Kanto or Kansai

[Mark Buckton 1]

In preparation for an article I have been asked to contribute to later this year, I would like to ask if those members here, given the opportunity and choice, would prefer to visit the Kanto or Kansai regions of Japan?

If you are reading this I presume you already have some interest in at least one (sumo) aspect of Japan so just to see how this one goes......

I am not voting as I am more interested in the results of others than in adding to one side's numbers.

Kanto

Kansai

Neither

- for some reason I have no ability to 'make' the voting boxes and numbers thingy that checks each vote. Mods?

Edited July 28, 2006 by Adachinoryu

[Zuikakuyama 1]

Kansai is eminently more interesting for me, as I like histrical sites and old temples.

[Mark Buckton 1]

actually - for those who don't know so much about Japan's geography -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kanto

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kansai

[aderechelsea 125]

definately Kanto.

more chances to watch Sumo and more chance to see the "real Japan" and not the historical aspect of it.

my general opinion for traveling is always prefer the urban places where you get to know the real characteristics of a country.

now this is coming from a guy who lives in Athens and went to the Acropole only once in his life (around 10years old) ...

[Asojima 2,874]

For most of my time in Japan, I lived in Kanto (Kanagawa), but for outings my family ususally opted for a trip to Kansai. We enjoyed soaking up the scenic and cultural aspects of its rural areas and the park areas near Fujisan. We seldom visited the major tourist-type areas. I had the luxury of making small visits over a period of several years, so my experience and interests may not be applicable to a one-time visitor.

[Andreas 0]

Im living in Tokyo at the moment, but i will go on a trip to Kyoto very soon.

I think that Tokyo (the Kanto is mostly Tokyo in my eyes) is the better place to live, in Tokyo You can get almost everything that Japan has to offer (including 3 Honbashos a year).

But the Kansai (Kyoto, Nara) is a must-visit if You are historically-culturally interested. On top of that, I want to learn what the Kansai-ben is all about ;).

So if You only got the chance to visit Kanto or Kansai, go to Kanto Area. If You are going to stay in one of the places for a longer time, go and visit the other one, too!

Edited July 29, 2006 by Andreas

[ragerkawa 0]

In preparation for an article I have been asked to contribute to later this year, I would like to ask if those members here, given the opportunity and choice, would prefer to visit the Kanto or Kansai regions of Japan?

I've never been to Japan. If you are asking which I would choose if I could only choose one, I would go to Kanto and see Tokyo. On the other hand, if I could visit both, I would probably spend more time in Kansai than in Kanto.

Hope this helps,

John

[sekihiryu 51]

definately Kanto.

my general opinion for traveling is always prefer the urban places where you get to know the real characteristics of a country.

now this is coming from a guy who lives in Athens

so what exactly is un-urban about Osaka?? (a top 20 city in the a world), its one huge urban mess if you ask me

Its nearly triple Athens population and chuck in Kobe and to the mix its has more people than Greece!

:-(

[ikishima 0]

Kansai.

For me Kanto is not built on a human scale, it is just too big and intimidating. I find Osaka and Kobe more managable than Tokyo. For a visit I like the history of Kyoto and Nara. I like that I can get a feel for Kansai.

I lik flying into Osaka. I like getting off the train Kyoto. I like biking around the city. I like Nara as a quick day trip.

[Gusoyama 105]

When I visited, I liked the Kansai region better, but I like more historical places than the flashy hip trendy places. Its the same reason I like Boston and Philly better than LA and New York City.

[Elenrian 0]

I spent a very few time in both Kansai and Kanto. I prefered Kansai because of the many temples and museums I visited there. What I visited was more "natural" than Kanto (I only visited Tokyo), there were much more trees and so on....

But I liked Tokyo too ! It is very strange, all is so big ( compared to the "small" European town I live in (200 000 inhabitants + 200 000 around....)) !

[Kotoseiya Yuichi 3]

Hmm... let's see... err... Aomori!

But of those two, Kansai any time.

[Otokonoyama 2,735]

I have to agree with K.Y. on this one :)

Rural Japan is strikingly beautiful; it's people incredibly hospitable. Try the outer islands of Okinawa, southern Kyushu, the San'in region, Hokuriku, Nagano, Tohoku (where Aomori is found), and Hokkaido. Fabulous!

[Hananotaka 8]

Some interesting replies here.

IMO, Kanto is plenty historic. Anyone in the area simply must visit the Toushougu 東照宮, in Nikkou, Tochigi. It is awesome, and certainly on par with any one site in Kansai. Kamakura is also quite historic. Not to mention that not only does Tokyo not represent all of Japan, but it doesn't even represent all of Kanto. Outside of Tokyo, Tochigi, Chiba, Ibaraki, Gunma, and Saitama prefectures also make up "Kanto", and they are all quite rural.

On the flip side, Kansai is plenty urban. Osaka by itself is one huge city, but another name for "Kansai" is "Kyouhanshin Region"; "Kyouhanshin" is short for Kyoto (Kyou), Osaka (Han), and Kobe (Shin). Three of Japan's major cities, all pretty close.

Incidently, strictly speaking Kanto is made up of Tokyo (the metropolis), Kanagawa, Saitama, and Chiba (the Big 3), Ibaraki, Gunma, and Tochigi Prefectures. While Kansai (also known as the Kinki region) is made up of the two big "fu", Osaka-fu and Kyoto-fu, Hyogo, Nara, Shiga, Wakayama and Mie. 　Fuji-san, in Shizuoka, thus falls between Kanto and Kansai, in the Chubu region. (Not surprisingly, "chubu" means "middle section".)

I have a personal preference for Kansai, mostly because I used to live there.

[Shibouyama 1]

I have to agree with K.Y. on this one :)

Rural Japan is strikingly beautiful; it's people incredibly hospitable. Try the outer islands of Okinawa, southern Kyushu, the San'in region, Hokuriku, Nagano, Tohoku (where Aomori is found), and Hokkaido. Fabulous!

Yes, I agree as well. I live in Sanin and it is quite nice. Give me the country over the city any day. Whenever I go to Osaka, I end up spending about two hours on the train everday. No thanks!

Although there are not many wild mammals here, there is alot more natural life here than in the big cities. I did, however, see a weasel in Osaka at the guest house I was staying in near the Osaka loop. It would come in and raid the garbage cans in the front entrance at night. Cool.

And, yes, the people here are nice here. They let me practice my bad Japanese on them every day.

For the non-Japanese readers, the bit at the bottom of my posts in kanji says Ganbare Sanin!

(Sign of approval)

[Bishonohana 0]

I vote for Kansai. Even though Kanto has it's own great qualities, I prefer the food in Kansai. Osaka is known for it's "kuidoraku" (the pleasure of eating). It's not all about the food, but it does have it's calling! (Eek...) (Praying...) It's a fine line, though...