Keris and Rembrandt

[kronckew]

a.g., you have most eloquently put into words the intent of my posts. words are also images.

...and sometimes provoke more thought than a graphic ever could. sometimes a word is worth a thousand pictures as it allows your imagination to fill in the gaps...

i remember reading 'the talisman' in my youth, and there was, i believe, a chapter where king richard (the lionheart) meets saladin (Salah-ed-Din Yusef ibn Ayub), richard cuts an iron bar in half with his sword to impress him, and saladin responds by cutting a silk scarf in half by just floating it down onto the stationary edge.

how many pictures of that sword are in our minds now....

and the image in oil paint of the essential keris in sampson's eye will also be engraved somewhere in our hearts evermore...

[drdavid]

Please excuse my whimsy but this thread has taken me to one of my favourite images by Yoshitoshi



' a finger points at the moon but the finger is not itself the moon'
(Gesshu 17th C)

drd

[kronckew]

ah, great minds think alike.

[Gustav]

In his Krisdisk Jensen gives an interpretation about a connection between subject of Samson and keris.

Rembrandt van Rijn (1606-1669) has in two
paintings pictured a kris. The first painting
represents “The Capture of Samson” (Judges 16:19)
and is painted in 1629. The picture shows Samson
sleeping with his head in the lap of Delilah. She is
pointing at his hair to tell the enemy entering the
room that his strength is sitting in his hair. Samson
wears a kris with a Yaksha-/Raksasa hilt type 1 and a red painted old Ladrang type of sheath.
The Dutch had in 1596 entered the Indonesian area and began to bring krisses of this type home to Holland.
The Europeans found them very exotic and Rembrandt, who collected oriental weapons, has presumably
purchased one.
The other painting illustrates “The Capture and Blinding of Samson” and is painted in 1636. At the painting a
soldier is blinding Samson with a kris with a long, strong and waved blade. It is most possible the same kris
as the one pictured in the first picture.
I do not think that it is accidental that Rembrandt twice connected the kris with the capture of Samson. It is
most probable connected with the fact that the Europeans thought the kris was a demonic weapon. Many
sources relate that the blade is poisonous (perhaps because of the arsenic that was used to blue the blade).
It was a view harboured by the snake symbolism of the blade (the blade symbolizes a Naga, snake, the ruler
of the underworld). This idea was made clear by the waved snake-like blade, which most of the krisses the
Europeans brought home to Europe had and which Rembrandt´s kris had as well. Now the snake is
according to the Jewish and Christian tradition connected with Satan as the tempter and seducer, a
connection which is further accentuated by the demonic Yaksha-/Raksasa hilt of the kris. Because of that it is
probable that Rembrandt has equipped Samson with a such a kris. It symbolizes that Samson wears a
seductive and treacherous weapon in his belt - a weapons which turns against himself and literally blinds
him, like he was blind to the seductive treason of Delilah.

[Laowang]

From Janson, History of Art (Abrams, 1986), regarding the Blinding of Samson:

"Rembrandt had developed a full-blown High Baroque style. He here visualizes the Old Testament as a world of oriental splendor and violence, cruel yet seductive... Rembrandt was at this time an avid collector of Near Eastern (sic) paraphernalia, which serve as props in these pictures."

I would hesitate from imputing too much symbolism to the choice of the keris, outside of its contribution to 'oriental' splendor. The interpretation in the KrisDisk is uncharacteristic of Rembrandt and his social milieu.

At this time, Holland was newly independent and prosperous, and art was a commodity hotly collected by wealthy merchants. Paintings were commodities produced for the market; the overall atmosphere of a piece like this would have contributed to its value as such. Still lifes from the period often have animals, flowers, or fruit from outside of Europe. Unlike paintings of Old Testament subjects from earlier periods in European art history, paintings in this period were being produced for wealthy secular clients, not the church.

Also, if the kris were viewed as a satanic emblem, it is unlikely Rembrandt would have held one in his self-portrait as an Oriental potentate.

[Rick]

Well said .

The weapon the other soldier is holding over Samson in 'The Blinding' is a Bhuj; is it not ?

[Gustav]

Originally Posted by Laowang

I would hesitate from imputing too much symbolism to the choice of the keris, outside of its contribution to 'oriental' splendor. The interpretation in the KrisDisk is uncharacteristic of Rembrandt and his social milieu.

At this time, Holland was newly independent and prosperous, and art was a commodity hotly collected by wealthy merchants. Paintings were commodities produced for the market; the overall atmosphere of a piece like this would have contributed to its value as such. Still lifes from the period often have animals, flowers, or fruit from outside of Europe. Unlike paintings of Old Testament subjects from earlier periods in European art history, paintings in this period were being produced for wealthy secular clients, not the church.

Also, if the kris were viewed as a satanic emblem, it is unlikely Rembrandt would have held one in his self-portrait as an Oriental potentate.

Of course the view of Jensen regarding keris in both paintings is a speculative one. It is a try to understand why this exotic weapon is appearing in the paintings whose subject is the story of Samson.

There is no statements of Rembrandt himself regarding depictions of keris in his paintings, so it can stay only a speculation, a speculative opinion.

It is important to understand, that the opposite opinion - this exotic weapon is merely a decoration without any background- is a speculation or a speculative opinion at least at the same degree, and even more: this is a very contemporary speculation in it's character, possible in this way only since the raise of modern, pluralistic society, in whose eyes the older european culture is slowely becoming the same exoticism as some South-East Asian culture: merely a decoration.

It is absolutely wright to draw parallels between the appearing of still life paintings and rising bourgeoise society in Europa. But exactly the still life paintings from 17. century are the richest displays of allegory - which was really an art and science per se - most of them having "Vanitas" as the main subject. Indeed, the 17. cent. was the golden age of Allegory, both in catholical and non-catholical European countries.

