Pamor Kembang Pete (Stinky Bean)

kai · 9th February 2013, 11:53 PM

Hello Alan,

Quote:

However Kai, having said that, I feel that you have now placed me in a position where I must justify my own opinion.

Sorry, my passing comment wasn't meant to put you in any such position. I was merely trying to maximize bang for the buck from the perspective of a budding collector.

Quote:

The value of Ensiklopedi to somebody who does not read Indonesian is in the multitude of illustrations and their captions; to understand those, very little, if any knowledge of Bahasa Indonesia is required. The observation that "more up to date" sources are available on line is interesting to me, as my own inclination is to turn to the traditional sources for reliable information in respect of classificatory information, rather than more recent sources, and Ensiklopedi is principally a book that provides classificatory information. Bambang Harsrinuksmo drew upon both current opinion, and upon the literature of a past age in his compilation of Ensiklopedi, which makes of it a "one-stop shop" if we need a quick and easy classification.

It certainly deserves a place in a keris library. I'm just not convinced that it is of paramount importance early in a keris career. I'm missing in-depth discussions rather than focusing on names (which could change around the next corner); it's an encyklopedia though... While I can't judge the veracity of informaton on keris Jawa, I'm also somewhat disappointed about entries on keris from other cultures.

Quote:

Groneman's work is a landmark, no doubt about it. As a part of history it is of extreme value, and deserves to be read by all of us who have a keris interest. However, although there is much of value in this work, there are also more than a few flaws. Flaws which are to be expected when we consider the time at which it was written, and the societal position of the person who wrote it. Groneman is of great historical interest, but as a source of information I could not recommend it to a newcomer attempting to come to terms with the keris. Where I do find Groneman to be of great interest is as a reflection of the light in which the Javanese regarded their Dutch masters.

I agree. One added value - of the translation only - that I thought of were the many added pics of old keris from Dutch musea, etc. (which I believe would help to get a new collector "in tune" with traditional keris rather than modern low-end work). Same-o for the kris disk which excells at showing "good ol' stuff" from many different regions IMHO.

Quote:

I have great respect for the late Karsten Sejr Jensen, and as with several other authors for whom I also have great personal respect, I will refrain from comment on his work.

I believe that a factual approach regarding the contributions of others (that notes good/interesting facets, identifies what might be dubious or unsupported by hard evidence, or explains what can be proven to be wrong) is the best way to advance knowledge. I may miss some subleties of life but don't think this should change just because someone is dead. I, for one, would be pretty much pissed if people stopped discussing any ideas/etc. of mine just because the inevitable had happened.

Quote:

I may be wrong, but I feel that most serious students of the keris are in agreement that an understanding of the keris cannot be gained from books written principally about the keris, but rather from reference works dealing with sociology and anthropology.

I agree that works about ethnic groups and their specific cultures in general are very important for understanding. However, this is quite a different aim than the recommendations we started with...

Quote:

Perhaps you would be so kind as to provide us with some of your recommendations in those fields? I am constantly searching for material I have not yet seen in these fields that could assist my own limited understanding.

I have to admit that I have drawn a lot from your prior recommendations in this respect - like the works of Wiener, etc. I reckon that I'd need to come up with pretty obscure references for you not having read them already!

Having said that, I also feel that for any period one is interested in, it also helps to spend considerable time on researching the neighbouring cultures (like Indian subcontinent to Chaam for the Hindu-Buddhist era) as well as cultures that had a heavy presence throughout the archipelago (Arab/China/Japan as well as Bugis or Moro contenders).

One meta resource I find myself returning to regularly is the Aceh library where a lot of treasures can be discovered (from early colonial sources to academic papers). I wish we had such resources freely available for all regions of the world (without prior desaster that is)!

Regards,
Kai

A. G. Maisey · 10th February 2013, 01:35 AM

Thanks for sharing your ideas Kai, it is always valuable for any of us to gain a slightly different perspective.

I've got a fairly old fashioned approach to learning. It is certainly at variance with what I can understand of modern educational methods. My belief is that knowledge is not about "knowing", but rather about "understanding".

For example, an educational trend of a few years ago, and one that is still supported by some sectors of the educational community, is that reading can be taught be recognition of complete words. Yes, this approach can work, for the purpose of teaching somebody to read, but what it misses on is that reading is not an end in itself, reading is only a tool that permits access to other tools, and in the absence of the foundation blocks of the learnt ability to read, some, if not most, of those other tools cannot be adequately accessed. This could be likened to building a house in the absence of footings. Yes, the house will be built, but as time passes the brickwork will crack and eventually fail.

I submit that the same thing will happen in any field of knowledge. Knowledge by itself is useless in the absence of understanding :
understanding is unlikely to exist in the absence of a foundation upon which to place the knowledge.

I would suggest that there are at least two ways in which to approach any field of learning. One can take the superficial approach and target examination results, or one can take the longer, slower route and attempt a deeper understanding, and that deeper understanding may, or may not produce excellent examination results. I think that many of us have probably encountered the show pony who has a couple of PhD's and more minor degrees and diplomas than we have had hot breakfasts, but who is an abject failure when he is actually asked to do something associated with his academic qualifications.

So, if we then consider where keris learning should begin, and if we adopt my preferred approach of moving towards understanding, rather accumulating a series of words and pictures, in simple terms, my recommendation is to first learn the ABC of the keris. With this in mind, my recommendations for early learning associated with the keris remain at my previous recommendations.

When we have mastered that ABC, we can then advance our knowledge by the asking of questions. These questions do not need to be asked of a person, but can be formulated in our own minds and the answers sought from all available sources, which might be printed matter, or from people who have a little more experience than ourselves. When we have the answers , those answers can be tested.

