|
Opinions please
The purpose of this thread is to attempt to collect some opinions in respect of the effect that external forces may have had upon the Javanese cultural perception of the keris in Java.
At the present time I believe that most serious students of the keris have a pretty fair idea of the possible, or even probable development of the keris from the time of its appearance in Central Jawa some time around the 8th or 9th century, through to its resurgence in Central Jawa during the 1970's and 1980's. About 1000 years of development, change, modification, and varying beliefs, and seemingly always attached to the culture of Jawa. A number of external forces have played a part in the physical shape of the keris as we know it today, that is, as the Modern Keris, the keris form that followed the so-called Keris Buda, and these external forces have probably also had an effect upon the cultural perception of the keris. There are two well known and obvious external forces that have acted upon Javanese culture and society during the period that has seen the appearance of the Modern Keris, these two forces are Islam, and colonial domination. I would very much like to hear opinions regarding the possible effects of the influence of these two external forces upon the way in which the Javanese people regard the keris. Possibly other external forces may be able to be identified, and opinions in respect of these other forces will be equally welcome. The focus is Jawa, and in this context, Jawa must include both Bali and Madura, the subsidiary areas where the keris is found do not need to be considered at this time. There is no right and no wrong in this exercise. I'm not attempting to open up debate in order to determine right or wrong, I'm attempting to place on record opinions in respect of this matter, nothing more. |
Hello Alan,
I have no detailed knowledge of the javanese history besides what is found in the well-known reference books but would just like to point-out that: . Bali remained Hindu and the heir of the Majapahit kingdom, and it was not much influenced by the Dutch until its conquest in 1906-1908 so the balinese kris was not influenced by Islam or the Dutch, and it could therefore be considered as the most original type of modern kris. Another indication is that the krisses brought from Banten and Cirebon during the 16th and early 17th century are quite similar to the traditional balinese krisses which are derived from the Majapahit ones. . Besides Islam itself and the Dutch, Java was also influenced by India (from where the Muslims came during the 16th/17th century AFAIK) and China because of the massive migration and trading links. Regards |
I would take this opportunity to ask a question about Bali kerises.
While the development of the figural hilts is easily explained, I would know why, contrary to what happened in the whole archipelago (excepted the long Sumatran kerises), in Bali the size has developed remarkably, though always respecting proportions. Thanks in advance |
Thanks for your contribution Jean.
The thrust of my question concerns :- "--- the effect that external forces may have had upon the Javanese cultural perception of the keris in Java. " In other words I am seeking opinions about how outside influences may have affected or contributed to the way in which the Javanese regarded the Javanese keris. We can identify many purely physical contributions, contributions that are also seen in the wider field of Javanese art and culture, one very obvious example can be used to illustrate this, the way in which the singo barong is rendered. The singo barong is seen as a lion, on a keris it possibly carries association with a warrior, and this association is in a direct line from Hindu culture, however, there are no lions in Jawa, so when it came time to produce an image of a lion, the Javanese drew upon Chinese representations of a lion, and now we have these pretty little fu-dog lions that in Javanese understanding can be interpreted as lions. A combination of Hindu + Chinese input to Javanese artistic expression. Alternatively, maybe the entire interpretation of the singo barong as being associated with the warrior is wrong:- maybe it is a direct lift from Chinese culture, and a very strong argument can be mounted for this. But these things are physical. What I am trying to get opinions on is the way in which factors from outside Javanese culture and society may have influenced the way in which the Javanese people regarded something that has become one of their major cultural symbols. As to the possibility of outside influences on the Balinese keris, I suggest that nothing can be taken for granted. Bear this in mind:- I am not looking for physical influences, but rather how an outside factor may have contributed to an internal cultural perception or belief. It is inarguable that Indian and Chinese contact with Jawa existed from a very early time, I think it is accepted that Indian contact existed from the second century AD, and Chinese contact from perhaps a little later, but in any case both India and China were contributing to Javanese cultural development well before the period that saw the appearance of the Modern Keris. In fact, in the 1950's, when I began my study of Jawa, I was repeatedly told that Jawa was an Indian sub-culture. This point of view has now altered, but this is the way Jawa used to be seen, not as a culture in its own right, but rather as a sub-culture of India. So, how did influences from outside Jawa contribute to or influence the way in which the Javanese people have regarded, and now regard, the Javanese keris? |
Giovanni, this was a question of mine for many years, and although I do have an answer of sorts, it remains only partially clarified, I believe.
Many years ago I put this question to a Balinese priest whom I knew very well. His answer was brief:- "big man : big keris". Some time later I put the same question to a very well known keris authority from outside Bali, but who has spent considerable time in Bali. His answer came back in almost the same words :- "big man : big keris" (they were the same words actually, but the Balinese gentleman was speaking in Indonesian, the authority was speaking in English) There are two ways to understand this statement, firstly, overall the Balinese are taller and more strongly built than the Javanese, so for a keris to be in proportion to body size, a Balinese keris would need to be considerably larger than a Javanese keris. The other way it can be understood is if the keris size were to be used as a hierarchical indicator, where the concept of "big man" would be interpreted as a man of higher status. It should be noted that Bali is an intensely hierarchical society. These two things are also worth noting:- many of the old North Coast Jawa keris were at least as large as a Balinese keris. Not many of these keris exist anymore, but apparently they were quite prevalent in previous times. It seems that most of these "super-size" Javanese keris were turned into keris of a more marketable nature. The second thing worthy of mention is that some very early Balinese keris were quite small, I have one early Balinese keris that would seem to be able to be classified as Majapahit, and this keris is smaller than the average Javanese keris, apart from this keris, I have seen and owned other quite small Balinese keris. |
One sees in many countries a strong emphasis put on a selection of traditional cultural symbols in response to modernisation, or colonial domination, or foreign influence. Sometimes new things are re-configured as new "traditional" cultural symbols. This can occur as resistance to foreign/colonial pressure to change, or as reclamation of traditional cultural markers after gaining independence after colonial rule.
