A simple question: We have the Great Buddha at Nara:
and the Great Buddha at Kamakura:
Which is better?
(Unfortunately, that's the best picture I have of the Nara Daibutsu. The camera has a million different modes, selected by a clicky wheel on the top, and the wheel kept getting spun to odd settings as I put the camera in and out of the case. The other shots I took in Nara were all blurry, because it was on some low-light-level setting and took really long exposures.)
- Log in to post comments
More like this
Back in 1998, when I was here for three months working outside of Tokyo, I made a trip down to Kamakura, which was the capital (or at least the seat of power) for a century or so, around 1200. It's a beautiful town, full of great old temples, but it was a pissy, cold, and rainy day when I visited.…
What would adapting to climate change be like? A picture is worth a thousand words:
But a second picture is worth a few thousand more!
I saw the kids protecting their families from the rising tide at the beach and thought it was an amusing analogy. The running-away photo was just an unforeseen…
I'm teaching my "Brief History of Timekeeping" class again this term, and as always, I'm tweaking things a bit. This is one of our "Sophomore Research Seminar" courses, intended to introduce students to academic research, so it's not specifically a physics class, but I'm choosing to take the…
On Twitter Sunday morning, the National Society of Black Physicsts account retweeted this:
Using Lasers to Lock Down #Exoplanet Hunting #Space
http://t.co/0TN4DDo7LF
— ✨The Solar System✨ (@The_SolarSystem) September 28, 2014
I recognized the title as a likely reference to the use of optical…
Next time bring a film camera. I don't have those problems with my old Nikons.
I'd go with Kamakura. The other seems to be go more in the direction of deification, which of course the Buddha would have rejected.
I like the fact that the buddha at Nara is waving: seems friendly!
I think I have to go with Kakamura. Statues seem more down-to-earth when pigeons are sitting on their heads.
The second is meditating and outside and less tackily adorned; it wins.
I personally always really liked the reclining Buddhas carved into mountainsides. There's one in central Vietnam (I think that's where it was, near Hue perhaps) that's in a cave and you're just walking around and it's like, whoa! that's a big Buddha!
Kamakura. Free of frippery.
Kamakura. Hardcore enough to meditate in the rain.
Agreed, Kamakura (though I really do like the Budai best of all depictions).
Kamakura. I like the open space and the posture and the overall simplicity.
Between those two, Kamakura. The humility, and serenity do it for me.
Between those two, it's Kamakura all the way.
I like the one at Nara, it just seems friendlier. How old are each of the monuments?
Wait, how is this not a dorky poll?
I'd join the Kamakura votes. The outside view, the simplicity, and the coloration win hands down. I know tastes are different in different cultures, but I agree that Nara looks tacky and just too "busy" - like a lot of the Indian temples.
Well, Nara has lots of little Buddhas floating in the background, and has the sense to come in out of the rain. Also he is much easier to spell.
Kamakura has the whole rugged outdorsey thing going, and the pigeons are nice. K-Dog has that whole Zen simplicity thing happerning, or not happening. You understand. As art goes, the Kamakura is better. As Iconography goes, I don't know what better means. They both communicate "Buddha in yo' face Mo Fo!"
All your Buddhas are belong to us.
Kamakura. Among reasons noted above, I'll add that the patina makes it look better, and most importantly, it looks a lot like the golden plastic Buddha that came with an old (12") GI Joe set we had when I was little (along with a helicopter and a rubber cobra.)
Kamakura has always been my favorite.
The second one, cause I was born in Japan, and have a picture of my dad holding me in front of it!!