New Keris/Keris baru

[A. G. Maisey]

Thank you gentlemen.

It seems I no longer need to write 10,000 words to answer Rasdan's questions. To a large extent, I feel those questions have already been answered, but answered within relative context.

Yes, we all like representations of things to look like what they represent. Problem is that very, very few artists set out to do this. The painters and sculptors of the Renaissance did not produce art works that looked like real people:- they produced idealised images of human form that pleased their clients and patrons.

Similarly, the post-impressionists did not produce works that looked like what they used as a subject. The images were idealised in a different way.

But both these different types of artists produced great art, as David has demonstrated. Art is something that touches the human soul. Great art touches the human soul deeply.

Michelangelo did not produce works that looked like real people. He produced idealised images, with distorted proportions that were intended to be viewed from a certain angle in a certain place, at which time and place they would look correct. I think it is his "David" that has a disproportionately large head, because it was intended to be viewed from below in the open air, in a square.
Portrait painters do not produce photographically correct images of their subjects --- if they did they'd never get any commissions. They idealise the subject.

This is called "art".

To understand any art we need to learn to understand it. I have friends who tell me that Jackson Pollock's works are wonderful. Personally I can't see it, but I did not go to university and get a degree in art appreciation. I am not qualified to comment on Jackson Pollock, because I don't understand his work.

The same applies to other art forms. Take classical ballet as an example. I loath ballet. This is my personal taste. I do not understand ballet, I know nothing about it, but I do know that I don't like it. I don't like classical ballet.

The point I am trying to make is this:- to understand any art form, one needs to be taught how to understand and appreciate that art form, otherwise it becomes a matter of personal taste, as with my dislike of ballet. I can certainly say if I like ballet or not, but I am not qualified to say if a performance of ballet is any good, or not.

The keris as an art work is no different.

We can all express an opinion as to whether we like a keris or not, but very few of us can give an informed opinion as to whether it is any good --- or not.

Here are Rasdan's questions:-

1. How do we measure quality? For instance, your keris have a different ratio of sorsoran width to its length when compared to Rick's keris. The sekar kacang is also different. (It's entirely different probably) How does the shape of the ricikan justifies quality?

2. If we take tangguh as age, how can we apply the quality measures to keris with different tangguh? If we take tangguh as style of keris, can we still use the same parameters?

The first question, a couple of questions actually, 'how do we measure quality', and 'how does the shape of the ricikan justify quality'

Probably the place to start is to ask another question:-

define quality

but I'm not going to do that, I will assume that Rasdan is asking his questions in an artistic sense.

Firstly we need to classify the keris. We do not apply the same standards to a Senopaten keris, as we do to a Surakarta keris.

Then we appraise in accordance with the standards of the classification.

How do we know the standards of the classification and how to apply in appraisal?

As with any art form, we need to learn those standards. There is no easy way. There is no nice neat mechanical formula that allows us to use specific measurements. We need to learn the classifications and standards from the ground up. In my experience, the only truly effective way to do this is to find an ahli keris and convince him to teach you. Otherwise you are locked in the standards of personal opinion forever.

Since it is not really possible for everybody to get the tuition that is needed to truly understand quality in a keris, perhaps the best approach is as Rasdan has said, to collect what you like, because ultimately it is you who has to live with the keris.

However, with all that said, there is one universal that applies in all art, and in all keris:- craftsmanship. A good keris will never display shoddy craftsmanship. Superb craftsmanship may not necessarily indicate that you have a good keris in your hand, but if the craftsmanship is less than excellent, the keris cannot be a good one.

The second universal that applies, especially with older keris, is condition. A good older keris will not be a worn out ghost. A very worn older keris may be appreciated for other reasons, and some very worn older keris can command pretty impressive prices, but the reasons for appreciation of such a keris need not incorporate an overall appraisal of "good".

The third universal is material:- no matter if we are looking at an old keris, or a brand new keris, the material must be good. Good iron is dense with tight grain, and stains to a good dense black. It is not open pored and grey. Good pamor is artistically correct; it conforms with the pamor standard. Good steel is able to be hardened (evidenced by the sepuh line) and is not brittle or given to cracking.

The traditional way to appraise quality is to appraise in terms of classification (tangguh), form, and features. But then you need to appraise the pamor, steel, iron, craftsmanship, and feeling.

You cannot do any of this appraisal in the absence of adequate instruction from somebody who understands all of this. An ahli keris.

