Keris luk 9 - inviting comments

jagabuwana · 14th August 2019, 09:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jean

According to the book "Keris Jawa" or the EK, dapur Balebang includes 7 waves (or possibly 5 according to the EK). As this blade has 9 waves I would rather identify its dapur type as Sempana Robyong (greneng above the kembang kacang). Dapur Balebang also icludes a twin sogokan unlike this blade.
Regards

Thank you, Jean. What is “the EK” that you refer to?

A. G. Maisey · 14th August 2019, 09:53 AM

Jaga, I sold this keris to the gentleman who had owned the collection that was auctioned last Sunday. In fact many of the S.E.Asian items in this collection had come from me.

I am not working from a blank canvas here, I know exactly what I'm looking at, I know all the craftsmen involved, Agus Irianto I knew for around 15 years, he was a friend of Empu Suparman, as his father was also. In the early 1990's he went to work for Tommy Suharto.

It would be a very bad idea to "swap out" the pendok. This keris is perfect and beautiful as is --- after you get rid of that garbage level selut. The pendok may be pasar quality, but it is very good pasar quality, you will not get one of equal quality in a pasar these days, to get anything better you will need to go to a bespoke one from a Solo craftsman, and for brass that will cost you around as much as this entire keris cost you. Additionally, this is good quality gold plate, to get quality as good as this now is impossible in Solo, you would need to get it plated in Sydney, and again, you'd be looking at a cost greater than the cost to you of this keris. You have something very nice and very good. Leave it alone and just look after what you have.

Jean, please see page 60 of the Surakarta Pakem. Balebang has two legitimate forms in the Surakarta Pakem, luk 7, luk 9.

There is something else too that we must not forget Jean:- dhapur, pamor, and just about everything else about the keris is not graven in stone, what one considers to be so is only correct in one specific dimension. The dimension I choose to use is Surakarta/Solo. I use this for a number of reasons, it is the senior branch of the House of Mataram, most of what I have learnt about keris has come from Solo, in a slip-sliding world of illogical, unfounded keris opinions, at least Surakarta/Solo stays consistently illogical, it does not change when the wind blows from a different direction.

Haryo Haryoguritno (Alm.) wrote a book, true, it is probably the best reference for Javanese keris that we have, but it is very, very far far from perfect. Never forget that Haryoguritno was a collector of information as well as keris, he collected from many people, but his world was the world of the collector, not the world of the dealer.

Jean · 14th August 2019, 03:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Jean, please see page 60 of the Surakarta Pakem. Balebang has two legitimate forms in the Surakarta Pakem, luk 7, luk 9.

There is something else too that we must not forget Jean:- dhapur, pamor, and just about everything else about the keris is not graven in stone, what one considers to be so is only correct in one specific dimension. The dimension I choose to use is Surakarta/Solo. I use this for a number of reasons, it is the senior branch of the House of Mataram, most of what I have learnt about keris has come from Solo, in a slip-sliding world of illogical, unfounded keris opinions, at least Surakarta/Solo stays consistently illogical, it does not change when the wind blows from a different direction.

You are correct Alan but the dapur Balebang shown on page 60 of the book "Dhapur" is quite different from the blade in question IMO, especially it includes a sogokan, twin lambe gajah, and kruwingan. As this blade was recently made it is not too surprising that it does not follow the standard pakem.
Jaga, by "EK" I am referring to the Ensiklopedi Keris written by the late Bambang Harsrinuskmo.
Regards

A. G. Maisey · 14th August 2019, 10:03 PM

Jean, I do not have the book you mention, but it would make no difference if did, I always try, insofar as possible to follow the Surakarta line.

If you care to go through the Surakarta Pakem and match the various forms and the names given these forms, to common belief, you will find that more than one Surakarta dhapur varies from common belief. Does this mean that the Surakarta Pakem is often wrong, or does it mean that other people and other writers are often wrong?

Actually, it means neither. Surakarta is always right, within its dimension.

All the others are also right, within their individual dimensions.

With the keris there are very few absolute rights & wrongs.

