered – pushing direct observation into the background. But it is also distant from the emphasis on the memoir and the predominance of the narrator, attitudes that would be typical of the last part of the 18th century and then of the 19th. The “diaries,” “chronicles,” “reports,” “guides” and “collections of letters” of the 18th century show little taste for the frivolous anecdote and the sentimental or personal observation, while the desire to present an objective account predominates. Diaries and letters, above all, made it possible to simulate a complete authenticity (even though they almost always underwent revision and refinement after the end of the journey) and to perform the didactic and informative function that was considered essential in a spontaneous manner. The letter in particular was one of the favorite choices (Bacchereti, 1981). It permitted a discursive and plain style, averse to preciosity; it allowed the author to leap from one subject to another thanks to the presence of an interlocutor (often fictitious); it entailed the idea of writing things down immediately, as they happened, itself an assurance of veracity.