Shadow Keris - Page 2

A. G. Maisey · 27th November 2010, 10:58 PM

Yes Kai Wee, perhaps you're right about the pics of KLO's --- but they would be useful.

However.

Style and personal taste may be a factor in how we structure our collections, but speaking for myself, I do not apply the same standards to all keris. I can like one keris for one thing, a different keris for a different thing, so whether we're talking about recent flamboyance, or the quiet grace of a previous time, it makes no difference to my personal appraisal, because I do not apply the same standards to every keris:- one is appraised according to one set of standards, another is appraised according to a different set of standards, and my personal taste encompasses all variations.

In fact, some of the keris which I consider to be "core collection" are keris which I believe the vast bulk of collectors, and most certainly all connoisseurs, would not look at twice.

When we introduce the requirement for a blade to be able to be used as a weapon, we have started down a new road.

Probably the two most generally accepted relevant factors for use as a weapon are firstly balance, and secondly that the blade has undergone some form of heat treatment.

As a weapon a keris is essentially a short rapier. It needs to be able to pierce. It does not usually need to be able to pierce metal, nor even leather, it needs to pierce soft fabric and skin. However, at the time in history when keris might have had to pierce metal, at least some Javanese mpus did make blades that were capable of doing this.

Even an iron blade will function well as a weapon when only fabric and skin need to be pierced, and iron cannot be hardened. In fact, even sharpened bambu makes an effective weapon when only fabric and skin need to be pierced.

So how relevant is the requirement of a heat-treat to the function of a blade as a weapon?

A keris is not a tool for cutting, as is a skinning knife, so it does not need to be able to hold an edge particularly well.

The makers of times past were well aware of this, and they were also well aware that when you harden steel you weaken it.

This is the reason why old blades were never hardened for their full length, and very often we will find an old blade that has only had the first few inches back from the point hardened.

If we consider the question of balance, we find that many Javanese nem-neman blades have appalling balance. Sometimes in Solo these keris are referred to as "crowbars" (lingis). However these keris are very highly regarded and carry values in accordance with this high regard.

In respect of a very high quality newly made keris, that has not been subjected to heat treatment, or one of the Javanese nem-neman keris that have not been heat treated, the matter of accidental damage to an edge is not something that is open to consideration, for the simple reason that these keris are treated as very valuable art works and any action that could cause damage to the blade is carefully guarded against.

It is not relevant to compare a Japanese blade to a keris, especially a Javanese keris, as the way in which each of these blades are appraised is entirely different.

Equally, it is not valid to appraise all the various types of keris under the same set of standards:- the standards that we can apply to a Javanese keris are not necessarily valid when applied to a keris from a different area, and the same is true of keris which come from different periods in time. We do not appraise a keris from the time of Pakubuwana X in the same way as we do a keris from the classification of Pajang.

Whilst it is true that we each might have our own standards for those things that we collect, and these standards will reflect our own individual tastes, it is equally true that in any field of art or craft there are certain universal standards that are agreed to by the broad population of collectors in that field.

It is these standards that perhaps we could attempt to delineate.

If the minimum requirements for a keris to be regarded as "real" could be set forth, then perhaps we might find that some of these KLO's are in fact just keris that have failed to achieve an acceptable standard of quality, rather than objects that are not in fact, keris.

The photo below is submitted with this question:-

Is this blade a keris?

BluErf · 28th November 2010, 02:09 AM

Ok, I see the conundrum I'm getting myself into.

Perhaps I have 1 static set of standards which is based on kerises from a particular region and time period. In a nutshell, I'm 'frozen' in one time-space locus of the keris world and seeing and judging the rest of the time-space loci through the same tinted glasses.

