This is the gate for the Nankunshan temple which, if I recall correctly, is in the south-eastern Beidou district of Chiayi County. That contrast of red and blue is the sort of thing you see in guidebook photography, though this image would never qualify for a guidebook. Had I spent more time (which I didn't because Sunday was scorching hot) I probably could have worked on the perspective a bit more to eliminate background cars and other clutter. I should also have either switched lenses for this shot (I was using the 18mm) or took up a closer position.
Anyway, this red-blue colour contrast is compelling - of attention, but not interest. In other words the form is attention grabbing, but the subject being a temple gate, it doesn't by itself interest me very much, which is another reason why I didn't bother to hang about. However, the fact that temples don't interest me much makes me somewhat uneasy, as I can't rid myself of this back-of-the-mind suspicion that I should be very interested in temples...
However, the fact that temples don't interest me much makes me somewhat uneasy, as I can't rid myself of this back-of-the-mind suspicion that I should be very interested in temples...
ReplyDeleteWhy, Mike? There's nothing in the temple(s), itself.
John,
ReplyDeleteThe temples represent non-State institutions (Daoism and Buddhism) which still command some involvement from a large cross-section of the population. Many of the temple associations also have connections with organized crime, through which there will typically be hidden political connections.
Yet the temples themselves are still a nominally apolitical fulcrum for voluntary association - so a better understanding of how they work, their boundaries, and of just how "voluntary" they really are, could be a useful thing to know in certain situations. My interest is anthropological and aesthetic - the hocus pocus itself I can do without.
I'm also discomforted by the fact that my own "understanding" of them hitherto has been as little more than colourful follies. I know that there is more to them that.
Unfortunately a lot of that "involvement" from the general public appears to come down to begging favors from non-corporeal beings through superficial gestures of appeasement. As such it's hard to see how temples, in their current form, could ever properly motivate the civil cooperation necessary to replace the various functions of the State. Maybe that's why it doesn't interest you much.
ReplyDeleteMike, thanks for the clarification. It appears, based on your comment, that the temples; i.e. the voluntary associates; have as tangled of webs as western churches; those voluntary associates; have had over the centuries and into today.
ReplyDeleteBlob...
ReplyDelete"Unfortunately a lot of that "involvement" from the general public appears to come down to begging favors from non-corporeal beings through superficial gestures of appeasement."
Yes, it's depressing to even think about it.
"As such it's hard to see how temples, in their current form, could ever properly motivate the civil cooperation necessary to replace the various functions of the State."
That's not even on the table, at least not in a good way. What I had in mind was the question of how likely they are to maintain their apolitical status in the event of either PRC annexation or ROC collapse. For what purposes would they likely be used and by whom? That's the question.
John,
ReplyDeleteTrue separation of Church and State would be a very good thing in many ways... especially for the ordinary church members - as I'm sure you appreciate.