New forged keris for review

[jagabuwana]

Originally Posted by Anthony G.

Hi

Pardon me as I am not a native English speaker. I got problem trying to understand your comments. Could you kindly tell me the meaning in a simple way?

Many thanks.

Sure thing Anthony.

What I said was that this discussion reminds me of a similar discussion in art and music. Imagine music where a very good musician plays really fast to show off, but it can feel like too much. Similarly, some artists can paint things so realistic that they look like photos of the real thing. It's very impressive, but is it really art? Sometimes, things that look too real don't feel as special.

Originally Posted by Rick

I wonder, Jaga if AI is going to make photo-realistic art a thing of the past and no longer relevant in art circles.

I don't think so, Rick. There is something awesome about a person being able to paint or draw photorealistically, but when it comes to aesthetics I don't consider it to be something that evokes beauty.

[Anthony G.]

[QUOTE=jagabuwana;284244]Sure thing Anthony.

What I said was that this discussion reminds me of a similar discussion in art and music. Imagine music where a very good musician plays really fast to show off, but it can feel like too much. Similarly, some artists can paint things so realistic that they look like photos of the real thing. It's very impressive, but is it really art? Sometimes, things that look too real don't feel as special.

I got it, thanks for the clarifications.

[SidJ]

No one here seems to be the least bit annoyed or bothered by this blatant copying of a unique piece? Was the consent of the owner sought? It's distasteful to do this in my view.

[Rick]

I've seen this woven pamor some time ago in our pages; if the dhapur is within a recognised pakem I can't really see any reason to be offended by the form.
I am not aware of any design copyright being claimed by whoever developed this particular pamor.

Why should I be offended.

[Anthony G.]

Originally Posted by Rick

I've seen this woven pamor some time ago in our pages; if the dhapur is within a recognised pakem I can't really see any reason to be offended by the form.
I am not aware of any design copyright being claimed by whoever developed this particular pamor.

Why should I be offended.

Agreed and this new forged keris belonged to me made by a Madura well-known smith who are responsibile for this type of unique pamor. I asked him to forge this keris based on an ancient old keris design.

[Gustav]

Originally Posted by SidJ

No one here seems to be the least bit annoyed or bothered by this blatant copying of a unique piece? Was the consent of the owner sought? It's distasteful to do this in my view.

If you don't wan't your Keris to be copyied, don't post the pictures of it on internet.

Jokes aside, copying was and is the most important part of learning process and creativity probably in every traditional culture, explicitly so in Eastern and Southeastern Asian cultures. I for myself am more annoyed and bothered about the ideal of Art schools in the Western world - everybody must be an artist with an unique language after his study at the age of let's say 25. This idea appears everywhere in Western world where creativity is concerned and not only there, and still determines some of the most fundamental differences between Eastern and Western peoples characters.

Regarding this special Keris and the original one, a part of the problem here could be that the smith was working with a couple of pictures, he never had the original in his hand. Not all people are equally talented to translate two-dimensional objects back to three -dimensional. The other thing is of course if somebody is able to understand what exactly makes out the harmony of a good blade, and not to destroy these things. Here maker's approach was too individualistic, his own character was the barrier not allowing him to make a harmonious blade. Rougly at the same time there has been made another copy of this particular Keris, by another maker, who followed the original much closer, and did have a better understanding of why exactly the old blade does work.

[SidJ]

Gustav you are right about folk pinching posted images of rare kris or other swords and seeking to make copies. I have seen this done with kukris where firms steal / take images posted online at the behest of clients who want something similar and then make multiple copies and offer these for sale. These are always very inferior to the original given the limitations of copying from a 2D image often distorted by camera angle etc. It has resulted in collectors not sharing or posting images of rare pieces online on closed forums like this. The consent of the owner of the image has not been sought nor the source acknowledged at all. Its plagiarism for profit plain and simple in my ethical framework. Some would say imitation is the highest form of flattery though. Nonetheless the point on intellectual copyright and ownership of the images copied remains and although legally the issue is moot, broader ethical considerations on this copying remain a concern for me at least. In the present case this keris form is very rare I think and it was the image posted that was the direct cause of it being copied. Perhaps the differences between the old and the new are sufficiently great to distinguish between the two but that might only be due to the new keris makers inability to reproduce the original well. Anyway thats my personal view. I dont mean to cause offence or insult.