That's the answer Rasdan, and it is not at all the one you wanted. To be able to appraise a keris you need to learn the keris. There is no easy way to do this. You need an ahli keris who will agree to teach you, then you need an immense amount of time and perseverance. You need to be prepared to sacrifice time and money and many other things in your life. There is no formula, no secret method, no mechanical matrix. Its like any other field of art, you need to learn the art. To do this you need time and a teacher.

In any field of art there are the laymen, and there are the authorities. Usually it is the authorities who lead, and the laymen who follow. No different with keris. When Empu Suparman was alive there was a constant stream of people to his door seeking his opinion on keris that they wanted to buy or sell. He was the authority, the expert, the ahli keris. People sought his opinion, and he was paid for this opinion. Exactly the same with art in the western world:- very often a buyer will seek the opinion of an expert before purchase of an art work.

The ordinary collector or investor in art cannot know everything. Usually he is the same as the ordinary collector of keris:- he knows what he likes, but when he wants to invest heavy money, he employs somebody who has the experience and/or qualifications to provide an opinion on the work before he buys it.

The upside of this is that anybody who truly wishes to gain the knowledge necessary to understand the keris can do this. But as with all education it costs time, and money, and sacrifice, and perseverance. It just depends on how badly one wishes to gain this knowledge.

[rasdan]

Thank you for the in depth reply Alan.

So now, different set of rules of quality for different tangguh. Meaning tangguh knowledge is on top priority and probably meaning that if a Javanese keris does not fit into a specific tangguh, it probably does not reach the minimum requirement.

When you say, "Superb craftsmanship may not necessarily indicate that you have a good keris in your hand", does this means that even if the keris can have superior material, workmanship and technical aspects (proportion etc), but it does not fit in certain tangguh hence posibly the keris is made by somebody that probably does not understand the keris? Are there any other reason for this?

[A. G. Maisey]

Short answer:- yes.

Whether one believes that tangguh is a true indication of real age, or whether one believes it is a classification that has a relationship with the passing of time, doesn't really matter, but one must have a knowledge and understanding of tangguh before one can adequately appraise a keris.

I don't know that it is a matter of "not reach minimum requirement"; I'd need to think about that and what it means, but it is certain that if one only understands, say, the Mataram Senopaten keris, one cannot adequately appraise either a Surakarta keris, or a Pajajaran keris, using the same guidelines.

When I wrote the lines on "superb craftsmanship etc" I had in mind certain recently produced keris that really are superb examples of art and metal carving, but in my opinion, and the opinions of some other purists, these works are not keris. Art, yes, maybe even great art, but keris? No.

[David]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Firstly we need to classify the keris. We do not apply the same standards to a Senopaten keris, as we do to a Surakarta keris.

Jussi, Alan's remark above is the my reasoning for the art comparison that i presented. Certainly paintings are not the same as keris, but i still think the analogy is still an effective one.
Alan, thank you for this excellent summary. While i realize much more can be said on the subject this is the best brief i have read on the subject to date. Unfortunately i would say that the greater number of us do not have either the resources nor the opportunity to approach this from the position of apprentice to a keris ahli. My only course of action is to continue to look, listen and learn where and when i can, to take advice from people i trust and continue to collect the keris that i feel "call" to me. I believe that i have developed some recognition of quality, but certainly do not have the knowledge of exactly what is to be expected from keris quality from all the different tangguhs. And while i feel that i do in fact know how to recognize quality in general i will openly admit that i have a few keris that i truly love despite their obvious lack of quality because in my own estimation they hold great "character".
Now i would like to extent the painting analogy just a step further and play a bit of devil's advocate if you all don't mind. Please understand Alan that i do absolutely agree with you in regards to all you say, including the need to study with a keris ahli for a complete understanding of these matters. But this brings to mind the question of authorities in all kinds of social hierarchy. Certainly one would need to find a teacher that they could trust and one whose knowledge was considered accurate and comprehensive by their peers. And this leads me to my next analogy. I have recently caught the BBC show Fake or Fortune? a number of times. One episode in particular attempts to authenticate a painting as a Monet that a fellow had owned for more than a decade. They go to great lengths on this show to get to the bottom of this mystery and find many experts who feel sure that the painting in question was indeed painted by Monet. I was convinced that they had established all the provenance necessary by the end of the show. But when they final had the opportunity to present the painting to the Wildenstein Institute, the accepted final word authority on all things Monet, they refused to authenticate the painting. Without their approval this painting will never be fully accepted as a real Monet regardless of what any other expert has to say about it. You can read about the case here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bords_d...e_à_Argenteuil
I realize that this is an extreme case, but i think it illustrates that experts are often at odds with one another. In the end i think i still must conduct my collecting based upon my own personal likes and dislikes. This does, of course, need to be an educated perspective. The more i "know" the more i am capable of appreciating. The more i learn, the more my understanding and appreciation can grow. But for now i simply must collect with my "gut". As a certain Monty Python skit once pronounced, "I may not know art, but i know what i like!"

