India in a week or 2 or 3

This caught my eye in today's NYT. It might be of use to some first-timers - or even some old-hands.

http://travel.nytimes.com/2012/03/25...me&ref=general

Cheers!

Haze

You'd need pretty deep pockets to follow this guy's agenda. As for suggesting that people avoid Old Delhi because it's dirty and crowded he seems to be missing the whole point of India.

And, what's worse, he doesn't even mention train travel.

What a loser!

Ahhh!! you make excellent points, Dave. I usually read things before I post the links, but thought that - because the guy had been to India so many times, and was writing for the NYT - it might be a worthwhile read.

I have to say that I think anyone who is going to India for less than a month must have deep pockets. So perhaps it makes sense he's recommending high-class places? Desperate that he doesn't mention trains. Some go to India just for the trains.

I've started to read the article and I have to say that it wouldn't be my way of visiting India, but it might appeal to those who are of limited time, but less limited budgets.

H

Until I joined this forum I didn't realise that there was any other reason for wanting to go to India.

I quote:

"After my morning outings, I tend to make my way to Basil and Thyme for lunch. this simple and surprisingly inexpensive* cafe..."

*my italics

I agree with Dave: this fellow has deep pockets. A meal for one at that place is likely to relieve you of a four-digit sum in Rupees.