In the end, as a collector, do we collect what resonates deeply with ourselves, or perceive what the majority of collectors value and go with that? To be recognized as an established collector, perhaps the latter is more important. And increasingly, I believe that collecting is not so much a knowledge-based (ok, it plays a material role, but not all of it) process, but a political/social process in which recognition is given by the rest of the collectors to some collectors with the right mix of social characteristics (influence, wealth, intelligence, social network, etc). So much so that some of them can start out collecting things that nobody never really cast a second look at, and soon, many others want to collect it too. In the keris world, I think it is not so much that nobody wants to collect kerises as a category, but within the world of kerises, what type of kerises are desirable. Maybe with time, some of the really fancy kerises exhibited at the recent Pameran could be the mainstream desired type of kerises to collect for their creativity and flamboyant flair.

Regarding the keris you have posted, it is a simple keris, but the feeling I get from it is that it is made by a serious student of the keris. It is not the most artistic, but I have the feeling that the intent to make a proper keris is there. The commercial drive behind this keris is not strong, and it certainly does not have the impressive dapur seen in the likes of those new kelengan malela kerises. Forced to choose between the two, I will pick this simpler keris. So in short, I would say this is a keris, and not a KLO.

BluErf · 28th November 2010, 02:24 AM

Hmmm... I just realized that in my post above, another factor has been defined by myself - the intent behind the manufacture of a keris blade - a keris blade made for commercial reasons vs a blade made for non-commercial reasons. A blade made purely for sale seems to cheapen its worth according to my values, but I have to recognize that ultimately, craftsmen need to eat and support their families.

Then perhaps I would consider whether the keris maker has truly a passion for making kerises. Pride of the artisan in his craft and art? Am I buying that pride?

And if it was an old keris made for sale - a simple but function keris kodi? I would be more inclined to accept it (though I may not buy it) because of the history and cultural overlay to it. The commercial old keris then becomes a vessel holding a bit of cultural significance because it was some past man-in-the-village's personal carry keris.

Questions for introspection, and it seems that even for myself, my 1 set of standards is not so fixed.

tunggulametung · 28th November 2010, 01:10 PM

I must admit that when mentioning nice blades in my earlier post, I don't count some aspect like material, forging, lamination etc. It is rather uneasy to observe lamination on some, especially contemporary Peninsula blade which stained with warangan on computer screen. In my opinion, other than being more practical for long term storage-providing better resistance to rust, a blade without pamor didn't benefit from the process. What I observe the most is the garap, please let me know Malay terminology for this. But then I only have my understanding from the internet, those who are in Malaysia/Singapore must know the exact situation better then me. When I mention social networking/blog, it is mostly Multiply which I refer to. I remember youtube has interesting video about Malay smith on action too. For these style I've no worry. What I worry probably is the future of Bugis/Bugis style blade which seems fading away.

tunggulametung · 28th November 2010, 01:30 PM

I think it is significance to remind anyone to the legend of Keris Mpu Gandring in this thread and how important smith in older time (although it is Javanese tale and might be fiction as well).

source: http://candi.pnri.go.id/jawa_timur/s..._singasari.htm
Legend around Singasari Dynasty

Some temples in East Java, especially around Malang, have a close historical connection to the Singasari Kingdom. Singasari dynasty descended from Ken Dedes and her two husbands, Tunggul Ametung an akuwu (chief of an area comparable to present day Subdistrict) of Tumapel and Ken Arok, a commoner who killed Tunggul Ametung and seized his power and wife.

The history of Singasari Kingdom has given birth to a legend of Kris (Javanese double-edged dagger) Mpu Gandring that is highly popular among the people of East Java. Legend has it that Ken Arok was born out of an affair between a woman from Panawijen village named Ken Endog and Brahma. Shortly after his birth, baby Ken Arok was abandoned by his mother in a cemetery, and then was found and brought home by an experienced thief. From his stepfather, Ken Arok learned many things, such as murder, gambling and robbery. Young Ken Arok became the meanest bandit around Tumapel and people were afraid of him. One day, Ken Arok met a Brahmin priest called Dang Hyang Lohgawe and the priest advised him to leave his walk of life. Following the advice of the priest, Ken Arok quit being a criminal and became a Tumapel soldier.

