Keris golok?

David · 25th April 2009, 10:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jussi M.

When I said about the WHY, What, WHEN, WHERE and HOW etc. I did mean it on a broad scope, not just regarding the keris on this thread or its dapur though I did mention that, yes. - I was implying it only as an example. I am sorry I was unable to make my point clear. My mistake. I understand completely what you mean - ruling out the language out would make it impossible to continue many of the fruitful discussions. Besides it is in the etymology that we many times find some proofs pro or against some insight to some of the Big Questions outlined above.

Jussi there was never any question in my mind that you were talking about the larger picture and not just the keris on this thread. I too would like to see this forum delve into the deeper questions of the keris and while i never really tire of the "show & tell" (afterall, i like to see nice and interesting keris) i know there is much more to learn than the names of all the parts, dhapurs and pamor patterns.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jussi M.

Some terminology is - of course - most welcome as it makes it easier to grasp certain things, such as the various parts, styles and components of the handle, sheath, blade and their decoration you mentioned. - These are well established and clearly define what is meant as there are - as you said - no other terms to be used.

Perhaps you could explain exactly which terms in this thread you are opposed to.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jussi M.

It appears I am with you all the way. - So, what did I mean then? I meant that it is - in my opinion - very frustrating when a posting includes more vague terminology than it does clear language when that vague terminology could have been replaced with more well established substitutes and especially so if it appears that the vague terminology is used only to enhance the posters own standing in this virtual community.

I'm sorry Jussi, but it is difficult for me to respond to this when you yourself are being vague about which words in this thread you are referring to exactly and what words you think they could be replaced with to make it more clear. Yes, there is quite a bit of jargon involved in the keris world and i would not argue with you that some of it may be unnecessary, though personally i am not well informed enough to judge which of them those are.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jussi M.

I am not implying new rules have to be formulated nor am I stating any new course of action. Everybody does what they do and if I am the only one who raises this issue onto discussion maybe it is me that should change his ways of dealing with vague terminology and excessive name dropping. This is not my house. It is the house of the long standing members with accumulated information who have shared this information with others. I have not shared any information with anybody because I dont have any. Most of my 80 odd postings are more or less replies on the oohs and aahs on the common show and tell postings and a few funny pictures which I´ve included to bring some humor to this place.

Well Jussi, as i see it this is as much your house as anyone else's. We don't rate our members by their level of knowledge here and everyone has a right to their opinion, even the less informed ones. And i have always appreciated your funny pictures.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jussi M.

I have - with high hopes - began a few serious threads that have more or less not moved anywhere as members have not wanted to participate on them. So I am merely an infrequent visitor who likes to every now and then sit in the porch looking inside to the big boys playing inside and hoping that they would share something of importance. It happens rarely and maybe it is because I am just a visitor sitting on the porch and not another established big boy. Then again I have a feeling that the big boys are holding back because they feel that the spectators are in it just for the show and tell? Maybe so maybe not.

You will only be an outsider here if you make yourself one. As far as i am concerned we are all students here. Everyone has something to offer IMO and sometimes brilliant theory can come from the keyboards of those with little knowledge, but a quick and logical mind. There are certainly many people here with much greater knowledge of the keris world than i and i respect them for that knowledge. But i think this "established big boys" idea is nonsense and if people seem to be holding back it is more likely that the really don't know any definitive answers.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jussi M.

All I kindly ask for is straightforward and easy language when possible. - After all this is an international forum and the language used here should reflect it.
The subject is hard enough to get a grasp of without complicating it unnecessarily with fancy wordings

True enough, this is an international forum, but discussing a weapon which is strictly Malay/Indonesian. So it stands to reason the the terminology of this weapon will be derived from the languages of it's origin. Again i am not sure exactly which words you refer to as the "fancy" ones and what words should be used in their place. I am not unaware that new terms are still forming in regards to keris and that new dhapur and pamor names are likely to appear that have not been heard of by others here before. This does complicate matters, but it is not for me to judge whether or not these newly arising terms are valid or not. Perhaps they are valid for one keris community and not for another. I think we just need to evaluate them as they turn up.

karset · 26th April 2009, 03:37 AM

do i make u wrote all that Jussi?, if the answer yes. all my apologize for you.

Maybe someone, somewhere need to know what i know about this keris type to use it as data and find more about What, Where,When,Why and How.
Just one from so many colors at this multicolor of keris.

