New Made keris, dhapur Mundarang

A. G. Maisey · 3rd July 2009, 06:35 AM

Pak Ganja, you are the one who is commenting on the Lar Gangsir, not I.

Yes, it is indeed a very fine keris, and if it is a PB IX era piece, then it would have been regarded as a pasopati when it was made.

I agree with the broad analogy you have drawn with art appreciation, however, art appreciation is a skill which must be learnt.Pictures produced by competent craftsmen, even if those pictures are beautiful, or at least appealing, are not necessarily art.Conversely, some great art can be distinctly unappealing, and much less than beautiful. I believe that you have a background in the field of art? If so, then you know exactly what I am saying here, and you can easily draw the relationship with the art of the keris.

However, this digression into the field of art has absolutely no bearing at all upon our discussion to date about dhapur and the role played in the field of dhapur by the various pakem.

A keris can most certainly be a work of art, even a great work of art, and be completely unclassifiable as any dhapur in accordance with any pakem.

Equally a keris can conform completely to a karaton pakem, and be an appallingly ugly piece of rubbish.

Dhapur according to pakem has nothing at all to do with art, it is all about maintenance of an established pattern, that established pattern being related to a socio-religious value.

Dhapur is about esoteric value, not artistic value.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Threaded Mode

3rd July 2009, 06:35 AM	#24
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,053	Pak Ganja, you are the one who is commenting on the Lar Gangsir, not I. Yes, it is indeed a very fine keris, and if it is a PB IX era piece, then it would have been regarded as a pasopati when it was made. I agree with the broad analogy you have drawn with art appreciation, however, art appreciation is a skill which must be learnt.Pictures produced by competent craftsmen, even if those pictures are beautiful, or at least appealing, are not necessarily art.Conversely, some great art can be distinctly unappealing, and much less than beautiful. I believe that you have a background in the field of art? If so, then you know exactly what I am saying here, and you can easily draw the relationship with the art of the keris. However, this digression into the field of art has absolutely no bearing at all upon our discussion to date about dhapur and the role played in the field of dhapur by the various pakem. A keris can most certainly be a work of art, even a great work of art, and be completely unclassifiable as any dhapur in accordance with any pakem. Equally a keris can conform completely to a karaton pakem, and be an appallingly ugly piece of rubbish. Dhapur according to pakem has nothing at all to do with art, it is all about maintenance of an established pattern, that established pattern being related to a socio-religious value. Dhapur is about esoteric value, not artistic value.