Some of the cultural things so emphasised in some countries include traditional dress, traditional festivals, traditional food (or "traditional" food, often less than a century old), song, dance, theatre, royalty, martial arts, national weapons. I don't have an answer, but I have a question: is this important in Java, and for the keris in Java? |
Timo, you have answered my question with a question, and I can give you a direct response:-
Yes. But why? There has probably been more nonsense spoken and written about the keris than about any other edged weapon, or cultural icon. The reasons for this are many and complex, but what we do know is that the nature of the keris has continually changed over the more than 1000 years of its existence. The core of keris culture, and its place of origin is Jawa. Jawa is also the place of keris culture that has been subjected to the greatest degree of continuous influence by factors from outside Javanese society. For anybody to understand the keris and its place in Javanese culture that person must be able to understand the way in which the Javanese people themselves understand the keris. This is not to say that an outsider must understand the keris in the same way as it is understood in the varying layers of Javanese society, but the outsider must be able to understand the way in which the Javanese people understand the keris. Thus, an understanding of an understanding, or perhaps an understanding of a number of understandings. For this understanding of an outsider to develop it is necessary to address many aspects of the keris presence in Jawa. During the period of existence of the Modern Keris those two greatest outside influences on Javanese society have been Islam and the presence of Europeans along with their colonial ambitions. Therefore it would seem to be of vital importance for the serious student of the keris to attempt to gain some insight into the way in which these two outside influences of Islam and the Europeans contributed to the way in which the Javanese people understand the keris. |
Thanks for your reply, Alan
Could the size of the kerises depend upon the availability of iron in the various areas ? I think that the possibility of finding iron and nickel/iron was a major problem. |
Hello Alan,
you ask a not easy to answer question, special regarding the influence of the Islam upon the the Javanese cultural perception of the keris since I know not enough about the Javanese cultural perception of the keris before Islam coming to Java. But frankly said I think that this influence wasn't so great like others maybe think. By my first visit on Java 1992 I was surprised, special in Central and East Java, about the very own interpretation of Islam on Java. This changed in the time until now but I think that this can be neglect regarding your question. The outer appearance of the keris may have changed by Islamic influence but nothing else. I may be completley wrong so I would like to read your own opinion about this. The colonial influence was much greater IMHO since middle of last century the "keris culture" was nearly moribund. This was prevent again by outside influence by only a few persons like yourself and Dietrich Drescher who has had a great effect that the keris forging don't died. Again, I could be completely wrong by my statement and would like to read your own opinion about this. :) ;) Regards, Detlef |
Thanks for your contribution Detlef.
Yes, it is far from an easy question, and this is the reason that I asked it. Perhaps any statement of opinion needs to begin with a statement that clarifies one's understanding of the way(s) in which Javanese society perceives the keris at the present time. Then perhaps it may be possible to unravel the various current perceptions and attempt to form some sort of opinion on how these current perceptions might have arisen. Detlef, you have made a very valid point when you identify the need for a baseline that puts the keris into a pre-Islamic, pre-European contact setting. Once this baseline has been established it then might become possible to identify the changing nature of the keris throughout time, and possibly speculate upon reasons for these changes. Obviously this cannot be done in the absence of at least some relevant knowledge. Perhaps my "Interpretation" article might be of some assistance in helping to form an understanding of the possible baseline. Detlef, I currently have a number of opinions about the changing nature of the keris in Jawa, but I will not state those opinions until such time as I can support them. The reason I have put this question up for everybody to take a shot at is to try to understand how broadly interested people in the world outside Jawa understand the Javanese perception of the keris. It may help to form opinions if we look at some of the facets of the Javanese keris. It is a weapon, a personal talisman, a family inheritance, a work of art, a store of wealth, an item of formal dress, it has religious associations, it is a symbol of its custodian, an hierarchical indicator, a symbol of its culture, an endorsement of the right to rule --- and that is the short list. Did all these things apply at the moment of its appearance in Javanese society, or did it gradually accumulate some of these attributes as time passed? If the attributes were gradually accumulated, is it possible to identify factors that may have caused an attribute to be attached to the keris? These are the sort of things that we need to consider in order to form opinions that could be used to respond to my question. As you say Detlef:- not an easy question. |
Yes Giovanni, the availability of materials at times in the past could have been a factor, however, perhaps not as great a problem as we might think. In Bali the Pandai Caste was and is powerful within Balinese society. The members of the Pandai Cast are workers in iron, and they are spread throughout the Balinese society. There were long standing trade links with China, there was iron smelting going on in Jawa, and I think probably Bali too, at least the beach sands in many places would seem to be suitable for production of iron.
So, yes, material could have been a factor, but perhaps not quite so much as we might think. EDIT Something we must always remember in this context of availability of any type of materials to areas of SE Asia is that there was a well established trade network throughout SE Asia, and even as far as Madagascar, China, and interestingly, Northern Australia, that in some cases extended back as far as the 2nd and 3rd centuries AD. There was nickel bearing iron being exported from Luwu in Sulawesi from at least the time of Majapahit. SE Asia may have been unknown territory to Europeans prior to first contact, but it was certainly no unknown territory to the people of India, China and the Middle East, let alone the people of Maritime SE Asia. |
Quote:
Most of my Indonesian colleagues were highly educated people (engineers) and of javanese origin. They were quite surprised about my interest for the kris, a number of them had family krisses but they did not seem to give them much attention, and none of them ever showed me one of their krisses. I was told that since recently, some Muslim extremists in Java require the people to get rid of their krisses as the worshipping of the kris is contrary to islamic principles but I don't know if this is correct and widely applied. Regards |
I will qualify my statements by saying that i really have no idea of the inner beliefs of Javanese (or Indonesian) society regarding the keris. I have never been there and have no real direct contacts that can valid anything i might believe on the subject. My understanding of the keris, what a "good" keris might be, is dictated more by my understanding of how international collectors view the keris.
