You will, Oscar, you will. 
Okay, Ellis Dee, I think I see why you are calling what I said the exact opposite of what Chesterton said, but I believe (and hope) that what he said is based on his arrival in a new place without any prior assumptions about what he would find there and without any research based on others’ impressions to set the stage for his arrival.
What I was trying to stress was that whatever “research” a traveler may have done, whether through reading, watching movies or TV shows, listening to stand-up comics describe their experiences there, or having talk show (and news show) “experts” give their takes on what it’s like to travel there, that when it comes time to interact with the people in that strange place, if the traveler is fair with himself about it, that “research” might take a back seat to first-hand experience, and opinions and impressions could be formed by way of what’s really there in the place and its people.
If one has “broadened his mind” by way of all that “research” before the actual visit, then I see the “narrowing of the mind” to be tossing out the extranaeous biases of others and “narrowing the focus” to what’s really there.
I have tried to locate some breakdown of what “travel narrows the mind” means in its usages on the web, but all I have seen this far is an appeal to the quaintness of the expression, and how it might stand in opposition to the version I’m more familair with of “travel broadens the mind.” I have always taken the latter to mean “you’ll learn a lot by going to a new and unfamiliar place and finding out what people there do and think.”
In other words, I would like to see some other writer expand on the expression’s meaning and put it in a context where its meaning would refute what I believe to be the case about travel. So far, my reading of Chesterton’s view is that he is saying pretty much the same thing I tried to (above and here).
But you are completely and utterly wrong. However the fact that you are wrong is of no importance at all and I am amazed that you continue to argue that the sun rises in the west. Who cares?
Apparently several do.
But now watch this. I will not post to this thread again, because I really don’t care.
Wonderful
Here’s a link to a discussion where it would appear there’s more than one way to interpret this expression: how travel narrows the mind
And in case it might go unnoticed there’s another linked to in that thread: How Travel Narrows The Mind, Ctd.
You’re still wrong, however.
Thanks. I was beginning to wonder if I might have had an original thought and would thus be branded as a heretic here at the “One Opinion Allowed” Church of Wisdom and Dispelling of Ignorance and all.
I detect that my presence in this thread is not longer required.
Climb down off that cross. Your interpretation of Chesterton’s meaning is just WRONG.
The new meaning you created out of whole cloth for it to express is perfectly valid.
It would be like if you created a whole new meaning for “To be or not to be” and it totally made sense and was thoughtful and carried real meaning. It’s still not what Shakespeare meant, though that doesn’t mean you can’t also have your own personal secondary meaning for it.
The problem is you trying to shoehorn your secondary meaning in as if that’s what Chesterton really meant. He clearly did not. He actually meant the opposite.
For the last time, and I mean the last time, I will respond to something directed at me. If you will examine the posts in this thread, except for my original comments in Post #3, which I made before ever reading Chesterton’s essay (which I have mentioned several times now), every post has been in response to something directed at me from:
Captain Amazing
NoClueBoy
Wendell Wagner
Ellis Dee
don’t ask
smiling bandit
with the two exceptions of Posts #11 and #27.
At this moment the participation in this thread reads:
“Travelling narrows the mind” What does this mean?
sassyfras Yesterday 10:08 PM
by Ellis Dee
29
1,163
Cafe Society
Who Posted?
Total Posts: 30
User Name Posts
Zeldar 12
don’t ask 3
Captain Amazing 3
Wendell Wagner 3
Ellis Dee 2
NoClueBoy 2
DrFidelius 1
smiling bandit 1
Thudlow Boink 1
sassyfras 1
Martini Enfield 1
Including where my name appears as the one making the actual post, my name has been mentioned 23 times, not including an edit. Deduct the post count of 12 and that means 11 references to my name. Am I not to respond when asked something? I won’t any longer!
And, cross or no, this is my final word on the subject. Either change the subject back to what the OP was asking or stop baiting me.
No comment on the interpretation, but I have just come across a quotation by Mark Twain (Readers’ Digest, Indian edition, Jan 2010, okay?) saying that " Travel is fatal to bigotry, prejudice, and narrow-mindedness."
By logical deduction (not to mention personal experience) I conclude that the statement must mean “By dint of its strangeness and stressful episodes, travel arouses prejudices that you did not previously have, or realize you had, or perhaps consciously rejected until you were deafened by Italians making a racket, grossed out by the sight of thousands of Chinese gobbing in the street … or whatever. Without travel, those caricatures would not have existed and you would have had a more tolerant image of peoples X or Y.”