The two articles have some similarities, obvious and subtle, they also contrast in the same way. The ways that they do relate,is that they talk of people in both articles. The cities and performances within them both need, people to continue to exist. Without tourism, or curiosity neither would be as functional as they are. A way that they contrast is obvious. They rely on the different aesthetics within the field to work, one relying on the location itself, the other on the people.
I’m a little confused by your answer. How can the articles be similar and contrast in the same way? This seems impossible, no? Also, I think you have missed some of the most important points of the readings. You need to spend more time with texts in order to make sense of them, even reading 2 or 3 times until you have a full understanding.