It is clear to me that Islam as it has existed in Indonesia is its own variation on the theme and has absorbed quite a bit of local (both pre-Islamic and pre-Hindu) belief along its doctrines. If extremists are now trying to turn Indonesians away from the keris i am not convinced that is yet the norm and i would rather not turn this into a discussion or debate on current politics and religious extremism. Islam in Indonesia seems to have embraced the keris over the centuries and embed it with its own sense of Islamic mystical thinking. It seems likely that a good deal of the original Hindu-influenced symbolic intent of the keris has been replaced with its Islamic counterparts over the centuries of Islamic influence. So how Indonesians relate to the keris must have certainly changed in some regard over the years because of this. Regarding the physicality of the keris i am less certain that the establishment of an Islamic culture made that many changes to the over all design. Yes, certainly we saw figurative hilts morph into abstract representation in certain areas around the archipelago. Interestingly enough though, a ban on figurative hilts does not really seem to have been put into effect in Jawa. I don't see that Islamic culture did that much to change the blade itself though. Yes, over the centuries we see the development of more complex pamor pattern, but this seems more a natural evolution than one dictated by religious philosophy. The same can probably be said about dhapurs. If anything affected the blade construction itself i would have to say colonial influence has. It seems to me that it was Europeans like Isaac Groneman who put an emphasis on the desirability of the high contrast silvery pamor he noted on upper level court pieces and made that the bar to be reached for a "good" keris. In 1904 Groneman wrote: ‘The pamor material for the kris smiths connected to the courts of Yogyakarta and Surakarta originates from an iron meteorite that fell to earth at the end of the eighteenth century in the neighbourhood of the Prambanan temple complex. The meteorite was excavated and transported to the kraton of Surakarta. From that time on, the weapon smiths of the Vorstenlanden used small pieces of meteoric iron to produce the pamor pattern in their krisses, pikes and other status weapons. After etching the blade with acidic substances, it is the small percentage of nickel always presents in meteoric iron that causes the characteristic silvery pattern that faintly lights up against a background of iron or steel that has become darkly coloured by the effect of the acids. However, the supply of meteoric iron, already scarce and expensive, will gradually become exhausted. The petty weapon smiths and their assistants who now and then receive a commission from their noble clients – they are becoming fewer and fewer – are poor and consequently can no longer pay for their raw materials. The Javanese weapon smiths are destitute. By making a kris, they do not earn more than starvation wages. Their trade threatens to become extinct if nothing changes. However, the solution of the problem is quite simple: replace the expensive meteoric nickel iron by cheap nickel originating from other sources since it is the nickel component in the kris that provides the contrast in color’ So Groneman seems to be making high contrast silvery pamor a standard to be most desired. I am not convinced that this view on keris pamor was the accepted Javanese perspective of the time. It has been shown that many, if not most old keris don't even have nickels material in the pamor, contrast coming instead from varying levels of phosphorus in the iron used (see studies and articles by Piaskowski and Bronson). Meteorite was only really in use as a pamor material for about a century before this time and only in a very limited number of keris. But Groneman began importing pure nickel to see his own ideal of pamor created in the keris. He was convinced he was saving a dying culture and putting keris production back on track, but it seems to me that he was instrumental in changing our perceptions of what a "good" keris is supposed to look like, at least in the international collector's view. I must admit that i am uncertain if this "ideal" has also become embedded in the native Javanese psyche. 70 years later Dietrich Drescher was instrumental in reviving keris manufacture and culture in Jawa. I am not certain how much his influence affected how keris were produced though he undoubtable brought his own European collector's perspective of what makes a "good" keris into the process. |
As A Western Collector
....and not a very good student :
I'd like to observe that it is utterly puzzling to me why the Javanese would take an object so clearly aligned with Male and Female, Birth and Death, Creation, aspirations, an Heirloom; the best work that a Pande, whatever his skill level could produce; and subject it to a corrosive process on a regular basis . Maybe if I could understand just that . |
Yes Jean, a very valid comment. This is what I meant by "levels of understanding".
The younger generations of Javanese people, particularly those who have had either an overseas or a local university education tend to turn away from not only the keris, but many other facets of traditional Javanese culture, most particularly when dealing with people outside their immediate family or circle of friends. It is seen as very uncool to remain attached to the traditions and ways of previous generations, whilst it is seen as prestigious to imitate the ways, or perceived ways, of the educated west. When dealing with Javanese people it is very wise to remember that you are dealing with the "public face" of a person, unless that person is a member of your immediate family or a close friend of very long standing --- and even then you cannot be certain. It should also be understood that the persona one sees is the persona that the Javanese person wants you to see, and what he wants you to see is usually calculated to generate the most favourable impression of himself. Thus, in the workplace the Javanese person could well feel that it is to his advantage to present a character that is in tune with western values, as he understands western values, but when he returns to his village and is surrounded by family and friends who have known him all his life, he allows a different character to appear, and that character is normally very different to the character that is presented to the outside world. Then there are the various divisions within Javanese society, the aristocrats, the old line of kraton civil servants (priyayi), the Muslim traders and shopkeepers (santri), the farmers, the craftsmen , and so on. Each of these groups have their own set of values that are added to the overarching set of values of all Javanese, and these values can affect the way they act or react in respect of anything. The question often arises as who is truly a Javanese person. To the people living in Central Jawa who consider themselves Javanese , to be Javanese is to be born into a Javanese Pribumi family and to use Javanese language as the normal means of communication. These traditionalists in my experience do not accept people from West Jawa as Javanese, these people are from Sunda, thus they are Sundanese. People from Jakarta are excluded. Javanese people from East Jawa are treated with a degree of suspicion, they might be Javanese, but not true Javanese, because they are too rough, have no manners and do not speak correct Javanese. (pribumi=indigenous) So, in the eyes of the people at the center of the traditional Javanese world, the ones who can qualify as genuine Javanese are pretty limited in number. Within this restricted group of people there is an even smaller number of people who have an interest in and understanding of, the keris. This small core has probably been influential in the greater Indonesian community for creating the ideas and values of the greater Indonesian community in respect of the keris. However, in recent years this appears to have changed. When I compare what I know of present day understanding and values with the understanding and values that I was taught by people at the center of the Javanese keris world, 30-40 years ago, it seems that the understandings and values now are in many respects quite a bit different to what I was taught. I rather suspect that Jakarta has hijacked the keris train. So --- levels of understanding. Then we have as you so correctly point out, the rather right leaning religious enthusiasts --- I'm trying to very careful with the way I phrase things here. These people are not necessarily all Muslim, there is a very strong Christian movement in Jawa, and many of these Christians are from rather extreme churches of the Christian faith. Again, more levels of understanding. The whole matter could use several lifetimes of investigation, and we still probably would not be very much wiser than we are right now. But this doesn't matter, because what we are seeking here are opinions; what do outsiders --- and insiders too, if any care to contribute --- think about the external forces that may have contributed to the way(s) in which Javanese people perceive the Javanese keris? |
Thank you for your contribution to discussion , David.
Gronemann probably did have some effect in line with your comments, but nickel was present in Javanese keris production from at least the time of Majapahit, because of the presence of nickel bearing material imported from Sulawesi. I do understand that you might be reluctant to comment on Javanese perceptions of the keris, because of your lack of personal contact, but I also feel that because of your long contact with the keris, and the reading that you have undertaken, you would have formed some personal opinions of the way in which Javanese people may regard the keris. As I said in post #1, there are no "rights" and no "wrongs" in this matter, we are talking about opinions, it is of no importance at all if an opinion can be shown to be incorrect, and of even less importance if it can be shown to be correct. This is a matter of external influences on the way Javanese people see the keris. It doesn't matter if what we think or say is wrong, what matters is the way we perceive something to be. |
I think that there are probably several things that we can say about this "corrosive process" Rick.