Finally we will reach the point where the answers to our questions are no longer easily obtained, and that is when we need to move that one step further and undertake independent research, rather than to rely upon the repetition of shared opinions. In other words, at that pint we need to move out of the comfort zone of having people agree with us and move into an area where we can support our own opinions in the absence of group agreement.

All of this can only begin with the very basic learning of the keris ABC.

If I were to recommend a single book for the first book of a budding student of the keris it would be Solyom.

Now I can hear somebody telling me that yes, that's fine, but Solyom is very deficient as a keris text because it does not deal with any other than the Javanese keris.

Let us not forget that my objective is understanding of the keris, that is to say understanding of a cultural artifact. My objective is not the acquisition of the superficial knowledge of classification and terminology across the broad expanse of keris distribution. Since it is only within the Jawa-Bali nexus that the keris functioned in its original intended role my position is that it is simply not possible to gain a true understanding of the keris within any society in the absence of an understanding of the keris within the society which gave it birth.

So Kai, I most certainly do agree with you that my mention of sociology and anthropology were very much divorced from the original thrust of providing some published resources for a newcomer to the world of the keris, however, those mentions were for my own benefit, and were completely divorced from the recommendations I had already made in response to Yuuzan's apparent needs. I know you to be a serious man, and an experienced collector, and I had hoped that perhaps your own independent research had unearthed something which could be of interest to me. As it happens, this is so, for I had never previously heard of the Aceh library. It is probably not likely that there will be much in this library that I will find of interest, its very existence demands that I acquaint myself with its contents. I thank you for providing me with this opportunity.

Again, I agree with you that if one is to understand the nature of the ocean, one needs more than a bucketful of sea water, however, the beginning is still the ABC of the keris, and for that only a very few references are necessary.

10th February 2013, 01:35 AM	#2
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,994	Thanks for sharing your ideas Kai, it is always valuable for any of us to gain a slightly different perspective. I've got a fairly old fashioned approach to learning. It is certainly at variance with what I can understand of modern educational methods. My belief is that knowledge is not about "knowing", but rather about "understanding". For example, an educational trend of a few years ago, and one that is still supported by some sectors of the educational community, is that reading can be taught be recognition of complete words. Yes, this approach can work, for the purpose of teaching somebody to read, but what it misses on is that reading is not an end in itself, reading is only a tool that permits access to other tools, and in the absence of the foundation blocks of the learnt ability to read, some, if not most, of those other tools cannot be adequately accessed. This could be likened to building a house in the absence of footings. Yes, the house will be built, but as time passes the brickwork will crack and eventually fail. I submit that the same thing will happen in any field of knowledge. Knowledge by itself is useless in the absence of understanding : understanding is unlikely to exist in the absence of a foundation upon which to place the knowledge. I would suggest that there are at least two ways in which to approach any field of learning. One can take the superficial approach and target examination results, or one can take the longer, slower route and attempt a deeper understanding, and that deeper understanding may, or may not produce excellent examination results. I think that many of us have probably encountered the show pony who has a couple of PhD's and more minor degrees and diplomas than we have had hot breakfasts, but who is an abject failure when he is actually asked to do something associated with his academic qualifications. So, if we then consider where keris learning should begin, and if we adopt my preferred approach of moving towards understanding, rather accumulating a series of words and pictures, in simple terms, my recommendation is to first learn the ABC of the keris. With this in mind, my recommendations for early learning associated with the keris remain at my previous recommendations. When we have mastered that ABC, we can then advance our knowledge by the asking of questions. These questions do not need to be asked of a person, but can be formulated in our own minds and the answers sought from all available sources, which might be printed matter, or from people who have a little more experience than ourselves. When we have the answers , those answers can be tested. Finally we will reach the point where the answers to our questions are no longer easily obtained, and that is when we need to move that one step further and undertake independent research, rather than to rely upon the repetition of shared opinions. In other words, at that pint we need to move out of the comfort zone of having people agree with us and move into an area where we can support our own opinions in the absence of group agreement. All of this can only begin with the very basic learning of the keris ABC. If I were to recommend a single book for the first book of a budding student of the keris it would be Solyom. Now I can hear somebody telling me that yes, that's fine, but Solyom is very deficient as a keris text because it does not deal with any other than the Javanese keris. Let us not forget that my objective is understanding of the keris, that is to say understanding of a cultural artifact. My objective is not the acquisition of the superficial knowledge of classification and terminology across the broad expanse of keris distribution. Since it is only within the Jawa-Bali nexus that the keris functioned in its original intended role my position is that it is simply not possible to gain a true understanding of the keris within any society in the absence of an understanding of the keris within the society which gave it birth. So Kai, I most certainly do agree with you that my mention of sociology and anthropology were very much divorced from the original thrust of providing some published resources for a newcomer to the world of the keris, however, those mentions were for my own benefit, and were completely divorced from the recommendations I had already made in response to Yuuzan's apparent needs. I know you to be a serious man, and an experienced collector, and I had hoped that perhaps your own independent research had unearthed something which could be of interest to me. As it happens, this is so, for I had never previously heard of the Aceh library. It is probably not likely that there will be much in this library that I will find of interest, its very existence demands that I acquaint myself with its contents. I thank you for providing me with this opportunity. Again, I agree with you that if one is to understand the nature of the ocean, one needs more than a bucketful of sea water, however, the beginning is still the ABC of the keris, and for that only a very few references are necessary. Last edited by A. G. Maisey; 10th February 2013 at 02:47 AM.