![]() |
![]() |
#1 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 999
|
![]()
Like Freddy's Keris, this one has the hilt facing an odd direction. It is difficult to remove the hilt. I didn't want to use too much force in fear of breaking it.
Bugis I believe it to be. Hefty blade measuring at 16 in., in length. I picked up 3 Keris' in the past week. More to follow. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Keris forum moderator
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,084
|
![]()
Beautiful blade Kino. I don't believe it is Bugis though. It is a keris carita i think and it looks peninsula to me, maybe Terranganu. I have one similar in form.
Just curious, when you say difficult to move do you mean it is fixed completely or is there some play? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Singapore
Posts: 1,248
|
![]()
A beautiful Peninsular Malaysian blade, probably originated from Terengganu. On it's type and origin... looks like a Carita or 'Tok Chu' piece... hmmm.
![]() Last edited by Alam Shah; 23rd November 2008 at 02:28 AM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 999
|
![]()
Thanks guys for the edification.
There is no cloth. It's remnants of old adhesive. It doesn't wiggle or budge. I will carefully heat the blade up when I get the courage, someday..... |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 | |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Singapore
Posts: 1,248
|
![]() Quote:
![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 | |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 401
|
![]() Quote:
![]() What do you think Shahrial, carita or tok chu.... me think its a tok chu |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 | |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Singapore
Posts: 1,248
|
![]() Quote:
![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 | |
Keris forum moderator
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,084
|
![]() Quote:
![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 | |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Singapore
Posts: 1,248
|
![]() Quote:
![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 401
|
![]()
in short, the characteristics of this dhapur is called "Tok Chu" by keris lovers from Malaysia, Singapore and Southern Thai.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#11 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Singapore
Posts: 1,180
|
![]()
From what I know, "Tok Chu" was a pandai keris in N Malaya (he could have been staying in the present day Thailand side, or the Malaysian side), who worked possibly circa late 19th century, early 20th century.
The kerises he made were very broad, and had very fine features. People called his kerises "Tok Chu", after him, just like the keris Pandai Saras. As to whether this example here is a Tok Chu is hard to say. The examples I've seen attributed to him are really really broad, and fine! Don't get me wrong, Kino's blade here is mighty fine, just that it is a wee bit too narrow compared to the ones I've seen. But still, a very fine blade - no questions! |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Singapore
Posts: 1,180
|
![]()
Ah ha, found a pic of a suspected Tok Chu. Note the "fatness"!
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#13 |
Keris forum moderator
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,084
|
![]()
I do see the difference Kai Wee, thanks.
![]() So would you then classify Kino's as keris carita then? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#14 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Singapore
Posts: 1,180
|
![]()
Yep, carita it is!
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#15 | |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Singapore
Posts: 1,248
|
![]() Quote:
Thank you for the example.. ![]() Does Tok Chu, only focus on one design, or does he have a few, perhaps made for different person with different size, height, etc.. throughout his lifetime or otherwise? In the Javanese concept, the original blade is added with the prefix 'kyai' (eg. kyai megantara), blades that are made afterwards are added the prefix 'dapur' (eg. dapur megantara).. so likewise, when one says keris 'tok chu', what does it really mean? a blade forged by the known empu, or a design known to be made by him, hence attributed to him? or something else?.. I'm just pondering.. open to opinion, ideas.. etc. ![]() Last edited by Alam Shah; 26th November 2008 at 01:22 AM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#16 |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 401
|
![]()
actually the fatter / broader one is called tok chu beko, whilst the slimmer one is simply tok chu
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#17 | |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Singapore
Posts: 1,180
|
![]()
Good question - I don't think I can answer that.
Perhaps we could ask ourselves - what is the meaning of 'Pandai Saras'? ![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#18 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Singapore
Posts: 1,180
|
![]()
But the picture I posted above is supposedly a keris made by Tok Chu himself.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#19 |
Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 6,813
|
![]()
Both of these blades exhibit evidence of being made by people with a high degree of skill in the use of tools. However, using the standards of beauty which I have been taught, the blade in the possession of Kino is far and away superior from an artistic point of view. This blade has flow and harmony, the blade attributed to Tok Chu is not harmonious, and there is no flow:- it is a statement of excellent craftsmanship, but it is not a statement of art.