Firstly we're dealing with a wet tropical climate. Polished ferric material is always going to rust, and rust pretty quick. So, the stain that is applied to a keris blade is similar in protective effect to the protection afforded by blueing, but before we can apply that stain, we need to get the ferric material nice and shiny white. We can polish the corrosion off, or we can remove it chemically --- the "corrosive process". The Balinese people polish it off with wet sand and lime, this results in the entire blade surface being reduced over time. The Javanese people clean the rust away with a mild acid that when used correctly has virtually no effect at all on the un-corroded surfaces of the blade. Regrettably not everybody who attempts to clean a blade is either properly trained, or careful, and the result is that instead of only the rust disappearing the surfaces that are not yet rusted also lose a little bit of matter. Then we have that great common attribute of the Human Race:- laziness. Why be careful when it is easier to throw something into a tub of acid ? Or maybe we can consider the cost of cleaning compared to the value of the article. What I know is this:- common keris that have little value are not going to have as much money spent on them to clean and stain, as the keris may be worth. However, the cleaning and staining of a truly valuable keris will be done with extreme care. |
Quote:
As to how Javanese people actually view the keris in their personal lives…yes, obviously it is seen (or has been seen since as i am sure that many current generation Javanese have little to no real connection to the weapon anymore) as the many things you have already mentioned. It is (or has been at some time in Javanese history) "a weapon, a personal talisman, a family inheritance, a work of art, a store of wealth, an item of formal dress, it has religious associations, it is a symbol of its custodian, and hierarchical indicator, a symbol of its culture, an endorsement of the right to rule". I hate to disappoint you, but beyond that i am afraid i do not care to speculate. Perhaps if i were to spend some time amongst Javanese people within the Javanese culture i would feel more comfortable making assumptions about their deeper thoughts on the matter. Until then i am afraid that i must be content with my own personal feelings and beliefs about the keris. My long contact with the keris has only allowed me my own personal perspective on the keris, not the perspective of the culture from which it originates. And while i have read a lot of books on the subject they have all been writing by people of European decent so they can only provide a filtered perspective. You have stated that it doesn't matter if what i think or say is wrong, but to me it does matter if what i think is wrong and it matters even more if what i say is wrong. But perhaps if you could outline what it is you hope to gain from this line of inquiry i might be able to add more to the conversation. You did present a question regarding your list of above of what the keris may represent that i can give thoughts on. Did all these things apply at the moment of its appearance in Javanese society, or did it gradually accumulate some of these attributes as time passed? I think it would have to be a gradual evolution, though i do believe that there was always some mystical/magickal intent present in the keris by design. The "modern" keris form as we know it contains certain physical elements that don't really seem to serve a martial function. So symbolism was always built in. Even the keris buda contains some of these, but the form (and symbolic nature) becomes even more complex as it develops into "modern" form during the Mojopahit. |
Thank you David.
I'm not sure that Gronemann's idea of a "good keris" came from the fact that he was a European, but rather, he had seen what the ruling elite considered to be a "good keris", he was working with kraton makers, and he attempted to provide the material that these makers needed to be able to continue to produce what their lords wanted. Yes, undoubtedly he considered the high contrast pamor a characteristic of a "good keris", but this was because he had seen this characteristic in the keris that he had been told by both the elites and the makers, were good keris. He was undoubtedly influential in the later perception of the keris in Europe, so this idea of high contrast pamor being a characteristic of a good keris flowed from him to the interested people outside Jawa. However, he only passed on what he had learnt, and perhaps he did not get the full story. What has been impressed upon me many times by keris conscious people in Solo is that within the Surakarta ethic, garap, that is, craftsmanship, is given much greater weight in the appraisal of a keris than is the colour of the pamor, if any exists at all. Whether this same value applied at Gronemann's time, I really do not know, but I feel that it very likely did, as I have never seen even slightly inferior garap in keris that has been attributed to a known mpu of the 19th through early 20th century. I do understand your unwillingness to state an opinion that you cannot support. I've already said that I'm not able to do this --- which is a pity --- but too often I've said or written something that is really only a thought for further examination and then had it quoted back to me as one of my firm opinions. It just wastes too much of my time trying to explain exactly what I meant when I made the statement in the first place. Probably you also get all those private emails that want to argue about half formed ideas. You have asked what I hope to gain from this line of enquiry. Valid question. I was hoping to gain a couple of things:- Firstly I wanted to get some sort of an idea about the way that people who were not specialist scholars, but rather more or less generalist collectors, thought about and saw the keris within the context of the society and culture from whence it came. In other words, the perception of these people of the perception of the Javanese people. This is something that can definitely be argued as being right or wrong, there is an enormous volume of work that has been done on the characteristics and attitudes of the Javanese people, their culture and their society, so if anybody stated something that was obviously wrong in the opinions of the authorities in this area of knowledge, it could generate a lengthy debate. This was the reason for the rider that in this thread there is no right and no wrong, only opinions. In other words, no debates. If we differ in opinion, simply state the different opinion and let both opinions stand, don't try to prove that one is right, and the other is wrong. We're not scoring points here. The second thing I had hoped to gain is relative to the idea of the keris gaining more and more attributes as it moves through time. In my "Interpretation" article I stated a hypothesis of what I believed the Modern Keris to be at the moment of its appearance in Javanese culture. Put very simply, it was an hierarchical indicator with the character of a religious icon. Its use was limited to people who formed a part of the hierarchy of the Karaton of Majapahit. Now, perhaps the first characteristic that the keris acquired from outside influence was its spread from an elite group of people where it had a very specific purpose to a broader group of people who did not understand much about it all. These people were the traders and merchants who lived in enclaves along the North Coast of Jawa. It is on record that these people, many of whom were either foreigners or first generation descendants of foreigners, copied the style, ways, and dress of the Majapahit Karaton. They adopted the keris and began wearing it, copying the style of the lords of the Majapahit Karaton. We must not forget, that some of the princes and lords of the kraton were also traders and merchants who were in competition with the people from outside Jawa. These Javanese traders would certainly have known the relevance of the keris, but the foreigners could not have known much at all. They simply copied:- monkey see : monkey do. The keris then spread from the traders and merchants to lesser people, those who could afford a keris copied the leaders of their society, but these lesser people knew nothing of the relevance of the keris to the kraton hierarchy. Then eventually Islam replaced the old Hindu-Buddhist Javanese society, original understandings were lost, new understandings were generated. So, here is what I presently see as the first attribute of the keris that came from outside Javanese society and that produced a new way for the Javanese people to perceive the keris:- from being a hierarchical indicator of the elites, with the nature of a religious icon, it became a characteristic of Javanese dress, something that was worn and used by anybody who could afford it. Now, we have all these other attributes. Are any of them attributes that might have come from outside Javanese culture, or been generated by ideas from outside Javanese culture, or generated as a reaction to influences from outside Javanese culture? These questions are constantly running at the back of my mind, and have been for as long as I can remember. What I am now seeking are the ideas of other people. I acknowledge that it may require a little bit of concentrated thought and perhaps a smidgen of research to generate those ideas, so what I'm really trying to do is get people sufficiently interested to take a more or less serious approach to their declared interest:- the keris. |
Colonial influence can be alikened to a degree as "Western influence".