[David]

Originally Posted by SidJ

Gustav you are right about folk pinching posted images of rare kris or other swords and seeking to make copies. I have seen this done with kukris where firms steal / take images posted online at the behest of clients who want something similar and then make multiple copies and offer these for sale. These are always very inferior to the original given the limitations of copying from a 2D image often distorted by camera angle etc. It has resulted in collectors not sharing or posting images of rare pieces online on closed forums like this. The consent of the owner of the image has not been sought nor the source acknowledged at all. Its plagiarism for profit plain and simple in my ethical framework. Some would say imitation is the highest form of flattery though. Nonetheless the point on intellectual copyright and ownership of the images copied remains and although legally the issue is moot, broader ethical considerations on this copying remain a concern for me at least. In the present case this keris form is very rare I think and it was the image posted that was the direct cause of it being copied. Perhaps the differences between the old and the new are sufficiently great to distinguish between the two but that might only be due to the new keris makers inability to reproduce the original well. Anyway thats my personal view. I dont mean to cause offence or insult.

My understanding is that smith have been copying older keris for a very long time. Keris dhapur, especially when dealing with Javanese keris, and perhaps to some extent Balinese and Madurese keris, is a matter of pakem, isn't it? I am unaware of the idea of intellectual copyright or ownership of any particular dhapur in the world of keris. As for the present owner of this original keris, how would they be connected to the "intellectual copyright" of this old keris? They are not the maker or even the original owner. Theoretically, if i were the owner of, let's say, the Mona Lisa, what right would i have to copyright that image and prevent young artists from creating copies based upon my original? I am merely it's current caretaker, not someone involved in the creation of that piece of art.
In all other art forms, students of various disciplines have spent time copying the work of the masters for centuries. It is a common way of learning your medium. This should not, of course, be confused with forging (not in the metal working sense) an art work in order to deceive. But students emulating the masters has always been a path for learning any art.
But as Gustav stated, if you are worried about someone copying your rare dhapur, the best idea is not to publish photos of it in books or on social media.That said, this new version differs in a way that makes it instantly distinguishable from the original it was modeled after beyond it being inferior in form. The pamor. So while a copy it is still unique.

[A. G. Maisey]

In respect of the art discussion & the ethics involved in copying any art work, I will only comment that in general I feel that art, as an expression of beauty or meaning, has lost the plot.

However, Anthony, in respect of the time taken to complete your keris, my opinion is that around a month is a reasonable time.

I think the forging would have taken around 3 or 4 days for a smith working with one striker, if he used two strikers, probably less than that.

Working with electric tools I believe a competent carver would take between 8 & 14 days to complete the carving. Working with non-electric tools, no more than a couple of additional days.

Refinement of the finished keris, and its staining could take another week, but all these estimates that I have quoted as days are full working days, I have rarely seen either Javanese or Balinese workers in any craft, work for a full 8 or 10 hour day, they take long breaks & short breaks & if they don't feel like working on any day, they do not. Additionally, somebody who makes a keris very rarely works alone and unaided, he usually has one or two assistants, & he works as quality control.

I have made a few keris, and a lot of other sundry bladed weapons. The shortest time it ever took me to make a keris was 16 days, the longest time it ever took was 49 man-days. The 49 man-days was a keris I forged in Jawa, & I used two strikers for three days to complete a complex pamor miring, that ultimately failed. The 16 days was a full size tilam sari that I forged and carved in Wentworthville, NSW, Australia. All keris I have made were made with traditional non-electric tools, and I never worked less than an 8 hour day when working in Australia, nor have I ever used a striker when working in Australia.

A month or so is an absolutely reasonable time to complete this keris under discussion.

[Anthony G.]

Originally Posted by Gustav

If you don't wan't your Keris to be copyied, don't post the pictures of it on internet.

Jokes aside, copying was and is the most important part of learning process and creativity probably in every traditional culture, explicitly so in Eastern and Southeastern Asian cultures. I for myself am more annoyed and bothered about the ideal of Art schools in the Western world - everybody must be an artist with an unique language after his study at the age of let's say 25. This idea appears everywhere in Western world where creativity is concerned and not only there, and still determines some of the most fundamental differences between Eastern and Western peoples characters.

Regarding this special Keris and the original one, a part of the problem here could be that the smith was working with a couple of pictures, he never had the original in his hand. Not all people are equally talented to translate two-dimensional objects back to three -dimensional. The other thing is of course if somebody is able to understand what exactly makes out the harmony of a good blade, and not to destroy these things. Here maker's approach was too individualistic, his own character was the barrier not allowing him to make a harmonious blade. Rougly at the same time there has been made another copy of this particular Keris, by another maker, who followed the original much closer, and did have a better understanding of why exactly the old blade does work.

Hi, very well said (written) and in fact I am shocked this smith took almost less than a month to complete it and I think simple too fast. I felt that many Madura smiths are more interested in making money and they might think craving many complicated motifs which is out of the tradition will attracts foreigners. I do hope they put more effort in traditionally way.