Modern interpretations of traditional design?

[Jussi M.]

Greetings all,

there has been discussions regarding this theme but I am interested on knowing your thought regarding the modernization of the keris art. In your opinion, what type of modernization you generally see as acceptable evolution in the keris art?

Do we want it or not, the power tools of modern age are here and save for the dying out(?) "old school" traditionalists and few and between in-door students of the old ways of keris manufacturing. So, lets not concentrate on tools on this thread; instead lets concentrate on the design and material side of things

What do you feel is acceptable evolution or is there such thing to begin with? I personally am too ignorant to say anything regarding the subject but as it interests me why not ask?

Best,

J

[Rick]

Hi Jussi ,
Since it currently takes a Karaton to determine what is a keris and what is not according to current Javanese culture I think it is more the search for perfection in execution and interpretation of Karaton defined forms .

More in another thread .
http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...?t=6905&page=2

Until then ... K.L.O.'s

[A. G. Maisey]

This is opinion and is being put up to be shot at.

I have tried to express my opinion clearly, but since I have no intention of attempting to change anybody else's opinion, I will not engage in debate on this subject.


In the world of the traditional keris there can be no acceptable evolution.

The forms and motifs have been set at a time in the past when these forms and motifs carried social and cultural meaning.

Modern makers are only permitted to express their ability within the bounds that have already been defined.


However, for those who view the keris as an artistic expression, rather than a cultural totem, there are probably no restrictions on either motif or form, provided there are still sufficient features present in the art work to permit identification of it as a keris-like object.

I have used the word "keris-like", because by definition, once a form moves outside the already defined parameters, it can no longer be a keris, it becomes an an artistic expression based upon the keris.

[Rick]

In other words Alan, if you move beyond the prescribed parameters the piece becomes pure fantasy and loses its traditional cultural relevence ?

[A. G. Maisey]

I don't know about "pure fantasy" Rick, but it no longer qualifies as a keris, as it no longer has any meaning.

This question was a big number in Solo about 20 years ago. There were supporters of both points of view, that is that the keris needed to evolve to survive, and the opposite , that any "evolution" was decline.

I'm firmly in the camp of the traditionalists, but I see this matter as one where all are entitled to their own opinions, which reflect the way they view the keris.

[Newsteel]

I thought I share the same view. There is a need to re-live the genuine art of keris making. As much as I like new and good keris, I think one should also be done within its pakem and 'parameters'. It is not just an art to see, like any good painting it must have that insight meaning and philosophy, like a poem .

It's about time for someone to write a book about Keris Jawa - Appreciating the evolution, philosophy and cultural interpretation. No longer about dapur and pamor, etc.

[PenangsangII]

I second the motion by Newsteel

In my opinion, keris making and its "parameter" should remain traditional

[David]

Just to play devil's advocate, when we talk about pakem we are really only talking about Javanese keris. Certainly there are many keris that have been made in other parts of Indonesia that fall well outside of the pakem of any Javanese kraton. How strict are the parameters surrounding the keris of Bali, Lombok, Sumatra (yes parts of Sumatra did indeed follow Javanese pakem for a time), Sulawesi, Malaysia and Thailand. Did any authority set a "pakem" for the keris from these places?

[A. G. Maisey]

Yes David, you are absolutely correct about pakem and Javanese keris.

Quite frankly, I do not know if pakem applies to keris other than Javanese keris, or not. I think it possibly does to Balinese keris, but it seems to be well buried in the past there, in any case.

But this is really a hypothetical, because to the best of my knowledge there is only one place where experimentation is being carried out in respect of new keris forms and new pamors, and that place is Jawa. I include Madura as a part of Jawa, as it is in the province of East Jawa.

So, if this question of permissible variation is raised, it can only apply to the place where it is currently occurring, and it must be addressed in that context.

[PenangsangII]

Originally Posted by David

Just to play devil's advocate, when we talk about pakem we are really only talking about Javanese keris. Certainly there are many keris that have been made in other parts of Indonesia that fall well outside of the pakem of any Javanese kraton. How strict are the parameters surrounding the keris of Bali, Lombok, Sumatra (yes parts of Sumatra did indeed follow Javanese pakem for a time), Sulawesi, Malaysia and Thailand. Did any authority set a "pakem" for the keris from these places?

Apparently there is no set of pakem exists in other than Jawa, as far I know. However, in determining the true form of keris made for example in Malaysia and "Malay archipelago" we rely on "samples" collected over the years that currently in the museums and private collection - both local & abroad. Though there's no hard & fast rules in keris authentication, we just know it from those collections