How good is the Shake Shack (a famous New York fast food joint in Madison Square Park)? I don’t know. Not a clue. But, I can tell you that it is massively popular. In fact, I think it’s too popular. The picture above is a bit of the line (I couldn’t fit the whole line in the frame) at 1:30 PM on Saturday. In the time I watched, the line was moving at a rate of about one person getting served every minute. At that rate people near the back of the line would be waiting for the better part of an hour. For a burger.

Unless you are on the burger pilgrimage, this sort of dedication to a simple food product is baffling. Sometimes when you’re traveling, your need to realise that even though something is a tourist destination, that doesn’t mean it should be the be all end all of your trip. If you go to the Louvre, you don’t have to spend hours queuing to see the Mona Lisa. Trust me, it’s smaller than you think and there is plenty of other great art to see without crowds of people jostling for a better position. Same goes for the Shake Shack. I’m sure it’s good, but I bet you can find a burger that’s just as good, if not better, without the wait. Just because something is famous and a tourist destination, doesn’t mean that you have to see it. Reach out and find the next big thing. Odds are you’ll spend less time in line and more time enjoying where you are.

When I’ve got an hour to veg out in a hotel room I like to flick over to the Travel Channel. Today though, I was sadly disappointed with what was on: National Parks: Extreme Maintenance. Really? If you get rid of the ‘Extreme’ you’re admitting that it’s a show about cleaning national parks. The segment I saw was about cleaning up bird droppings and feathers on Alcatraz. Ew.

My ideas on travel might be a bit different from most, but this doesn’t strike me as winning travel show. In fact, it doesn’t appear that it really was a winner as I couldn’t find any mention of the show on the Travel Channel website, and only found the most obscure of references on any Discovery Channel websites. Obviously they aren’t super proud of that one. Maybe I should put together a pitch for a show.

I think I have a different definition of the downsides of travel than lots of people. Check out of the new Titanic Awards blog, listing out some of the worst parts of travel. While agree that many of them suck – squat toilets, turbulent flights, and baggage handlers trashing luggage – there are fair number that are the type of thing I actually seek out while travelling.

For example, the video above is nominated as the world’s worst road. It looks nerve racking, but probably also good fun. Similarly, the worst commute is something I sought out while I was in Tokyo. I ended up a bit disappointed that even at rush hour in Shinjuku station in Tokyo I didn’t have a truely packed train. I guess that one person’s headache is another’s adventure.

Lane Wallace writes in The Atlantic about how adventure tourists having a good time together expose themselves to significant risks. A week ago I was musing about bonding power of risk, but it’s also good to look at it’s destructive power.

So first, there is the problem that Wallace highlights. There are certain variables that make you feel that your risk is actually less than it is. If you think you are in control, if you think that there is an expert or authority helping and protecting you, if you’re in a good mood, or if there is a group of people taking the risk with you, then you can easily forget how dangerous the situation is. The example I used for bonding is a perfect example. We we’re travelling as a group, so felt it wasn’t quite as dangerous as it actually was.

Digging back through the archives of Q4A, I find more evidence this theory on perceived risk. When discussing my need for a ski-helmet, I mentioned that when I’m happy and having fun I take on a greater level of risk. Case and point: as soon as I actually got to the slopes this winter I didn’t end up buying a helmet. I was having fun and the group I was with didn’t have helmets, so my perceived risk dropped.

The second problem is that taking risks is addicting. The rush you get can be addictive – literally from the dopamine boost you get when you take risks. There’s also the lifestyle addiction, you fall into the pastern and don’t really think to get out of it until you get into trouble.

All told, it’s a reminder that flirting with trouble is a joy and is a great way to make friends, you do have to keep your head up because the closer you get to trouble, the more likely you are to be reckless.

A few nights ago I was out for drinks with a friend of mine who began expounding about the joys of getting a drink with someone to forge the bonds of friendship. I disagree as I think that travelling is the best way to make friends. Not wanting contradict, I tried to build open the sentiment. Drinking together and travelling together both involve leaving your safe zone and taking risks together.

Once said shared risk, I couldn’t shake the feeling. That really is what drives bonding while you’re on the road. I’ve travelled with people in very safe environments and had a great time, but even a few months after the trip we had lost touch. On the other hand, when I’ve taken really risky trips with people we’ve built strong friendships.

For example, take the group with whom I rode through back trails in Senegal on shoddy bikes. We took on a great deal of risk together. We were short on water, didn’t know where we were going to sleep, and spent half our time fixing broken bikes. It was great. We can got months, or even years, without talking to each other and pick up like not a moment passed – all because of that one week. That’s the bonding that shared risk provides.

Sharing risks demands and creates trust. Whether drinking or travelling, you’re trusting the people around you in a situation that is a bit beyond your control.

Of course, this isn’t exactly a novel line of thought. There is a whole school of philosophy around risk – and they would say that I’ve sloppily lumped risk and uncertainty together here. And M. Scott Peck summed to the value of risk to forming bonds in The Road Less Traveled; “There can be no vulnerability without risk; there can be no community without vulnerability; there can be no peace, and ultimately no life, without community.” He may have written some crazy things, but I certainly agree with this bit.