The then chief of Tumapel, an area within Kediri Kingdom, was Tunggul Ametung, who married Ken Dedes, the daughter of Mpu Purwa who lived in Panawijen village. A son named Anusapati was born out of the marriage. One day Ken Dedes went home to see her father. As she stepped down from her imperial carriage, a strong wind blew open her under skirt. Ken Arok, who was on duty of escorting the carriage, briefly saw the thighs of Tunggul Ametung’s wife. To the eyes of Ken Arok, the thighs produced a sparkling light. The scene lingered on the mind of Ken Arok. He then asked Mpu Parwa about what he had seen. The master explained that the light was an omen that Ken Dedes was predestined to be a woman who would descend kings on the island of Java.

Ken Arok then ordered a Kris from a Kris master (mpu) in Tumapel named Mpu Gandring. It takes long to forge, shape, and follow the necessary rituals to make a reliably powerful Kris. Because the completion of his Kris was dragging on, Ken Arok became very angry. He snatched the unfinished Kris and stabbed it to the body of its maker. Dying, Mpu Gandring cast a curse upon Ken Arok that he too would meet the same fate to be killed by the same Kris and that the Kris would take seven lives. Ken Arok lent Mpu Gandring Kris to his colleague, Kebo Ijo, who liked to show off. Kebo Ijo showed the Kris to his fellow soldiers and bragged that the Kris was his. After it became a common knowledge that the Kris was Kebo Ijo’s, Ken Arok stole and used it to stab Tunggul Ametung. As it was expected, people, who were under the impression that the Kris belonged to Kebo Ijo, accused him for the murder while Ken Arok walked freely and took over Tunggul Ametung’s place as the chief and married Ken Dedes.

Soon after he became the chief, Ken Arok conquered Kediri Kingdom, which was under the reign of King Kertajaya (1191-1222). Upon defeating Kediri Kingdom, Ken Arok declared the establishment of Singasari Kingdom and made himself its first king entitled Rajasa Bathara Sang Amurwabhumi. Ken Arok had a son named Mahisa Wongateleng from his marriage to Dari Ken Dedes, and another son named Tohjaya from his marriage to Ken Umang. Then, Mpu Gandring’s curse started to happen. Anusupati killed Ken Arok and took over his throne, Tohjaya came up and killed Anusupati and claimed the throne. In turn, Ranggawuni, Anusupati’s son, killed Tohjaya and came to reign. Ranggawuni was addressed Jayawisnuwardhana and ruled Singasari from 1227 until 1268. Jayawisnuwardhana was succeeded by his son, Joko Dolog, who was called Kertanegara (1268-1292).

Kertanegara was the last of Singasari kings. He was overthrown by Jayakatwang, the king of Kediri. Jayakatwang, however, was defeated by Kertanegara’s son-in-law, Raden Wijaya, who was the descendant of Mahisa Wongateleng and King Udayana from Bali. Later, Raden Wijaya established a new kingdom named Majapahit and ruled the kingdom from an area called Tarik (Trowulan).

A. G. Maisey · 28th November 2010, 10:27 PM

Oh yes, Mpu Gandring and Ken Arok.

Essential reading for anybody who wishes to understand the nature of Jawa.

The lessons taught in this little story still hold true today.

I like the taste and decorum exhibited in this version.

In the original, good ole Kenny boy saw a bit more than just thighs.

A. G. Maisey · 28th November 2010, 10:57 PM

Quote:-

In my opinion, other than being more practical for long term storage-providing better resistance to rust, a blade without pamor didn't benefit from the process.

Tunggalametung, I guess you mean the process of lamination, ie, the repeated folding and welding of material ?

In the original keris of Jawa, this was not an option, it was a requisite part of the process of making a keris.

The material available was of various types and various qualities, so in order to produce material that was of adequate quality for use as a weapon, it was necessary to weld the small available pieces together, and then repeatedly fold and weld to remove the impurities. This repeated folding and welding created a pattern in the material, which eventually came to be recognised as an indicator of a weapon's integrity, and as a consequence was demanded by the paying customers. This was the birth of pamor.

To provide a harder edge than could be obtained from the iron used in the pamor material, a thin sliver of steel was inserted between the plates of pamor. Steel is very expensive to produce by the old technologies.