This is particularly so when we get to playing with names and that is a foundation stone of my personal philosophy that the names of things are unimportant, that which is important is the understanding, but very few people seem to be prepared tom devote the time necessary to grasp an understanding of the keris.

jagabuwana · 15th August 2019, 12:20 AM

Jean, Anthony - thank you !

Alan - Haha I did say to my partner "I bet half this stuff went through Alan's hands once.." when I saw the auction. There we go.
Understood loud and clear regarding the pendok. Knowing what I know now I no longer have any inclination to remove it.

I should also make clear that my reservations about it were entirely from a personal taste and aesthetic preference perspective (I have a general bias against to gold or shiny things

) , and certainly not on the pendok's suitability as a dressing or its quality. However my personal tastes and preferences have certainly been pliable as far as keris matters goes, so I hope that along the way I can appreciate this pendok more and come to see it in the same way as keris aesthetes.

A. G. Maisey · 15th August 2019, 12:39 AM

I understand what you're saying Jaga, and I agree, I personally don't much like this "bling-bling" style that was and is popular with many people in Solo, but it is perhaps not correct to over-rule a taste or style that we do not find particularly appealing and substitute a style that we personally like. The substitution might be more pleasing to us, but is it more pleasing to the people of the culture that owns the artifact? After all, we indulge ourselves in "ethnic collection", not in the collection of things that are our own interpretation of what is ethnically pleasing to us.

jagabuwana · 15th August 2019, 11:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

.. but it is perhaps not correct to over-rule a taste or style that we do not find particularly appealing and substitute a style that we personally like. The substitution might be more pleasing to us, but is it more pleasing to the people of the culture that owns the artifact? After all, we indulge ourselves in "ethnic collection", not in the collection of things that are our own interpretation of what is ethnically pleasing to us.

Well said and a good reminder. Agreed!

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

I guess I'd have to go with "diluar pakem"

Unfortunately I don't have the Surakarta Pakem / Dhapur books to reference, but it seems then that you would disagree with Jean's suggestion that this is dhapur Sempana Robyong. Would I be correct there? If so, I'd be interested to know how a different understanding of this could come about if you both use the same reference that is considered to be canon.

Jean · 15th August 2019, 08:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Jean, I do not have the book you mention, but it would make no difference if did, I always try, insofar as possible to follow the Surakarta line.
If you care to go through the Surakarta Pakem and match the various forms and the names given these forms, to common belief, you will find that more than one Surakarta dhapur varies from common belief. Does this mean that the Surakarta Pakem is often wrong, or does it mean that other people and other writers are often wrong?

Hello Alan,
This is the book in question (my favourite reference about dapur types) and it should constitute or be in line with the Surakarta Pakem which you mention.
I recommend this book to all the members who do not own it yet.
Regards

A. G. Maisey · 15th August 2019, 09:35 AM

Yes, you're right Jean, speed kills. No sogokan, I should have checked before rushing into print.

What you call the "Dhapur" book, I call the Surakarta Pakem. Its the same book.

Actually, many years ago, some time in the 1980's, I was offered the original of this book with all the hand drawn illustrations and hand written notes, it is a very big book. The price was way beyond me, but I was permitted to borrow it and photograph the pages.

I guess I'd have to go with "diluar pakem", which is the usual for these more recent keris. Pity.

Incidentally, the "greneng above the KK" is called a "jenggot", a beard.

