YOUNGER Keris

[Anthony G.]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

It is generally accepted that the making of keris in Jawa disappeared with the occupation of Jawa by the Japanese.

It is also generally accepted that Mr. Dietrich Drescher was responsible for the re-birth of the making of keris in Jawa.

Both of these things can be taken to be more or less true, in a general sense.

However, although the broad tradition of keris making did disappear with the coming of WWII, and did not reappear until the well known involvement of Mr. Drescher, I personally knew one man in Jogja, who is now deceased, who by his own account was producing keris for dealers from the late 1950's. Not only was he producing keris, but he carried on his business from his father.

This was probably true, as a tukang wrongko I knew very, very well, in Solo a few years ago claimed that his grandfather had helped this man in Jogja, and the tukang wrongko's grandfather was, amongst other things, a pandai keris.

Additionally, a relative of my wife, who lived in Malang in East Jawa, and who was a keris collector, claimed that he had been able to have a keris made in the Malang area during the 1960's.

As with many things, there is the generally accepted story, which is probably true in a broad sense, and which for one reason or another it pleases us to accept as the "True Story".

Then there is reality which may perhaps not be quite so well known, nor accepted.

In the case of the Jogja gentleman mentioned above, his name was not known outside the keris trade, and because of the nature of his work, he preferred it this way.

The question of the techniques used to make keris cannot be answered simply.
There are a number of approaches that can be used in both the forge work and the benchwork.
Many, if not most, of the new generation of makers seem to be quite open in so far as their working methods are concerned, and they make no secret of the fact that they use electric blowers for forge work, electric grinders for benchwork, and in fact that they work in the most economic and time effective way in all respects.

However, it seems to suit some makers to work in a traditional fashion, using traditional hand tools, when they are being filmed or observed, and to use the more modern methods when they are by themselves.

I will state here that Empu Suparman Supawijaya only ever used handtools:- he did not own any electric tools of any type, and he considered their use as having no place in the art of the keris. The images are of Empu Suparman's tools. Apart from the usual forge tools, and a large file and medium sized file, these were the only tools he used to create a keris.

This brings us to "The Art of the Keris".

During the 1980's in Solo, the Anak-Anak ASKI held a number of exhibitions of their work. Included in this work were keris of traditional forms, and keris of new and divergent forms. I often heard the comment at that time that these new forms or keris were most certainly art, but that they were not keris.

Why were they not keris?

Because according to the hardcore traditionalists of that time, "Keris Art" was Karaton art.

Only the Karaton could determine the correct form for a keris, it was not up to an individual maker, and most certainly not the general public to say whether a keris was a correct form or not:- that was the prerogative of the Karaton.

By "The Karaton" these people meant only only one kraton:- the Karaton Surakarta Hadiningrat, which is indisputably the senior branch of the House of Mataram.

If the Karaton decreed that a keris form was indeed a keris, then it was. If the Karaton did not so decree, then it was not a keris.

Very simple--- well, at least from the perspective of these hard-core keris traditionalists.

Now, I was taught by one such traditionalist, and I do acknowledge that my personal opinion is exactly in line with that traditional perspective.

Keris Art is Karaton Art.

Only the Karaton can set the parameters which must be followed in the execution of this art form.

If those parameters are not followed, then the resultant creation is not a keris, but rather, a keris-like object, even though it may be superb art.

I am well aware that the nation of Indonesia is in a state of flux. It has been struggling for some time now to throw off the bonds of feudalism, and to embrace the ways of the West. The old traditional rulers have lost their power, and their tax base, and are dependent upon government handouts to maintain their crumbling authority, both actual and cultural.

Now we have the emergence of "Democracy", which I have been told many times by ordinary people in Solo --- people such as housewives, taxi drivers, factory workers, farmers --means that "everybody can do as they wish". In other words, Jack is as good as his master. The old restrictions of traditional allegiance, duty, obligation, both on the part of the servant, and on the part of the master, no longer apply.

In such an atmosphere, is it any wonder that those same factory workers, business executives, journalists, and others of the modern world now believe that they have the right to decree what is and what is not acceptable in the world of art, and especially in respect of the "Art of the Keris"?

However, the culture of any people has its roots and its strength, in solid tradition.
In any culture , there are arbiters of what is, and what is not acceptable in the cultural context, and the art of any people is an integral part of that people's culture.
Perhaps in time it may become acceptable for some group of persons within the Javanese cultural community to decree the acceptability or otherwise of various deviations from tradition in respect of the various forms of Javanese Court Art, or which the Art of the Keris is one.

However, in my opinion, that point in time has not yet been reached.

Hi

Pardon my ignorance but does it also applies to the Balinese keris as well or else which authority actually should dictate the Balinese keris standard etc?

[A. G. Maisey]

I cannot give an authoritative answer to that question Anthony.

Balinese society is structured in a different way to Javanese society. The rulers do not live in a Karaton that is in effect a walled city within a city that covers many acres and provides accommodation for those who are attached to the kraton.

In Bali the ruler lives in a Puri, which is not as grand as the Kratons of Jawa were, and judging from the puris that still exist, there was no concept that people attached to the puri needed to live under the eye of the ruler. If a ruler, or somebody attached to the ruler's puri wanted to order a new keris, he would call the pande to the puri, or visit him.

I do not know the degree of control that a ruler had over the dhapur of a keris.

[Anthony G.]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

I cannot give an authoritative answer to that question Anthony.

Balinese society is structured in a different way to Javanese society. The rulers do not live in a Karaton that is in effect a walled city within a city that covers many acres and provides accommodation for those who are attached to the kraton.

In Bali the ruler lives in a Puri, which is not as grand as the Kratons of Jawa were, and judging from the puris that still exist, there was no concept that people attached to the puri needed to live under the eye of the ruler. If a ruler, or somebody attached to the ruler's puri wanted to order a new keris, he would call the pande to the puri, or visit him.

I do not know the degree of control that a ruler had over the dhapur of a keris.

Dear Alan

Thanks for sharing.

[Mickey the Finn]

I vividly recall the occasion when (with my parents as a preadolescent) I visited a place billed as an art gallery. In that place was displayed a pair/ set of mens drawers, affixed to a white canvas with large lumps of masticated pink chewing gum.
To clarify: this was a single undergarment for men; use of the word "pair", or the suffix "s" (usually an indicator of plurality in English) may be misleading to someone for whom English is a second language. English is not my first language.
During my first year of college I was taught that a body styling itself the Modern Language Association of America has claimed for itself the authority to decree what is or is not correct usage of the English language.
In the movie "Inglourious Basterds", an Englishman posing as a German is found out by a "Gestapo major". The Englishman, knowing that "the jig is up" and no longer speaking German, makes a quip about "going out speaking the King's [English]".
Legitimate authorities exist, as well as authorities without legitimacy. I hope I'm not being too abstruse.
I'm the custodian of a few keris kamardikan, most made by Empu Tidak Dikenal. I'd never consider acquiring any keris luk dan lurus, or with pamor catur.
Come on...honestly...have some class. I understand that tastes may vary, but if it looks hokey, it is hokey; and if it looks cheap and cheesy...calling it something it's not doesn't make it any better than what it is.
Any Old Boy knows that if it's not cricket, it's just not cricket, Old Boy.
In memory of Richard Chave Sanderson (June 24th, 1973 - February 20th, 2008).
Mickey the Finn

[Jean]

You are too clever for me, Mickey!

[David]

Originally Posted by Jean

You are too clever for me, Mickey!

Perhaps he meant obtuse...

[A. G. Maisey]

Error