When higher quality material became available in areas outside of Jawa and Bali, and where the beliefs in pamor had not taken root, blades were produced from all steel.

If a piece of material was large enough,and of adequate quality, it was not necessary to amalgamate pieces of material by folding and welding, but if a large piece of material could not be obtained, then the folding and welding process was necessary, however, the material being brought together into one large piece was steel, and of much higher quality than the various ferric materials used in earlier times. This steel was obtained from imported commercial goods, such as tools imported from China, and tools and machinery from Europe. Much of the production of these keris lacking pamor appears to have been carried out by Chinese smiths, whose work was reputed to be of very high quality.

In the context of keris form, "garap" means "workmanship". In Bahasa Indonesia a synonym is "pembuatan". Maybe this same word is valid in Malay, I don't know.

A. G. Maisey · 28th November 2010, 11:17 PM

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.

tunggulametung · 29th November 2010, 01:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Quote:-

In my opinion, other than being more practical for long term storage-providing better resistance to rust, a blade without pamor didn't benefit from the process.

Tunggalametung, I guess you mean the process of lamination, ie, the repeated folding and welding of material ?
---------------------------------------------------

In the context of keris form, "garap" means "workmanship". In Bahasa Indonesia a synonym is "pembuatan". Maybe this same word is valid in Malay, I don't know.

Sorry for the misunderstanding but I was going to say warangan staining to a blade without pamor (kelengan as how I understand it). I personally think these blades were more stand out without previously mention staining. But when long term storage is in mind, combined with larger number of ones collection, it really help to protect the blade against rust-less time required to maintain. This is due to my personal observation that a blade with warangan staining is more immune to rust compare to one without. This all being said with previous discussion (in this forum) about keris storage in memory.

Thank you for the translations

BluErf · 30th November 2010, 03:03 PM

G'day Alan,

Indeed, when I referred to KLOs, I could have been too harsh and demanding. The world of keris just gets bigger and bigger the further/closer one looks...

Hi Tunggulametung,

After reading the story of Ken Arok, could I ask then why did you adopt Tunggul Ametung as your internet moniker? It's an interesting choice!

tunggulametung · 30th November 2010, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BluErf

Hi Tunggulametung,

After reading the story of Ken Arok, could I ask then why did you adopt Tunggul Ametung as your internet moniker? It's an interesting choice!

Hello BluErf,
I'm sorry to disappoint you, the interesting choice doesn't has any interesting reason. I should have use Airlangga, Gajah Mada or Ken Arok