14th August 2019, 09:53 AM	#2
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,989	Jaga, I sold this keris to the gentleman who had owned the collection that was auctioned last Sunday. In fact many of the S.E.Asian items in this collection had come from me. I am not working from a blank canvas here, I know exactly what I'm looking at, I know all the craftsmen involved, Agus Irianto I knew for around 15 years, he was a friend of Empu Suparman, as his father was also. In the early 1990's he went to work for Tommy Suharto. It would be a very bad idea to "swap out" the pendok. This keris is perfect and beautiful as is --- after you get rid of that garbage level selut. The pendok may be pasar quality, but it is very good pasar quality, you will not get one of equal quality in a pasar these days, to get anything better you will need to go to a bespoke one from a Solo craftsman, and for brass that will cost you around as much as this entire keris cost you. Additionally, this is good quality gold plate, to get quality as good as this now is impossible in Solo, you would need to get it plated in Sydney, and again, you'd be looking at a cost greater than the cost to you of this keris. You have something very nice and very good. Leave it alone and just look after what you have. Jean, please see page 60 of the Surakarta Pakem. Balebang has two legitimate forms in the Surakarta Pakem, luk 7, luk 9. There is something else too that we must not forget Jean:- dhapur, pamor, and just about everything else about the keris is not graven in stone, what one considers to be so is only correct in one specific dimension. The dimension I choose to use is Surakarta/Solo. I use this for a number of reasons, it is the senior branch of the House of Mataram, most of what I have learnt about keris has come from Solo, in a slip-sliding world of illogical, unfounded keris opinions, at least Surakarta/Solo stays consistently illogical, it does not change when the wind blows from a different direction. Haryo Haryoguritno (Alm.) wrote a book, true, it is probably the best reference for Javanese keris that we have, but it is very, very far far from perfect. Never forget that Haryoguritno was a collector of information as well as keris, he collected from many people, but his world was the world of the collector, not the world of the dealer. Last edited by A. G. Maisey; 14th August 2019 at 10:04 AM.

15th August 2019, 12:20 AM	#5
jagabuwana Member Join Date: Jan 2018 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 290	Jean, Anthony - thank you ! Alan - Haha I did say to my partner "I bet half this stuff went through Alan's hands once.." when I saw the auction. There we go. Understood loud and clear regarding the pendok. Knowing what I know now I no longer have any inclination to remove it. I should also make clear that my reservations about it were entirely from a personal taste and aesthetic preference perspective (I have a general bias against to gold or shiny things ) , and certainly not on the pendok's suitability as a dressing or its quality. However my personal tastes and preferences have certainly been pliable as far as keris matters goes, so I hope that along the way I can appreciate this pendok more and come to see it in the same way as keris aesthetes. Last edited by jagabuwana; 15th August 2019 at 04:32 AM.

14th August 2019, 10:03 PM	#4
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,989	Jean, I do not have the book you mention, but it would make no difference if did, I always try, insofar as possible to follow the Surakarta line. If you care to go through the Surakarta Pakem and match the various forms and the names given these forms, to common belief, you will find that more than one Surakarta dhapur varies from common belief. Does this mean that the Surakarta Pakem is often wrong, or does it mean that other people and other writers are often wrong? Actually, it means neither. Surakarta is always right, within its dimension. All the others are also right, within their individual dimensions. With the keris there are very few absolute rights & wrongs. This is particularly so when we get to playing with names and that is a foundation stone of my personal philosophy that the names of things are unimportant, that which is important is the understanding, but very few people seem to be prepared tom devote the time necessary to grasp an understanding of the keris.

15th August 2019, 12:39 AM	#6
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,989	I understand what you're saying Jaga, and I agree, I personally don't much like this "bling-bling" style that was and is popular with many people in Solo, but it is perhaps not correct to over-rule a taste or style that we do not find particularly appealing and substitute a style that we personally like. The substitution might be more pleasing to us, but is it more pleasing to the people of the culture that owns the artifact? After all, we indulge ourselves in "ethnic collection", not in the collection of things that are our own interpretation of what is ethnically pleasing to us.

15th August 2019, 09:35 AM	#9
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,989	Yes, you're right Jean, speed kills. No sogokan, I should have checked before rushing into print. What you call the "Dhapur" book, I call the Surakarta Pakem. Its the same book. Actually, many years ago, some time in the 1980's, I was offered the original of this book with all the hand drawn illustrations and hand written notes, it is a very big book. The price was way beyond me, but I was permitted to borrow it and photograph the pages. I guess I'd have to go with "diluar pakem", which is the usual for these more recent keris. Pity. Incidentally, the "greneng above the KK" is called a "jenggot", a beard.