Which brings us to Western Magic: technology. Mind you - when the previous Pope of the Catholic Church died a few years ago much less was written about it in contrast to when the previous Boss at Apple Computers - Steve Jobs died. Such is the power of the Technological Cult we are all part of. So I´d reason that the forthcoming of firearms, railways etc must had influenced the Javanese at large and thus also their relationship with the Keris as well. How, I raelly dont know, but common sense would dictate that, that the arrival and adoption of the Western Magic of technology must had eaten away some of the fabric of the indegenious belief system. Mind you - I am not saying that the Javanese were not technologically savvy - I am saying that their technology came to co-exist with the Western. Thus change happened. Thanks, J. |
Thanks for your contribution Jussi.
Yes, the ways in which European ideas of "magic" might have influenced Javanese perceptions of not only the keris, but also of other aspects of Javanese life is something that as far as I know has not been subjected to close investigation. I'm thinking here of traditional European attitudes towards what we commonly regard as "magic". Don't forget that the early European contacts were a long time ago (16th century) and magic was still alive and well in Europe at that time and for a long time thereafter. I have sometimes played with the idea that a lot of so-called magic associated with the keris was actually a Dutch perception that flowed back into Javanese society. Javanese attitudes towards outsiders and those who are hierarchically superior to them are well documented, briefly you tell these people what you think they want to hear. From long personal experience, I can vouch for it that this attitude is still very much a part of the Javanese character. Then the technology came along, which as you point out must have had some effect. But what? Perhaps this technological invasion may have had no more effect than to facilitate supply of materials. The Javanese may have a magical world view, but that world view does not exclude a very pragmatic approach to achieving their ends. Firearms? The Javanese were not strangers to firearms. I do not know when firearms were first used in Jawa, but under Sultan Agung (1614-1645) 800 pandais were put to work under the leadership of 8 mpus, in order to prepare weapons for the attack on the Dutch in Batavia. These weapons included massive canons. I do understand that a lot of people hesitate to read history, mostly because it is seen as deadest dry and boring, but Javanese history is pretty much like reading a history of the Mafia:- it is full of murder, blood, double crosses, and torture. Its good stuff. Here is a little snippet of Javanese history that demonstrates that except for Javanese duplicity Jawa may well have become a tributary state of China, with the consequential effect of a type of colonial influence from China. It is about the time when Kublai Khan attempted to invade Jawa. In the 13th century the Mongols attempted to invade Jawa. Kublai Khan had sent emissaries to Singhasari to ask for tribute. King Kertanegara of Singhasari took offense at this and decided that he had been insulted, so he branded the faces of the emissaries and cut off their ears, sent them back to China. Well, Kublai in turn was insulted by this action, so he put together a force to invade Jawa and punish Kertanegara. Big force, 1000 ships, 30,000 men. Kublai wasn't going to screw around with this impudent little crud Kertanegara, he was going to wipe the floor with him. When the invaders reached Jawa they found that Kertanegara had already been killed and replaced by Jayakatwang, who had been the ruler of a tributary state, Kediri. Raden Wijaya was Ketanegara's son-in-law, and thought he had a pretty good claim to be the next ruler of Singhasari. So Raden Wijaya made the Mongol commanders an offer that they couldn't refuse:- he'd help the Mongols defeat Jayakatwang and swear allegiance to the Great Khan, if the Mongols would help him get his kingdom back. Great deal. Everybody wins. Except of course Jayakatwang. One thing that the Mongols did not understand was that the Javanese fought in a completely different way, and held completely different values to those of the Mongols. Without taking another 5000 words to put down all of the twists and turns to this story, in brief, Raden Wijaya double crossed the Mongols after Jayakatwang was defeated. He attacked the Mongol forces, who retreated to their ships and sailed back to China, taking the captured Kertanegara with them, who was killed on the voyage back to China. Raden Wijaya was obviously a bloke with pretty big ideas. Today he would probably be the CEO of a major tech company, or maybe a bank, but back in 13th century Jawa those two opportunities were not available, so what did he do after kicking the Mongols off Jawa? He founded a kingdom:- Majapahit. Majapahit is seen by the Javanese as the Golden Age of Jawa. Not dissimilar to the way in which the British see the Arthurian age and its legends. I started this thread to try to extract some ideas from other people who have an interest in the keris, but as it has developed I am getting the feeling that here is an opportunity to try to raise the interest of my fellow students of the keris in delving into the fields of history, sociology and anthropology in order to gain a better understanding of the keris. As the understanding develops, so will the ideas. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Regarding blacksmithing, just about every culture has regarded it as a magickal act for some period, turning ore and base metal into useful tools and weapons through an act of will by the smith. Metal workers were often looked upon as magicians or alchemists by the common folk who did not possess their knowledge of the craft. It is, in fact, impossible for me personally to view the act of creating a keris as anything but a magickal act even without considering the ritual magick aspect of prays, mantras and other magickal intentions that were placed into the keris while working the metal into a dagger. The Dutch colonist's perception of this magickal act may have been somewhat different from the Javanese in specifics, but i would find it hard to believe that the Javanese culture did not have a very strong sense that the mpu's work was indeed a magickal art in its essence long before any contact was made with the West. |
Possibly David, possibly.