Jussi M. · 26th April 2009, 08:54 AM

karset: I did not mention you.

David: I already said that I am through with this theme. You now ask me to name the names that should not be named? - You know what , I cannot do that. Why, because I simply can´t tell the difference. It is a fair question though. So why bring this theme up in the first place? Simply said because it seems that a majority of threads will end up in a name game in one form or another. I should of have begun a new on this theme and not talked about it here. That was a mistake and I think bringing this matter up was not the wisest idea of the week either.

All I kindly ask for is that when possible lets use well known and widely accepted terms if they exist and suit the case. If not, well, use what ever is appropriate as long as using a term serves a purpose. Not doing so adds unnecessary complication and leads to never-ending loops of misunderstanding, misinformation and putting time on debates and name-games that lead to nowhere.

The name-game

Over and out of this thread.

J

drdavid · 26th April 2009, 09:58 AM

Hi Jussi
This is just my personal take on the issue so bear with me

Keris is art not science. There is one (maybe two) universal language of science. There is no universal language of art and there is no universal language of keris. It seems to me that if one's keris background is Jawa it is a bit like ones art background is France, if one's keris background is Malay peninsular it is a bit like one's art background is Japan............there has been cross fertilisation between the two worlds, there are similar motifs, the techniques interplay, and both are very knowledgeable........ but the words are often not interchangeable. What is interchangeable is some perception of quality, and an appreciation of the beauty and cultural significance . Keris study can be very frustrating (particularly the name game) but when I reach that point I ask myself how would 20 people from around the world interpret Van Gogh's (or Van Gough's) Starry Night.....most would appreciate the image and skill, but the words they use to describe it, they would be different.

It would also be impossible for me to know exactly why Van Gogh painted this scene in this manner at that time, unless he had written his reasons at the time, so I become reliant on other people's interpretation of the work OR I make my own story based about what I know of his life, painting style, emotional response to the image etc. Of course none of my story or someone else's interpretation is the truth .
cheers
DrD

Jussi M. · 26th April 2009, 02:40 PM

Well gentlemen...

I´ve obviously slipped a brain-fart here and should of have said nothing. I apologize in case I have irritated anyone. That has not been my purpose. I am just somewhat tired of the endless name games. I guess that comes with the territory so to speak and is something that one must get used to if one wants to continue within kerisology. Will keep the lid on from now on.

Thanks,

J.

A. G. Maisey · 27th April 2009, 05:05 AM

I feel that this has been an interesting thread, not only because of the subject matter, but because of the contributions to it.

Jussi, I can most definitely sympathise with you. Those people who have known me for a little while know that one of my pet hatreds is "The Name Game". I rather dislike the perpetual striving to stick a name on things, without first establishing a foundation.

There are many reasons why the names that we use to describe South East Asian artifacts are not necessarily accurate, even when those names are accepted as accurate. However, when we attempt to use Javanese names to describe artifacts from some other area, in the case before us, from Lombok, the whole scenario becomes ludicrous.

I do understand the desire of collectors to want to tag whatever is before them with a name. For the purposes of a personal collection record, I can see very little wrong with that. However, to extend that personal collection record into the public arena and claim that such and such a name is the correct name for something or other is simply not a responsible attitude.

Perhaps we might be able to say that a particular keris form resembles some dhapur or other, but to say that it is a particular dhapur when it is patently obvious that it has only a passing similiarity with some known dhapur is wrong.

It is a sign of healthy interest when a number of us combine to search our references and try to come up with a name for something, however, when we think we might have a candidate for the possible name, we need to firstly try to establish if the name we propose is applicable in the probable area of origin; then, we need to ensure that the reference example we are drawing on is exactly the same in all respects with the item we wish to name.If that reference example varies in only the smallest detail, the best we can do is to say that the object we seek to name resembles such and such, and quote the reference.

I'm well aware that my approach to this sort of thing is too disciplined and dry for most people, however, we can either treat the whole subject as lighthearted fun and stick any name we fancy onto something, or we can attempt a slightly more rigorous approach and try to make our opinions count for something.

When I see the interest that this thread has generated it gives me great hope for the future of keris study.