In the Tok Chu blade, note the poyuhan, ie, the point of the sogokan, this comes to a blocky, abrupt end. This execution just by itself, and even if all other parts of the blade were perfect and beautiful, immediately disallows this blade as an artistic endeavour. Now have a look at the poyuhan in Kino's blade. Yes, this sogokan appears to lack the necessary cross section that would raise it to a level of brilliance, but the flow of the sogokan, and the harmonious integration of the poyuhan demonstrate a complete understanding of the requirement of harmony in a keris blade. Its not just the difference in execution of the poyuhan, every feature I can see in Kino's blade speaks of a maker who truly understood the art of the keris. Even from a photograph I can feel the harmony of this blade.On the other hand, the Tok Chu blade, although an example of superb craftsmanship, has absolutely no soul:- it is an essay in excellence, but the proportion --- which translates into pawakan --- and the abrupt workmanship has killed any chance of harmony. I almost never post on the art of the keris, simply because I find it too difficult to express the necessary ideas in print, however, the contrast between these two blades provides an excellent example of the difference between art and craft. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#20 |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 401
|
![]()
Since English is not my mother's tongue, I cant explain it the way Alan said earlier..... Yes, I agree with Alan. It's very hard to explain but Kino's keris looks more "alive" whilst the tok chu looks quite "stiff". But Tok Chu is meant for fighting only.....
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#21 | |
Keris forum moderator
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,084
|
![]() Quote:
![]() That being said, i see what you mean and we share a similar aesthetic. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#22 |
Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 6,813
|
![]()
Yes, I understand what you mean, David.
I'm applying a very high Javanese standard to a piece of work that comes from an area where it is entirely possible these standards were unknown. Its a bit like appraising a Pro Hart (popular Aussie artist), or a Grandma Moses by the same standards that would be applied to an old master. However, the contrast was just too good to let pass. Even if these standards cannot be applied to blades from this area, the blades themselves can serve as very good examples to allow me to make my point. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#23 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Singapore
Posts: 1,180
|
![]()
Not that I'm taking the contrarian view for the sake of being different, but somehow, I thought Kino's blade was the one that was well-executed but somehow a little 'muddled' in the middle part. It has a strong base, an nice tip, but the middle is not a strong statement.
The suspected Tok Chu blade is strong and sure, with a lot of character. But I agree that matters of aesthetics are a tricky matter. Some people prefer tall and waif-thin super models, others prefer women with a bit of extra flesh. ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#24 | |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Singapore
Posts: 1,180
|
![]() Quote:
![]() Tok Chu was supposedly one of the last great pandai keris in N Malaya. Anyone who commissioned a keris by him would have paid a lot. I'm sure the keris here can be used for fighting, just like any other keris, but would the primary purpose be for fighting or status/aesthetic appreciation? ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#25 |
Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 6,813
|
![]()
Kai Wee, I do not challenge your opinion in even the slightest degree, you're swimming in one pool, I'm swimming in another.
However, in the matter of keris aesthetics, as they apply in the Javanese sense, it is not a matter of personal preferences, it is a matter of certain very specific criteria being met. The Tok Chu blade quite simply fails in many respects to meet those critieria, however, the other blade, although it does have some shortcomings, does meet those criteria in many important respects. The biggest single point of difference in the two blades from my point of view, is the total and absolute failure of the Tok Chu blade to create a viable poyuhan:- in this blade the poyuhan just does not exist, and this ---from a Javanese perspective---destroys the entire blade. Secondary is the pawakan---slim women , well endowed ones. I can easily understand how in a discreet environment the Tok Chu blade could be highly regarded for many reasons, but appraised by Javanese criteria, it doesn't make it. The other blade almost does make it. However, the main point of my previous post was this:- in respect of these two specific blades, I accept that all my comments could be totally irrelevant, however , using these two blades as examples, I have been able to comment on a couple of very important aesthetic factors. If I were to try to use two Javanese blades to carry out the same exercise, the difference between superb and terrible would be so slight that no untrained person could see it. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#26 |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 235
|
![]()
Greetings,
I cannot help but to comment these two kerises based on how they appear to me on the pictures. The other one seems to have fines and flow, yet it is very obviously a force to reckon with. - It reminds me of an old Jaguar E-Type. The other one on the other hand is nothing like a Jaguar but more of a robust Volvo 240 if you will. - Both great cars on their own, different, way. ![]() ![]() Just my 002 Thanks, J |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#27 | |
Keris forum moderator
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,084
|
![]() Quote:
You say that you have used these two blades to comment on some very important aesthetic factors that may indeed be totally irrelevant. But if we can not apply these aesthetics to this style of keris then i am afraid that i miss your point. Since, as you say, trying to carry out this exercise on two Javanese blades would make it nearly impossible to distinguish a superb blade from a terrible one, i am not sure that i see how we can apply your comments at all. How can i take this information and apply it to other (Javanese?) keris, for instance, if the differences in these aspects of these keris would be so slight that my untrained eye probably wouldn't even see it? So why does it matter if the Tok Chu blade fails to meet Javanese criteria? Aren't we discussing apples and oranges here? ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#28 |
Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 6,813
|
![]()
Thanks for the reality check gentlemen --- I do sometimes forget the advice of Yoda.
Please regard my earlier posts to this thread as an error of judgment. I will try not to repeat this error. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#29 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Singapore
Posts: 1,180
|
![]()
Hi Alan,
Just curious, what teaching of Yoda were you referring to? ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#30 |
Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 6,813
|
![]()
Always remember where you are, and what you are doing.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|