Learning questions 1. What is the trouble for tourism and travel theory (Franklin & Crang, 2001)? The first trouble is "Tourism has been unclear which was growing very dramatically and quickly and that the tourism research community is relatively new. The second trouble, that how we understanding of tourism, like a thing, a product or a behavior, but in particular an economic thing. The Third trouble leads on the tourism studies have been restricted to a vision of tourism as a series of discrete, localized events, enumerated occurrences of travel, arrival, activity, purchase, departure, and where the tourist is seen as another grim incarnation of individualized. In addition, tourism studies has had a problem with the process of definition and regulating tourism. Finally, tourism does very often produce negative effects, for instance, culture changes. I was interested in this third trouble that tourism is a discrete activity. Because globalizing trends have increased the flows and normalized that no longer be discrete. In this article, the author also mentioned that two books show tourism can no longer be bounded off as a discrete activity, contained tidily as specific locations and occurring during set aside periods. So I am confused that is this the oppiation to author's original opinion ? This article helps me to better understand what is the specific trouble that tourism studies has For example, I know the resort cycle model---the archetypal villain of this misconception . The author wish to encourage and publish in Tourist Studies and listed some useful objectives that for tourism studies needs therefore to reflect this growing significance during the journal. However, this article was published in 2001. After 16 years, I was wondering these troubles still existing or already fixed. 2. What is the nature of the 'critical turn' in tourism studies (Bianchi, 2009)? The 'critical turn' in Tourism Studies is seen as an innovative and substantive turning point in enquiry into tourism, which provides a focus for the critique of the dominant industry-focused, positivist analytical frameworks in tourism. critical turn' is an explicitly political project, which embodies 'more than simply a way of knowing, an ontology, it is a way of being, a commitment to tourism enquiry which is pro-social justice, equality and anti-oppression: it is an academy of hope. Critical tourism scholars must, therefore, in the eyes of its principal advocates, embrace reflexivity in the course of knowledge production, and emancipate themselves from the institutionalization of a de-humanizing obedience to applied business knowledge in tourism This article also talk about the problem in tourism studies. And in the introduction, it citied the idea from previous article (Franklin & Crang, 2001) to support author's idea. However, this article gives a very unique way to think about the trouble of tourism studies –The "Critical turn" . The paper evaluates the scope and potential for a revitalized radical critique of tourism that engages with issues of power, inequality and development processes in tourism whilst acknowledging the significance of cultural diversities. In my existing idea from the previous article(Franklin & Crang, 2001) that tourism can no longer be bounded off as a discrete activity, however , in this article , the author also claims that tourism studies appears to be increasingly divided between the unquestioning embrace of the market. Both of these articles mentioned this topic, as a consequence. It will be reinforce my existing idea based on these articles. 3. What is the 'problem' with developing tourism theory (Hall, Williams, & Lew, 2014)? The first problem is some of the issues surrounding the definition of tourism and, hence, its study. Substantial differences remain between countries to define tourism. In addition, some of conception should be clearly like leisure, tourism and recreation. The second problem is some of the key themes and issues that have emerged in tourism as a field of social scientific endeavor. one of the reasons for conceptual confusion in tourism is because of the multiplicity of disciplinary and paradigmatic approaches that have been brought to bear on tourism phenomena, as indeed is true of many of the phenomena that are studied in the social sciences. The third problem is issues such as sustainability or safety and security rise or fall on the tourism agenda of academics, as well as government, in response to external factors such as terrorism or environmental concerns, as well as on the availability of specific funding opportunities. This article is cited both of two previous articles. First, this article cited (Franklin & Crang, 2001) one paragraph to support his argument and add his idea to identify the persistent tensions in tourism research. In addition, both of these two articles mentioned the tourism journals , with economic analyses also being significant in a number of other journals. Second, this article cited (Bianchi, 2009) to examined that the tourism studies also influence of neoliberalism on tourism governance. In my opinion, this article based on previous two articles to develop and find out some new issues on tourism studies. More importantly, it helps me understand same basic conceptions like the relationship between leisure , recreation and tourism.