27th November 2010, 10:58 PM	#31
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,892	Yes Kai Wee, perhaps you're right about the pics of KLO's --- but they would be useful. However. Style and personal taste may be a factor in how we structure our collections, but speaking for myself, I do not apply the same standards to all keris. I can like one keris for one thing, a different keris for a different thing, so whether we're talking about recent flamboyance, or the quiet grace of a previous time, it makes no difference to my personal appraisal, because I do not apply the same standards to every keris:- one is appraised according to one set of standards, another is appraised according to a different set of standards, and my personal taste encompasses all variations. In fact, some of the keris which I consider to be "core collection" are keris which I believe the vast bulk of collectors, and most certainly all connoisseurs, would not look at twice. When we introduce the requirement for a blade to be able to be used as a weapon, we have started down a new road. Probably the two most generally accepted relevant factors for use as a weapon are firstly balance, and secondly that the blade has undergone some form of heat treatment. As a weapon a keris is essentially a short rapier. It needs to be able to pierce. It does not usually need to be able to pierce metal, nor even leather, it needs to pierce soft fabric and skin. However, at the time in history when keris might have had to pierce metal, at least some Javanese mpus did make blades that were capable of doing this. Even an iron blade will function well as a weapon when only fabric and skin need to be pierced, and iron cannot be hardened. In fact, even sharpened bambu makes an effective weapon when only fabric and skin need to be pierced. So how relevant is the requirement of a heat-treat to the function of a blade as a weapon? A keris is not a tool for cutting, as is a skinning knife, so it does not need to be able to hold an edge particularly well. The makers of times past were well aware of this, and they were also well aware that when you harden steel you weaken it. This is the reason why old blades were never hardened for their full length, and very often we will find an old blade that has only had the first few inches back from the point hardened. If we consider the question of balance, we find that many Javanese nem-neman blades have appalling balance. Sometimes in Solo these keris are referred to as "crowbars" (lingis). However these keris are very highly regarded and carry values in accordance with this high regard. In respect of a very high quality newly made keris, that has not been subjected to heat treatment, or one of the Javanese nem-neman keris that have not been heat treated, the matter of accidental damage to an edge is not something that is open to consideration, for the simple reason that these keris are treated as very valuable art works and any action that could cause damage to the blade is carefully guarded against. It is not relevant to compare a Japanese blade to a keris, especially a Javanese keris, as the way in which each of these blades are appraised is entirely different. Equally, it is not valid to appraise all the various types of keris under the same set of standards:- the standards that we can apply to a Javanese keris are not necessarily valid when applied to a keris from a different area, and the same is true of keris which come from different periods in time. We do not appraise a keris from the time of Pakubuwana X in the same way as we do a keris from the classification of Pajang. Whilst it is true that we each might have our own standards for those things that we collect, and these standards will reflect our own individual tastes, it is equally true that in any field of art or craft there are certain universal standards that are agreed to by the broad population of collectors in that field. It is these standards that perhaps we could attempt to delineate. If the minimum requirements for a keris to be regarded as "real" could be set forth, then perhaps we might find that some of these KLO's are in fact just keris that have failed to achieve an acceptable standard of quality, rather than objects that are not in fact, keris. The photo below is submitted with this question:- Is this blade a keris? Attached Images Last edited by A. G. Maisey; 27th November 2010 at 11:26 PM.

28th November 2010, 01:10 PM	#34
tunggulametung Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 238	I must admit that when mentioning nice blades in my earlier post, I don't count some aspect like material, forging, lamination etc. It is rather uneasy to observe lamination on some, especially contemporary Peninsula blade which stained with warangan on computer screen. In my opinion, other than being more practical for long term storage-providing better resistance to rust, a blade without pamor didn't benefit from the process. What I observe the most is the garap, please let me know Malay terminology for this. But then I only have my understanding from the internet, those who are in Malaysia/Singapore must know the exact situation better then me. When I mention social networking/blog, it is mostly Multiply which I refer to. I remember youtube has interesting video about Malay smith on action too. For these style I've no worry. What I worry probably is the future of Bugis/Bugis style blade which seems fading away. Last edited by David; 29th November 2010 at 03:20 PM. Reason: Site listed was a commercial site

