It's as if the way Durga is described here by the Rijksmuseum is closer to a narrow and probably wholly erroneous perception of Kali. Though I don't think that was the understanding or intention behind the author and it seems that they hadn't put much thought into it (although they should have).
I do wonder if that description of Durga is derived from the photographer's contemporaneous notes or impressions. It would make far more sense if that were the case because the reading is tinged with what you might expect of a person or institution who'd be inclined to view Javanese culture as an "exotic" one. Another way to describe it might be orientalist in the Edward Said sense.
I actually almost completely passed over how they chose to describe Durga and chose more to question whether the figure is actually Durga, before quickly putting that question to bed pretty quickly in my own mind because it's not a question that was as interesting to me at the time of posting. But in my studies I do intend to better understand the figures that are commonly represented in and on krisses, along with why they are represented.
I'm glad you had paid more attention to this than I did if only to encourage us to understand Durga in a way that is more truthful and thoughtful. Thank you Alan.
|