OK.
Not a KLO.
That puts you in agreement with a number of notable people in Jawa, Kai Wee.
But its not much of a keris. Low quality, poor form. Not much going for it at all. Maybe even somebody's first attempt at a keris.
The point I'm trying to make is that these blades that are currently being produced in Malaysia, and that I have not yet seen, might fall into this same category of poorly made keris.
It takes time to develop the skill and understanding necessary to create a properly proportioned and executed blade.
I'm not saying that KLO's do not exist, what I am trying to say is that when we describe something as a keris like object, rather than a keris, we could well be adopting an elitist position which we are not really entitled to take.
Inevitably we are going to collect what we like. In fact, I personally feel that this is really the only relevant guideline upon which to build a collection, that is, to collect what you like. As one's knowledge increases , so will his level of discernment --- hopefully --- and the quality of what one likes will rise.
Well, that's the theory. But it doesn't always work like that, because some people never advance in an appreciation of quality, and then there are others who have learnt to recognise quality, have acquired quality, but have turned back to favour keris which lack the quality of known mpus, or of the modern perfectionists, and have directed their attention to the seemingly more humble work of village makers. It is widely rumored that this was the direction that was taken by that noted connoisseur Panembahan Harjonegoro during the several years prior to his passing.
Then there is the "social" factor, as you note. If we have a number of collectors who associate together, as is the case with collectors groups and societies in Indonesia and Malaysia, then the less experienced will be led by the more influential members of the group, and in such a situation there are many possibilities, including the value and nature of a person's collection becoming a measure within the hierarchy of the group.
This situation can be both beneficial and detrimental to the acquisition of a true understanding of the keris. Much depends upon the influential people within these groups.
My own feeling is that if we are to truly understand the keris, we should not limit ourselves to a single style, or a single period, or a single area of production, but we should try to understand what is expressed in the entire range of keris.
Certainly our natural likes and dislikes will direct us towards one style, or period , but to better understand our own chosen sub-field, I feel that we need to also have some understanding of the keris that fall outside that sub-field.
And this brings us back to the dreaded KLO's.
My feeling is that a genuine student of the keris could do a lot worse than to keep at least one example of this type of keris. If we only know perfection it can become very difficult to recognize imperfection.
|