What I actually wrote, and what Jussi picked up on was this:- "Yes, the ways in which European ideas of "magic" might have influenced Javanese perceptions of not only the keris, but also of other aspects of Javanese life is something that as far as I know has not been subjected to close investigation." I used inverted commas around the word magic, because I was talking about the European concepts of magic rather than the way in which Javanese people understand parallel concepts. In Javanese the word for what we think of as stage magic is "sulap", and actually it has the sense of sleight of hand. The word for black magic is "sihir" , which is from the Arabic, it is not an indigenous word, and I believe that in the Arabic it actually means asking for help from demons or evil spirits to harm somebody, essentially it is what people in European societies think of as "black magic". This word does not appear in Old Javanese, so it is a pretty recent way of looking at the idea of using the dark forces of the Hidden World. Those Javanese who have been influenced by Western Culture probably now have concepts of magic that are not much different from the concepts of magic held by lay people in European societies, but the indigenous Javanese concepts relating to what Europeans might think of as magic are quite different to these. I believe it goes without saying that we can automatically exclude stage magic, or sulap, from consideration. In fact, when I wrote the word "magic" it didn't even occur to me that there is something called stage magic, I guess because I never think of these performances in these terms. So yes, I did sort of sidestep Jussi's reference to the magic of technology, simply because I did not really want to write thousands of words in trying to explain why the Javanese would never confuse technological advancement with their own ideas of supernatural forces, any more than they would confuse the working of supernatural forces with sleight of hand. Javanese people simply do not think in this way. When the Europeans first came to Jawa they came into contact with an advanced culture, a culture that had had contact with the civilisations of China and India for over 1000 years. The Javanese were already familiar with the technology that these Indian and Chinese civilisations used, and they had adopted some of this technology for themselves. After the industrial revolution in Europe, when technology took off and we saw the move to the cities in the British Isles and Western Europe, the Javanese had already been in close contact with the Dutch and other Europeans, for well over 100 years. We could comfortably liken the situation of the Javanese to the situation of Europeans who were living in rural areas of Britain, or perhaps France or Italy:- remote from daily contact with advanced technology, but certainly not unfamiliar with its existence. In our own time we have seen the appearance on the scene of personal computers. My first real job was in the data processing section of a major government organisation. Around 80 or 100 girls putting holes into little cards, other girls reading those cards, others working on comptometers (machines for mathematical calculation), a mostly male administrative staff of perhaps 30 people, over 6000 square feet of floor space. At the time, mid-1950's, this was an advanced information technology --- even though it originated in the 18th century and what we were using in the mid-1950's probably hadn't changed all that much since about 1920. These days I carry greater computing capacity in my briefcase, than was available from all those old IBM machines and the enormous staff required to operate them. This is truly magic --- or very rapid technological advancement --- but it didn't stun me as it developed, I knew it was happening, I saw it coming, as did any educated person in our society. I believe that the Javanese who saw the introduction of European technology to Jawa during the 19th century would have had a similar attitude. At least the educated ones would have. Farmers and other people who were out of the mainstream in rural backwaters would probably be somewhat more amazed, but I have not encountered any evidence that would suggest that any Javanese would have confused advanced technology with the magic associated with his own unseen world. The Javanese of any time after European contact were not primitive natives who had no concept of the happenings in the world outside Jawa. They were members of an advanced culture, and could probably be regarded as living on the fringes of the civilised world. They could very certainly differentiate between technology with which they were not familiar, and the essence of the Unseen World. However, the way in which a Javanese person would regard the Unseen World and those things attributable to it, should not be confused with the way in which a person of Western European heritage would think of "magic". But if we do a fast forward to the 20th century, what we begin to see, I think, is the attitudes of educated Javanese people toward the keris mirroring the mystical/magical view of Western Europeans. When I am sometimes confronted by this I cannot help but ask myself where these ideas came from. I know I did use the word "magic", but I used this word as something associated with European ideas. In truth, I try in so far as is possible to avoid the use of this word in respect of the keris or of other aspects of Javanese society and culture. In the European mindset the keris can possibly be thought of as a "magical" thing in some ways, but in the Javanese mindset the relevant ideas simply do not translate in any way as any type of magic that a European could readily understand. This is a bit like trying to understand the indigenous Javanese ideas associated with what happens to the human essence after death. People of European heritage simply do not have a frame of reference to allow them to understand. Now, when we consider death from the indigenous Javanese point of view, we come very close to a similar way in which the old Javanese people thought about the powers of the worker in the forge. The concept of death embodies the concept of rebirth. Anybody from any agricultural based society anywhere in the world is unable to escape from this idea:- things die, and they are reborn next season. The society of Jawa is an agriculturally based society. The idea of death embraces the idea of rebirth, thus death is only a part of life, for life to exist, death must also exist. The worker in the forge fulfils a similar function:- he takes iron that is dead and he turns it into something that is living, but this living piece of iron will eventually perish, only to be renewed again. The iron changes, but it does not disappear, its form alters, but it is only waiting to be brought back to life by the worker in the forge. This is not magic. It is simply the way in which the world functions, and its there for everybody to see, all they need to do is to look. Candi Sukuh on Mt. Lawu is possibly associated with this relationship between the forge worker (pandai, mpu), and the renewal of souls.(O'Connor). But here we are specifically looking at the keris, and trying to consider how the ways in which Javanese people regard the keris might have been influenced by ideas and concepts that came into Javanese society from outside Javanese society. For example, traditionally the Javanese gentry have regarded the keris as a store of wealth. When did this attitude start to appear in Javanese society? Is it possible to identify any of the possible causes for its appearance in Javanese society? |
Quote:
It was not my intention to bring the concept of stage magic into the conversation at all. Of course we are not discussing that. I was simply explaining the use of the spelling "magicK" to differentiate it from common stage magic. Nor when i speak of magick am i in any way referring to either European or Javanese ideas about "black" magic. I am quite aware that the Javanese were not primitive people and would not be fooled by advanced technologies of the Europeans. I quite agree that as technology grows slowly before you it does not shock, surprise or fool you by its progress. This still does not mean that Western technology (and the culture, products want to, ideals and desires it brought with it) has not affected how Indonesians view the keris. The more that Javanese society has become influenced my modern technology and the information age, the more i believe they have moved away from their world view of the seen and unseen worlds. This world view is probably seen more like superstition with each proceeding generation. I find it interesting that you have tried to draw me into this discussion repetitively stating that there are no "rights" or "wrongs" on this issue, yet you seem to find fault in my opinion anyway. ;) |
David, if I have offended you I most sincerely apologise.
I extend my apology further if you have perceived my statement of opinion as a statement that finds fault with your opinion. You have put forward your opinion, I have put forward my opinion, as I have stated more than once, in this thread there are no rights and no wrongs. My objective is to try to draw out the opinions of all those who have an opinion, if this thread were to deteriorate into a point scoring match this would discourage people from floating their opinions. Thus, it began as, and as far as I am concerned, it remains simply a place to put forward an opinion. Nobody is necessarily right, and nobody is necessarily wrong. Just opinions. The point I was trying to make, and that I apparently failed to do, is that the Javanese may have a concept that a European would regard as magic, but the Javanese perception of that concept would be not be similar to the European perception. The Javanese person would think about the idea in a different way to the way in which the European person would think about the same idea. To a degree I've dug my own grave here, by straying into commenting on an area of keris belief and Javanese belief that I am usually very careful to avoid, except in face to face discussion with people who have the background that permits them to accept as understood many of the ideas associated with this area of Javanese culture. I have absolutely no problem at all with you, or anybody else considering some of the things about the keris, and about Javanese culture as being either "magick", or "magic". This is an individual prerogative. In fact, the Javanese word "sihir" is very close to the Oxford definition of magic, but that Javanese word is not an indigenous Javanese word, and does not represent an indigenous Javanese concept that can be applied to the keris. However, many of the ideas that both enthusiasts outside and inside Jawa now apply to the keris do come within the ambit of the Oxford definition of "magic". So, to return to the main thrust of this thread:- where might some of these ideas have come from, and why? Did "sihir" enter the language along with Sufism? David, again I apologise for any offense , negation, insult or criticism which you may find in my comments, please be assured, I am not attacking you, I am merely stating my opinion, which you are welcome to accept or reject as you see fit. Edit I probably should mention that when I think about magic within the Western European framework, I am thinking in terms of the folk ideas of magic, the ideas of magic held by the common people that have been handed down to them by their ancestors, and represented in the English language by the Oxford definition. I do not have the specialist knowledge necessary to presume to comment of the ideas of Aleister Crowley's "magick". |
Oh Alan, you should know mw well enough at this point to know that i am in no way insulted by your comments. You have certainly written nothing that i could be offended by.