26th April 2009, 03:37 AM	#2
karset Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 48	do i make u wrote all that Jussi?, if the answer yes. all my apologize for you. Maybe someone, somewhere need to know what i know about this keris type to use it as data and find more about What, Where,When,Why and How. Just one from so many colors at this multicolor of keris.

26th April 2009, 08:54 AM	#3
Jussi M. Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 235	karset: I did not mention you. David: I already said that I am through with this theme. You now ask me to name the names that should not be named? - You know what , I cannot do that. Why, because I simply can´t tell the difference. It is a fair question though. So why bring this theme up in the first place? Simply said because it seems that a majority of threads will end up in a name game in one form or another. I should of have begun a new on this theme and not talked about it here. That was a mistake and I think bringing this matter up was not the wisest idea of the week either. All I kindly ask for is that when possible lets use well known and widely accepted terms if they exist and suit the case. If not, well, use what ever is appropriate as long as using a term serves a purpose. Not doing so adds unnecessary complication and leads to never-ending loops of misunderstanding, misinformation and putting time on debates and name-games that lead to nowhere. The name-game Over and out of this thread. J

26th April 2009, 09:58 AM	#4
drdavid Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Australia Posts: 372	Hi Jussi This is just my personal take on the issue so bear with me Keris is art not science. There is one (maybe two) universal language of science. There is no universal language of art and there is no universal language of keris. It seems to me that if one's keris background is Jawa it is a bit like ones art background is France, if one's keris background is Malay peninsular it is a bit like one's art background is Japan............there has been cross fertilisation between the two worlds, there are similar motifs, the techniques interplay, and both are very knowledgeable........ but the words are often not interchangeable. What is interchangeable is some perception of quality, and an appreciation of the beauty and cultural significance . Keris study can be very frustrating (particularly the name game) but when I reach that point I ask myself how would 20 people from around the world interpret Van Gogh's (or Van Gough's) Starry Night.....most would appreciate the image and skill, but the words they use to describe it, they would be different. It would also be impossible for me to know exactly why Van Gogh painted this scene in this manner at that time, unless he had written his reasons at the time, so I become reliant on other people's interpretation of the work OR I make my own story based about what I know of his life, painting style, emotional response to the image etc. Of course none of my story or someone else's interpretation is the truth . cheers DrD

26th April 2009, 02:40 PM	#5
Jussi M. Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 235	Well gentlemen... I´ve obviously slipped a brain-fart here and should of have said nothing. I apologize in case I have irritated anyone. That has not been my purpose. I am just somewhat tired of the endless name games. I guess that comes with the territory so to speak and is something that one must get used to if one wants to continue within kerisology. Will keep the lid on from now on. Thanks, J.

27th April 2009, 05:05 AM	#6
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,015	I feel that this has been an interesting thread, not only because of the subject matter, but because of the contributions to it. Jussi, I can most definitely sympathise with you. Those people who have known me for a little while know that one of my pet hatreds is "The Name Game". I rather dislike the perpetual striving to stick a name on things, without first establishing a foundation. There are many reasons why the names that we use to describe South East Asian artifacts are not necessarily accurate, even when those names are accepted as accurate. However, when we attempt to use Javanese names to describe artifacts from some other area, in the case before us, from Lombok, the whole scenario becomes ludicrous. I do understand the desire of collectors to want to tag whatever is before them with a name. For the purposes of a personal collection record, I can see very little wrong with that. However, to extend that personal collection record into the public arena and claim that such and such a name is the correct name for something or other is simply not a responsible attitude. Perhaps we might be able to say that a particular keris form resembles some dhapur or other, but to say that it is a particular dhapur when it is patently obvious that it has only a passing similiarity with some known dhapur is wrong. It is a sign of healthy interest when a number of us combine to search our references and try to come up with a name for something, however, when we think we might have a candidate for the possible name, we need to firstly try to establish if the name we propose is applicable in the probable area of origin; then, we need to ensure that the reference example we are drawing on is exactly the same in all respects with the item we wish to name.If that reference example varies in only the smallest detail, the best we can do is to say that the object we seek to name resembles such and such, and quote the reference. I'm well aware that my approach to this sort of thing is too disciplined and dry for most people, however, we can either treat the whole subject as lighthearted fun and stick any name we fancy onto something, or we can attempt a slightly more rigorous approach and try to make our opinions count for something. When I see the interest that this thread has generated it gives me great hope for the future of keris study.