[Jussi M.]

Originally Posted by David

Jussi, Alan's remark above is the my reasoning for the art comparison that i presented. Certainly paintings are not the same as keris, but i still think the analogy is still an effective one. (...) In the end i think i still must conduct my collecting based upon my own personal likes and dislikes. This does, of course, need to be an educated perspective. The more i "know" the more i am capable of appreciating. The more i learn, the more my understanding and appreciation can grow. But for now i simply must collect with my "gut". As a certain Monty Python skit once pronounced, "I may not know art, but i know what i like!"

David - I am not in variance to what you are saying. It´s just that analogies can be a difficult means of communication as different people see and associate different things alike and vice versa, alike things differently. Now that I´ve read your answer above I see that I misunderstood what you meant. Possibly because I am handicapped at the English language as it is not my native language. It can, of course, also be that I simply look at things from a different perspective. This does not necessarily have anything to do with the way you presented your case; it´s on the other end where the interpretation is done. - Believe me, as a teacher I know how differently different people can interpret things said or written

[dbhmgb]

WOW - a fantastic thread for a new-comer to the keris! Thank you all for your contributions.

[A. G. Maisey]

Yes David, all experts are not equal.

Brings to mind the old "oils ain't oils" ad.

Tangguh understanding is central to keris understanding, but even in Jawa many very highly respected people say "tangguh nggak sungguh" : "tangguh isn't real"

It doesn't matter if its real or not. It is a solid system of classification, and people of approximately equal knowledge will not vary very much in their assessments of an applicable tangguh, meaning that, for instance, a Surakarta keris from the 19th century will never be identified as a Pajajaran keris, or a Majapahit keris, or a Pajang keris. Whatever tangguh is agreed upon, that tangguh will give an indication of relative age. I stress "relative".

But at its foundation tangguh is about money. It is not about playing a game with keris to see who the smartest bloke in the room is.

It is also about keris of good quality.

At this point we enter the circle of reason, or put another way, circular reasoning.

We need to be able to identify quality in the absence of tangguh, and we do this by using the universals I've mentioned above, plus a few other indicators, such as cross section of sogokan, regularity and form of greneng, the nearness to mirror image of each face of the keris, the form and robustness of the gonjo --- etc. Little things that can tell us if this keris was really made by somebody with skill, or not.

If we decide that, yes, this is a nicely made keris, then we closely examine the indicators to try to place that keris into a legitimate classification, or tangguh, and tangguh is a system that was developed primarily to classify keris of quality. Investment property.

As I have said:- its all about money.

Salesmen will very, very frequently present a Koripan keris as Mataram, Sultan Agung. A Koripan keris has the same form as a Mataram SA, but it is marginally more coarse in some details, and it lacks "presence". The value of a Mataram SA is vastly more than a Koripan in equal condition.

The examples of misrepresentation go on and on. Gresik for Pajajaran, Tuban-Majapahit for Majapahit, Mataram-Matesih for Amangkurat --- and on, and on and on.

In Jawa, if you do not understand tangguh and you want to buy keris you are setting yourself up for not only considerable loss of money, but perhaps disappointment when you eventually discover the truth. In the Western World, this doesn't matter. You can go on believing that your Koripan is Mataram SA forever, and it is unlikely that you will ever be disillusioned. But in Jawa, sooner or later you will meet somebody with understanding and by then its too late to run back to the dealer. You've done your dough --- or you perpetuate the lie.

Keris collecting in the Western World, and in Jawa are very different entities. In the Western World we mostly do not outlay serious sums of money for keris. In Jawa the serious collector may outlay a sum of money equivalent to the cost of a house. Under these conditions it is imperative that there is some understanding of the system that sets the ground rules for value.

As for validation of an acquisition upon the basis of "I like it", I do exactly the same thing, a lot of my personal collection is comprised of "keris that I like". Not much value to anybody except me.

[Jean]

Truly excellent threads Alan, you said it all, thank you!

[David]

Originally Posted by Jean

....you said it all....

Somehow i doubt that, but it's a good start...