Quote:
However, if, as you state, many of the ideas that both enthusiasts outside and inside Jawa now apply to the keris do come within the ambit of the Oxford definition of "magic" then it does indeed seem that those ideas of "magic" may indeed have entered the Javanese understanding from an outside source and you are probably right to imply that Islam/Sufism may have been that source. It seems to me that the idea of djinn and maleficent forces of the unseen world that can be used by unscrupulous individuals to wield power in the seen world is an Arabian concept. It is not, however, what i mean when i say that the keris is a magickal object. ;) |
Thank you for your reassurances that I have not insulted you David, but have merely been a source of frustration. I regret this frustration that I have caused you, but I probably cannot avoid causing some degree of frustration, or maybe merely dissatisfaction, because to address all that would need to be addressed to provide a clear understanding of the differences between your base, the European lay person's base, and the various levels that can apply in Jawa, would use an enormous amount of time and an enormous amount of words. Certainly more than have a place in a thread in an on line discussion group, a thread that declares in the first sentence that its purpose is to seek opinions. Possibly in order to gain those opinions we may need to engage in some rather convoluted discussion, but I do hope we can keep that to a minimum.
I'm going to use an analogy here in the hope that this may clarify why I keep repeating that there is a basic difference in the way that European people and Javanese people think that precludes the understanding of ideas and approaches to the world that we cannot see. This difference would apply as much to European understanding of that which is Javanese, as it would apply to Javanese understanding of that which is European. Moreover, because time alters perception the understandings and misunderstanding have altered throughout time. To address the time factor, I will set my analogy in the second half of the 19th century; near enough to us in time to have some appreciation of the differences between that time and the present, and far enough away from us in time to permit comparison with the present. Belief systems are an integral part of the human experience. The belief systems that any particular society, or person within a society chooses, or is obliged, to use are indicative of that society's or person's needs and obligations, and the availability of resources to satisfy those needs and obligations. Food is similarly a necessity that permits the continuation of the human experience:- without food, we die. Except perhaps for some notably Indian extremists who apparently have been able to live for very extended periods of time in the complete absence of food --- but I think we can exclude those good people from consideration. So, here we are in County Cork, Ireland, in 1875. Thomas Patrick considers that the peak of culinary delight is a good solid stew, full of mutton, potatoes, onions, parsley and with lots of good heavy dumplings. Thomas Patrick is a poor tenant farmer, he hasn't seen this sort of meal on his table often, but it is his dream cuisine. But over the water in London, Cyril Peregrine enjoys nothing so much at table as a good roast with the usual side dishes. Cyril Peregrine is a member of the English upper class. On the other side of the world, just outside Sragen in Central Jawa Pak Sigit is a poor tenant farmer, just like Thomas Patrick in County Cork. Once, many years ago Pak Sigit had been fortunate enough to be invited to his landlord's house for a gathering, and he had tasted kalak. He had never been able to afford to try it again, but sometimes in his weaker moments he would dream of that kalak, and his mouth would water. Three different people, in three different societies with three different cultural bases. All three have different ideas of what makes a really good meal. Thomas Patrick and Cyril Peregrine would be able to eat each other's food, they might not enjoy it quite as much as their own food, but they could eat it. But could they eat Pak Sigit's dream cuisine? Not likely. In fact I would suggest that the mere smell of the chilli used in that dish of kalak would cause their eyes to water, make them sneeze and keep them 20 meters from the table. What would Pak Sigit think of Irish stew and a traditional English roast? Well, he could undoubtedly eat either, but would he enjoy them? No. In fact he would disallow them because of their blandness and for another very important reason:- neither meal is served with rice. A Javanese does not consider that he has had a proper meal unless it is based around rice. If the time frame and the situation were to be changed, we would probably see Tom and Cy come to enjoy kalak, perhaps after living in Jawa for an extended period of time. In the 21st century Pak Sigit's grandson might win a scholarship to Oxford or Cambridge and come to truly love roast beef. Even in Jawa itself many of the younger generation drool over McDonald's and Pizza Hut --- mostly because they see it as a prestige thing to be able to eat this delightful cuisine. So, food and belief systems. Both necessary for continuation of the human experience. What is acceptable, nay, necessary, or perhaps essential to a person from one cultural base is not necessarily palatable or even understandable by a person from a different cultural base. Not without first gaining a thorough understanding of the society that has grown from that different cultural base, and perhaps not even then. To return to here and now. This difference and the difficulties involved in explanation, most especially in things associated with Javanese/Balinese perceptions of the Unseen World are the reason that I do try to avoid discussion in this area of knowledge unless I am in the physical presence of a person who has an understanding of the cultural base and society associated with the topic. Quite simply it is not possible to understand one world view when working from the base of an entirely different world view. David, I do hope that the opinions I have expressed above will clarify my position in this matter. |
An Indonesian friend of mine, who follows this forum but isn't registered, shared with me his view on the topic today. Coming from someone who grew up in the Javanese culture, I thought it worthwhile to post it here (with his permission):
Quote:
|
Thank you very much for passing along these comments Gajah.
Yes, I would agree that your friend's comments do accurately reflect some of the opinions of some Javanese people, and as such are undoubtedly of interest. Thank you again. Edit An after-thought that may be of interest. I can recall an occasion when I accompanied a family friend who had been employed to dig a new well for a village near Boyolali. The location had already been established, and the purpose of the visit was to go to the site with a dukun (shaman) to ask for permission from the spirit who inhabited the location, if a well could be dug. Offerings were made, prayers recited, the dukun went into a trance-like state, and eventually a white presence that looked something like a snake emerged from the ground. The dukun spoke with the presence and the presence replied with instructions on what needed to be done before the well was dug. The man employed to dig the well did not understand anything that was said, and neither did I, and we heard nothing but the voice of the dukun. Nor did I see the white presence, but according to the well digger, something did appear out of the ground that had a snake-like appearance, but was also something like smoke. Neither of us heard anything but the voice of the dukun. However, the people of the village were satisfied that the correct permission for the well had been obtained, and the well was dug and produced water. |
Quote:
|
Please accept my apologies for causing you any confusion David. I guess it is probably inevitable that some confusion must be generated when we are limited in discussion by what we can put on paper, but even so, I perhaps should have been more explicit with some of what I have written, although in all honesty, it did not occur to me that questions such as the ones you have framed might even arise. I sometimes take too much for granted. Call it a character fault.
