The resort

During the past century, tourism has become one of the main economical resources for the western world. This industry has created jobs, entertainment, communities and cities that are known as destinations or resorts.
Consciously or not architecture emerged as a product of this business.
Nowadays every city brands itself as a “destination” and wants to be a part of the global map. Different strategies emerge from those resorts. Some of them are open in their purpose, Venice, Benidorm, Gstaat, Val D’Isere, Eurodisney… Those examples are maybe a bit far from Swedish everyday life but are known by everyone.
Back in northern Europe we can see those signs in most of our cities. Stockholm is dealing with its beauty that attracts large numbers of tourists coming to experience the romanticism of the Venice of the north. How do architecture informs us on the hidden agendas of a city?

Another question that rises from a touristic view of the city is the one of trends.
Back in the 70’s up to the mid 90’s it was ok to have a resort with an opened agenda: “Mass tourism for everyone.” This mass tourism was not against architectural qualities but was just “open” with its purpose. Then, from the mid 80’s to today, people have showed an urge to experience “authenticity”. This authenticity covers -architecture wise- a large spectrum of expressions. How does cities cope with authenticity? Back to Sweden; what is the authentic Stockholm and what is an authentic capital?