To see the objects merely as decoration in still life and other paintings is a way to see things, which have nothing to do with european culture before 19. cent.

Regarding the self portraits of Rembrandt (more than 90), some of them belong to the most sarcastical and self-ironical visual statements from this age.

[Laowang]

Gustav, you raise some interesting points that made me think a little bit more about the role of the keris in these paintings, of Rembrandt himself, and of art in this period. I also checked a couple more specific sources out of curiosity: Schama, Rembrandt's Eyes (Knopf, 1999) and Westermann, Rembrandt (Phaidon, 2000). Let me start furthest from the keris, and move back toward it.

Much art of this time employed allegory, but that doesn't mean all art did. While vanitas was a common theme in still lifes from the period, not every still life used it as a theme. Certainly a painting featuring a skull, rotten fruit, an hourglass, or watch, was a clear allegory of humanity's mortality, but not every still life does so. One shouldn't assume every component of every painting is loaded with symbolic portent. This same time period saw the birth of Dutch Realism in genre painting, portraiture, and landscape.

Regarding Rembrandt's still lives, the general scholarly consensus is that they were studies of emotion, and personae. He portrayed himself angry, happy, upset, etc., with curly hair, with facial hair, with a cloak, as an oriental potentate, etc. In the case of the still life with the keris, the keris helps create the persona.

Neither source I mentioned, nor a couple others I paged through, had much to say about Rembrandt using Christian allegory. Most scholars agree that Rembrandt was primarily interested in portraying the tragic as found in historical and Biblical scenes, and rendering that poetic idea in a dramatic fashion. You are right, however, the keris is not mere decoration, per se. It serves a symbolic function, but not as Christian allegory.

In Samson and Delilah, Schama says it much better than I ever could: "...the great potent curve of the hero's sword, unlike the weapon of the soldier in the background, deeply sheathed and hanging slackly below his buttocks. It doesn't take a higher degree in Freudian analysis to understand what Rembrandt is up to here: the narration of sexual drama through signs and euphemisms."

In the Blinding of Samson, the anachronistic combination of ethnographic weapons, European-style armor, and exotic costumes creates an imagined scene of Old Testament violence and gore; the keris and other objects are critical in creating a dramatic tableau that is convincing even though not historically accurate. The light falls from the top left of the canvas down toward Samson in a diagonal formed by Delilah's torso, Samson's leg, terminating via the mailed arm and keris at Samson's eye, and mirrored by the bhuj. The alien appearance of the keris, from a European perspective, heightens the drama of his blinding.

The keris appears to be the same in both paintings, and ties together two paintings painted eight years apart. One could certainly read it as a comment on Samson being undone by his own lust; Schama clearly believes that, and even in its original cultural milieu the keris is a phallic emblem.

Any interpretation of art certainly involves subjectivity. I do not mean to dismiss Jensen's reading out of hand. However, his reliance on a Christian allegorical interpretation, with the keris as a satanic emblem, is in contradiction with much of the established scholarship on Rembrandt.

[Gustav]

Laowang, thank you very much for your well researched input here.

You wrote:

I do not mean to dismiss Jensen's reading out of hand. However, his reliance on a Christian allegorical interpretation, with the keris as a satanic emblem, is in contradiction with much of the established scholarship on Rembrandt.[/QUOTE]

This is a circle, becouse oncemore recalls the question of Rick from the post #14: In what light was the keris viewed in the european culture of that time?

I tryed to answer on this in my post #17.

To this, after reading Jensen (post # 34), I can only add:

I don't know, from which time on the europeans (and the javanese) started to see a snake in the blade.
The image of snake in european iconography has an absolutely clear connotation, in all times after the majority of europeans become christians.

I don't know, from which point the europeans started to believe the blade is poisoned (which probably is connected with the view on the blade as snake).

There are few kerisses in early european collections having balu mekabun hilts, even fewer having early planar forms; the absolute majority have yaksha/rakshasa hilts, which are demonic depictions not only in european eyes. There are two passages in Levinium Hulsius (1606), where the keris hilts are mentioned as depictions of devil.

What is Jensen's point, and seems an interesting interpretation (a speculative of course), is that Samson is beeing blinded by his own weapon.
This view on the nature of keris also seems (my individual speculation) to be appearing in the 17. cent. inscription on a keris sheath "...brings fortune or misfortune".

Jensen:

It symbolizes that Samson wears a
seductive and treacherous weapon in his belt - a weapons which turns against himself and literally blinds
him, like he was blind to the seductive treason of Delilah.[/QUOTE]

Your source and your statement:

The keris appears to be the same in both paintings, and ties together two paintings painted eight years apart. One could certainly read it as a comment on Samson being undone by his own lust; Schama clearly believes that, and even in its original cultural milieu the keris is a phallic emblem.

These are two views on this subject. I don't think they are much opposite. They are as much opposite as the views of two sources are.

[Rick]

Thank you both for adressing the question that I raised , Gentlemen .

I have found your responses most interesting .

Rick

[Dmitry]

Here's another keris. I don't know who the artist is, but the style of the painting looks positively mid-1800s, Pre-Raphaelite.

[kronckew]

interesting, while the hunting horn has a cord baldric to carry it, the keris appears to be the first recorded use of velcro (i can't see what is holding it to it's human). it may be more apparent if viewing the original . where did you see that one?

[Dmitry]

I was just informed that this is a fragment of the painting by William Holman Hunt - "A converted British Family Sheltering a Christian Priest from the Persecution of the Druids", 1850.