Shadow Keris

[A. G. Maisey]

Yes, Kai Wee, when we are considering a plain black blade that could have been produced by stock removal from a bar of mild steel, I do agree that it might be difficult to decide just exactly where the line is drawn between a "proper" keris and something that looks like a keris.

However, with this type of keris, that same problem was always there.

If you have a blade that has been made from a single piece of material, without a welded-in core there is essentially no difference between such a blade made now, and one made 100 years or more in the past.

None of us question the integrity of an old blade of this type, we appraise it by reference to its artistic beauty and the excellence of its material.

Why should we act any differently when we consider a modern blade of the same type?

Should not exactly the same standards apply?

With such a blade, the time difference between roughing out with an angle grinder, and forging to shape is minimal. In fact, if I were to be asked to make such a blade myself, I would choose to forge to shape, because it would save me time in the long run.

I haven't seen any of these modern Malaysian KLO's, but perhaps we are really talking about keris of low, and even extremely low, quality.

Maybe 5 or 10 years down the track , when these current makers have learnt their trade, there will be a pretty severe problem with forgeries. It would be very, very difficult to gauge the age of a blade that had been well made, but with no core, and that had been skillfully aged.

And as long as some amongst us focus their attention upon the concept of "old", rather than the concept of "excellent" you can bet on it that a lot of these recently produced blades will gain around 100 years of age with the first few weeks after they have been completed.

I rather feel that this matter comes back to knowing and understanding the keris.

If we focus upon art and excellence, there should be no difference at all between old and new.

However, if our focus is upon the history of a culture, or the esoteric content of the keris as a cultural icon, then that focus is necessarily concentrated upon the old, rather than the new.

But such a focus relegates the keris itself to a position which is subordinate to the passing of time.

It all comes back to where our true values lay.

[A. G. Maisey]

Photos of recent, good quality blades would be informative, but what I'd really like to see is photos of what people refer to as keris like objects.

[BluErf]

G'day Alan,

You have articulated the issue very well. The point about where our values lie and how we look at kerises is indeed key to whether we embrace certain types of kerises and reject other types.

In terms of the artistry of a keris, standards shift with time. The older kerises which with 'quiet' controlled grace may look less impressive compared to a flamboyant OTT new keris screaming for attention. And that seems to be the direction that a lot of the newly-made kerises are taking - it needs to 'wow' the viewer in an instance. But maybe 3 months down the road, it doesn't look so good any more. The viewer feels saturated by the overdone features.

And then, there is the issue of practicality. A Malay keris made in the traditional method should stand up to use, at least in an emergency. Newly made kerises are not expected to be used, and many would get dents and dinks on the edges or tip the moment it is brought into contact with something hard, like a stone countertop, for instance. Is this still considered a keris? If a newly made katana is not quenched properly, but has the most beautiful metal grain and form, is it still a katana? I don't know what is the standard that collectors expect of newly made kerises, but would the easily deformed kerises mentioned above be considered true kerises?

So I guess what I've written reflects my personal values I use to assess kerises. Maybe what I consider KLOs are accepted as good solid pieces by others, and I would say maybe I could be wrong in the long run, because in any collecting hobbies, it is what the majority of the collectors want and appreciate that matters, not the quirky/stubborn individual.

About pictures of KLOs. Now that is difficult because I have not thought about keeping any of those as examples. Even if I have, it could be socially suicidal to post them because it would invariably offend some one.

[A. G. Maisey]

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]

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]

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]

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.