You've raised a number of questions, so probably the easiest way for me to respond is to interpolate my responses:- Do you believe that all Javanese share the same world view? No, and I'll go further, I do not believe that even the same Javanese person holds a consistent world view. The way most people see the world can vary according to situation, and that idea of "situation" automatically embraces the concept of time. This applies no less to a Javanese person than it does to anybody else. For instance, the modern Javanese engineer who has come from a village background could well espouse one world view when in the work place, or outside his village environment, but when he is back in the village, he becomes a member of the village hierarchy and will adopt the hierarchical position and world view that is expected of him. What about Westerners, or even to be more specific, how about Americans? I'll assume that "Westerners" is near enough the same as "people from a Western European cultural base", thus, everybody in the Old World, plus those of us whose ancestors came from that Old World. No, of course not, there is observable wide variation in the way different people from this base see and react to the world around them. I'll assume that the generality already stated applies as much to all non-indigenous people from all the Americas as much as it does to people anywhere else with the group delineated by paragraph 1 of this response. Of course, if we include indigenous people within the group, then again, we can expect situational variation in probably most cases, however, in the case of indigenous people who are still living as their ancestors lived, then it might be necessary to carry out very specific investigation of each individual group before any opinion could be formed. Do you believe that my own personal world view is more likely to be closer to your own or what you might perceive as a Javanese world view? No idea at all David. I'm sorry. Or perhaps that my own world view is closer to whatever you believe to be the generic American world view? Again, I am completely unable to answer this question. If you could answer these questions what evidence would you base these assumption on? What I've written above are not assumptions, they are opinions. In one case above I have given a very brief outline of an informed opinion, in another case I have given an opinion that could probably be described as the opinion of an educated layman, in a couple of cases I have not given an opinion at all, simply because I have insufficient information to form an opinion. One of the beauties of opinions is that anybody can have an opinion, and that opinion does not require any evidence at all to support it --- unless the person stating the opinion wishes others to adopt it, in which case he might well wheel out a whole barrow load of evidence. My position in this thread is that any opinion that I state is up there for others to accept or reject as they see fit. I'm not pushing any barrow here. I don't care if anybody accepts my opinion, and I care even less if they reject it. In fact, I am more than happy to hear any argument against any of my opinions, and I won't argue back. This thread was started to extract opinions. Arguing against the opinions of others is not really such a great way to encourage people to state their opinions. David, in respect of the quote that preceded your questions:- Quite simply it is not possible to understand one world view when working from the base of an entirely different world view. As already stated, this is my opinion. It is an opinion that I have formed after a very long time spent reading anthropological text books, and reinforced by very close personal contact with two cultures that are not my own --- well, in one case very close and very lengthy contact, in the other case lengthy contact but lacking the same degree of personal contact. This opinion seems to me to reflect a widely held opinion within the community formed of professional anthropologists. These people could well be wrong. My own opinion, although an informed opinion, could well be wrong. I have many character faults, and one of these is that when somebody can demonstrate that something I believe to be true, is in fact untrue, I am not offended in any way, rather I welcome the revelation of a new truth. So it is, that if you can demonstrate that the opinion of mine that you have quoted is in fact inaccurate and insupportable, then I will welcome that revelation. |
Quote:
Quote:
How ever, things are not so black and white. - There is grey also, and that is where the exchange of ideas and opinions can, and will, happen granted that there is motivation for communication. What Alan states above is that it is not possible to understand one world view when working from the base of another. With this - as a child of a mixed marriage between parents coming from two whole different cultures - I wholeheartedly concur and disagree. - It is not possible! Yet it is possible! Uhmm... What? :confused: Well... It is my opinion that one can learn to understand a foreign world view technically and thus learn to cope with it. This understanding how ever is clinical in it´s nature. Clinical in the same way that one can learn to play an instrument technically correct yet completely void of that intangible "tribe-uniting" emotional content that makes other people to make a connection with it. So, is the technically competent musician a musician to begin with or a fraud? What makes a musician? Alike we could ask what is the nature of the understanding we are actually discussing herein? |
I think that maybe we’re on the same page here Jussi.
Speaking in very general terms, I believe it is possible for somebody from one culture/society to understand the way in which people from a different culture/society perceive, understand, act and react in respect of the world around them, and the people around them. In fact, this is the core of the profession of anthropology. However, these anthropologists do not gain this understanding by working from their own cultural or societal base, they first learn, as an academic discipline, the cultural or societal base that they wish to use in their evaluation of that culture or society. They learn the way in which to observe, evaluate, measure. In this, one thing is true:- time alters perspective. We can think about this statement in similar terms to the idea of Albert E’s ideas on relativity: stand up close to a moving train it looks different to the way it looks if we stand off at a distance. So, if we are evaluating a culture, or a society as it is at the present time, it will appear to be different to what is was , say, 500 years ago. However, there will fundamental elements in the culture/society that remain more or less constant both for now, and for 500 years ago. This understanding of the way in which people from a different cultural base see and understand things is an understanding that can be learnt, and in the case of Jawa there has been more than enough work done in this field for a good understanding to be gained purely from study of the written word. However, for a person to be able to understand in the same way as people from a different culture or society understand, is a whole different thing than merely understanding the way in which they understand. Many years ago I had a close friend who was department head of anthropology at Sydney University. We had lots of conversations about all sorts of things ranging from the best way to skin a kangaroo to the idea of witchcraft in 17th century Bulgaria. I’ve forgotten most of what he said, but one thing he said has remained firmly in my memory. Broadly it was this:- the idea of “heaven”, or of “going to heaven after death” is completely different for a traditional Chinese person and a person from a Western European society. The word used by the Chinese person to describe the place equivalent to our heaven will translate into English as “heaven”, but it is totally impossible for an Englishman, or a Frenchman, or other Western European to understand what this idea of heaven means to the Chinese person, because the Western European and the Chinese person are working from entirely different cultural bases which affect the way in which they think and evaluate the world around them and the concept of “existence”. To come back to Jawa, I believe it is possible for any person with sufficient interest to learn the way in which a traditional Javanese person understands the world, and how he evaluates things working with that world view. But to understand in the same way that the traditional Javanese person understands is very probably not possible unless one is born and lives his entire life as a traditional Javanese person. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:11 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.