28th November 2010, 01:30 PM	#35
tunggulametung Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 238	I think it is significance to remind anyone to the legend of Keris Mpu Gandring in this thread and how important smith in older time (although it is Javanese tale and might be fiction as well). source: http://candi.pnri.go.id/jawa_timur/s..._singasari.htm Legend around Singasari Dynasty Some temples in East Java, especially around Malang, have a close historical connection to the Singasari Kingdom. Singasari dynasty descended from Ken Dedes and her two husbands, Tunggul Ametung an akuwu (chief of an area comparable to present day Subdistrict) of Tumapel and Ken Arok, a commoner who killed Tunggul Ametung and seized his power and wife. The history of Singasari Kingdom has given birth to a legend of Kris (Javanese double-edged dagger) Mpu Gandring that is highly popular among the people of East Java. Legend has it that Ken Arok was born out of an affair between a woman from Panawijen village named Ken Endog and Brahma. Shortly after his birth, baby Ken Arok was abandoned by his mother in a cemetery, and then was found and brought home by an experienced thief. From his stepfather, Ken Arok learned many things, such as murder, gambling and robbery. Young Ken Arok became the meanest bandit around Tumapel and people were afraid of him. One day, Ken Arok met a Brahmin priest called Dang Hyang Lohgawe and the priest advised him to leave his walk of life. Following the advice of the priest, Ken Arok quit being a criminal and became a Tumapel soldier. The then chief of Tumapel, an area within Kediri Kingdom, was Tunggul Ametung, who married Ken Dedes, the daughter of Mpu Purwa who lived in Panawijen village. A son named Anusapati was born out of the marriage. One day Ken Dedes went home to see her father. As she stepped down from her imperial carriage, a strong wind blew open her under skirt. Ken Arok, who was on duty of escorting the carriage, briefly saw the thighs of Tunggul Ametung’s wife. To the eyes of Ken Arok, the thighs produced a sparkling light. The scene lingered on the mind of Ken Arok. He then asked Mpu Parwa about what he had seen. The master explained that the light was an omen that Ken Dedes was predestined to be a woman who would descend kings on the island of Java. Ken Arok then ordered a Kris from a Kris master (mpu) in Tumapel named Mpu Gandring. It takes long to forge, shape, and follow the necessary rituals to make a reliably powerful Kris. Because the completion of his Kris was dragging on, Ken Arok became very angry. He snatched the unfinished Kris and stabbed it to the body of its maker. Dying, Mpu Gandring cast a curse upon Ken Arok that he too would meet the same fate to be killed by the same Kris and that the Kris would take seven lives. Ken Arok lent Mpu Gandring Kris to his colleague, Kebo Ijo, who liked to show off. Kebo Ijo showed the Kris to his fellow soldiers and bragged that the Kris was his. After it became a common knowledge that the Kris was Kebo Ijo’s, Ken Arok stole and used it to stab Tunggul Ametung. As it was expected, people, who were under the impression that the Kris belonged to Kebo Ijo, accused him for the murder while Ken Arok walked freely and took over Tunggul Ametung’s place as the chief and married Ken Dedes. Soon after he became the chief, Ken Arok conquered Kediri Kingdom, which was under the reign of King Kertajaya (1191-1222). Upon defeating Kediri Kingdom, Ken Arok declared the establishment of Singasari Kingdom and made himself its first king entitled Rajasa Bathara Sang Amurwabhumi. Ken Arok had a son named Mahisa Wongateleng from his marriage to Dari Ken Dedes, and another son named Tohjaya from his marriage to Ken Umang. Then, Mpu Gandring’s curse started to happen. Anusupati killed Ken Arok and took over his throne, Tohjaya came up and killed Anusupati and claimed the throne. In turn, Ranggawuni, Anusupati’s son, killed Tohjaya and came to reign. Ranggawuni was addressed Jayawisnuwardhana and ruled Singasari from 1227 until 1268. Jayawisnuwardhana was succeeded by his son, Joko Dolog, who was called Kertanegara (1268-1292). Kertanegara was the last of Singasari kings. He was overthrown by Jayakatwang, the king of Kediri. Jayakatwang, however, was defeated by Kertanegara’s son-in-law, Raden Wijaya, who was the descendant of Mahisa Wongateleng and King Udayana from Bali. Later, Raden Wijaya established a new kingdom named Majapahit and ruled the kingdom from an area called Tarik (Trowulan). Last edited by tunggulametung; 29th November 2010 at 09:12 AM. Reason: Adding missing words on the quote

28th November 2010, 02:09 AM	#32
BluErf Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Singapore Posts: 1,180	Ok, I see the conundrum I'm getting myself into. Perhaps I have 1 static set of standards which is based on kerises from a particular region and time period. In a nutshell, I'm 'frozen' in one time-space locus of the keris world and seeing and judging the rest of the time-space loci through the same tinted glasses. In the end, as a collector, do we collect what resonates deeply with ourselves, or perceive what the majority of collectors value and go with that? To be recognized as an established collector, perhaps the latter is more important. And increasingly, I believe that collecting is not so much a knowledge-based (ok, it plays a material role, but not all of it) process, but a political/social process in which recognition is given by the rest of the collectors to some collectors with the right mix of social characteristics (influence, wealth, intelligence, social network, etc). So much so that some of them can start out collecting things that nobody never really cast a second look at, and soon, many others want to collect it too. In the keris world, I think it is not so much that nobody wants to collect kerises as a category, but within the world of kerises, what type of kerises are desirable. Maybe with time, some of the really fancy kerises exhibited at the recent Pameran could be the mainstream desired type of kerises to collect for their creativity and flamboyant flair. Regarding the keris you have posted, it is a simple keris, but the feeling I get from it is that it is made by a serious student of the keris. It is not the most artistic, but I have the feeling that the intent to make a proper keris is there. The commercial drive behind this keris is not strong, and it certainly does not have the impressive dapur seen in the likes of those new kelengan malela kerises. Forced to choose between the two, I will pick this simpler keris. So in short, I would say this is a keris, and not a KLO.

