Customer Reviews:
 The worst Lonely Planet I have read so far ! April 13, 2006
19 out of 25 found this review helpful
As much as I am faithul to Lonely Planet guidebooks, I was shocked by reading their edition of Belgium & Luxembourg. Not only did we have to wait 2004 to have a LP guidebook for those 2 countries (which must be after about all other regions in the world, even Antarctica, Papua New Guinea and tiny tropical islands), but it's not even half satisfying.
They should have kept the previous title "Brussels, Bruges and Antwerp", as there is frankly not much about the rest of the country. For instance, Belgium has some 3000 castles, but for some reason only 2 (yes, a miserable 2 !) are listed in the Lonely Planet. Same sparsity for the abbeys. Then, the book is heavily centered on Brussels and Flanders, as if the author didn't know more about Wallonia than the average occasional tourist. No mention of towns like Huy, Ciney or Gembloux - in fact they are not even on the guide's map ! No mention of the beautiful stone villages of the Condroz and Meuse Valley. It's like if they had written a guidebook about England without writing about the Cotswolds, Mendips and the country's many castles and stately homes ! It seems that the author is more interested in finding the best pubs and clubs in Antwerp than in historical and cultural sightseeing. There is more than lots of beer and legal drugs in Belgium !
|