28th November 2010, 02:24 AM	#33
BluErf Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Singapore Posts: 1,180	Hmmm... I just realized that in my post above, another factor has been defined by myself - the intent behind the manufacture of a keris blade - a keris blade made for commercial reasons vs a blade made for non-commercial reasons. A blade made purely for sale seems to cheapen its worth according to my values, but I have to recognize that ultimately, craftsmen need to eat and support their families. Then perhaps I would consider whether the keris maker has truly a passion for making kerises. Pride of the artisan in his craft and art? Am I buying that pride? And if it was an old keris made for sale - a simple but function keris kodi? I would be more inclined to accept it (though I may not buy it) because of the history and cultural overlay to it. The commercial old keris then becomes a vessel holding a bit of cultural significance because it was some past man-in-the-village's personal carry keris. Questions for introspection, and it seems that even for myself, my 1 set of standards is not so fixed.

28th November 2010, 10:27 PM	#36
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,892	Oh yes, Mpu Gandring and Ken Arok. Essential reading for anybody who wishes to understand the nature of Jawa. The lessons taught in this little story still hold true today. I like the taste and decorum exhibited in this version. In the original, good ole Kenny boy saw a bit more than just thighs.

28th November 2010, 10:57 PM	#37
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,892	Quote:- In my opinion, other than being more practical for long term storage-providing better resistance to rust, a blade without pamor didn't benefit from the process. Tunggalametung, I guess you mean the process of lamination, ie, the repeated folding and welding of material ? In the original keris of Jawa, this was not an option, it was a requisite part of the process of making a keris. The material available was of various types and various qualities, so in order to produce material that was of adequate quality for use as a weapon, it was necessary to weld the small available pieces together, and then repeatedly fold and weld to remove the impurities. This repeated folding and welding created a pattern in the material, which eventually came to be recognised as an indicator of a weapon's integrity, and as a consequence was demanded by the paying customers. This was the birth of pamor. To provide a harder edge than could be obtained from the iron used in the pamor material, a thin sliver of steel was inserted between the plates of pamor. Steel is very expensive to produce by the old technologies. When higher quality material became available in areas outside of Jawa and Bali, and where the beliefs in pamor had not taken root, blades were produced from all steel. If a piece of material was large enough,and of adequate quality, it was not necessary to amalgamate pieces of material by folding and welding, but if a large piece of material could not be obtained, then the folding and welding process was necessary, however, the material being brought together into one large piece was steel, and of much higher quality than the various ferric materials used in earlier times. This steel was obtained from imported commercial goods, such as tools imported from China, and tools and machinery from Europe. Much of the production of these keris lacking pamor appears to have been carried out by Chinese smiths, whose work was reputed to be of very high quality. In the context of keris form, "garap" means "workmanship". In Bahasa Indonesia a synonym is "pembuatan". Maybe this same word is valid in Malay, I don't know.

28th November 2010, 11:17 PM	#38
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,892	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.

30th November 2010, 03:03 PM	#40
BluErf Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Singapore Posts: 1,180	G'day Alan, Indeed, when I referred to KLOs, I could have been too harsh and demanding. The world of keris just gets bigger and bigger the further/closer one looks... Hi Tunggulametung, After reading the story of Ken Arok, could I ask then why did you adopt Tunggul Ametung as your internet moniker? It's an interesting choice!