New Keris/Keris baru

[sirek]

Originally Posted by Jussi M.

what was the intent of the maker - did he act on good faith and failed because of ignorance? Did he himself thought that he had followed the Pakem, only to be corrected by some of more understanding?

replica or fake is indeed not easy to define
if there is deviated from the traditional form, and we have to deal with the artistic spirit of the modern maker.
IMO its not a replica or a fake keris, but ? a modern impression?

[Jussi M.]

Originally Posted by sirek

replica or fake is indeed not easy to define
if there is deviated from the traditional form, and we have to deal with the artistic spirit of the modern maker.
IMO its not a replica or a fake keris, but ? a modern impression?

I guess a "purist" would say that anything that deviates from Pakem (if the maker is following one in the first place that is) is not a keris but a keris like object. That said I guess the difficulty is in deciding where to draw the line between artistic freedom and tradition.

I guess we all weigh and measure these things differently depending on our abilities, motives and capabilities

[Jean]

Originally Posted by sirek

replica or fake is indeed not easy to define
if there is deviated from the traditional form, and we have to deal with the artistic spirit of the modern maker.
IMO its not a replica or a fake keris, but ? a modern impression?

A modern creation indeed but not a very good one IMO, the wadidang has an odd shape and I apparently see some filing marks on the gandik and pejetan? But this is according to my personal taste only and you are fully entitled to disagree!
Regards

[David]

Originally Posted by sirek

replica or fake is indeed not easy to define
if there is deviated from the traditional form, and we have to deal with the artistic spirit of the modern maker.
IMO its not a replica or a fake keris, but ? a modern impression?

A certain amount of artistic interpretation has always been acceptable to the standards of pakem AFAIK. It can, of course, be taken too far, but that does not seem to be the case in your example.

[A. G. Maisey]

I'm going to stay out of this discussion, for a while, anyway, as I put the questions.

However, on the subject of keris used as items of formal dress. These are very often just pieces of flat iron that are used to hold the dress together. I've even seen cardboard used to hold dress together.

The standards that collectors in the western world use to judge a keris are not often used used by people in Jawa who need a dress keris. It most often comes down to what they can afford. At a grassroots level, all current production is directed at the local market. Keris sold to collectors in foreign lands are not really any sort of special or dedicated production.

[Rick]

Can you expand on what is the local market in Jawa, Alan ?

If many only need a paper stand-in for a wedding; who purchases contemporary work in Jawa ?
Only keris collectors ?

Maybe this is a digression; I would like to know; it might help how I see the keris .

[A. G. Maisey]

I saw the cardboard used by a very poor farm worker. I've seen flat iron (flat galvanised iron as used for chicken coops etc) used by a number of ordinary working people like school teachers, bus drivers etc. Based upon what I've seen in dealers kiosks in Central Jawa, the people who buy ordinary quality new keris are people who want a dress keris and can afford something better than flat iron. People who buy better quality new keris seem to be people who are collectors at one level or another.

My remarks are based on what I've seen, and discussion with friends in Solo who deal.

[Rick]

Alan, is the concept of pusaka from this time gone now ?

People would not purchase a new keris with the intent of it becoming a pusaka in future generations ?

[A. G. Maisey]

No, the pusaka idea has not disappeared. I know a number of people who have ordered new keris with the intent of those keris becoming pusaka, and two people --- one in Jakarta and one in Malaysia--- have placed orders through me for keris intended as pusakas. I'd say the concept is still alive and well.

[HughChen]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

I'm going to stay out of this discussion, for a while, anyway, as I put the questions.

However, on the subject of keris used as items of formal dress. These are very often just pieces of flat iron that are used to hold the dress together. I've even seen cardboard used to hold dress together.

The standards that collectors in the western world use to judge a keris are not often used used by people in Jawa who need a dress keris. It most often comes down to what they can afford. At a grassroots level, all current production is directed at the local market. Keris sold to collectors in foreign lands are not really any sort of special or dedicated production.

Hell, Maisey. As you said all current production is directed at the local market, I heared that in 1900s, many Keris were produced specially and deliberately for export to Europe. Is that really?

[A. G. Maisey]

I do not believe that we should lump the entire 20th century into one basket.

Pre-WWII tourism does seem to have resulted in the production of not only keris, but many types of ethnographic artefacts that were intended for sale to visitors to the old Dutch East Indies.

During the period between more or less 1940 & 1950 there were probably a very few keris made and these would have been intended exclusively for local use.

The revival of keris culture began in the late 1960's or early 1970's, as it has progressed it is probably true that all actual making of keris has been for local consumption, every Javanese man who wishes to dress in formal attire must wear a keris, so this local need for keris is the biggest single factor in keris production.

But not all keris made were prepared for sale to only the local market, nor were keris produced only as items of formal attire. The collector market in Indonesia is extremely active, many keris were & are prepared for this market. Some keris were & are made as sophisticated works of art.

In fact, the market for keris outside Indonesia is something that receives very little attention from Indonesian craftsmen & dealers, the local market is where the money is.

Visitors to Indonesia who wish to take one or more keris home to their own country with them face quite a few hurdles, so sales to tourists are now so few that general dealers who once sold keris now focus on more easily transportable items.

[HughChen]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

I do not believe that we should lump the entire 20th century into one basket.

Pre-WWII tourism does seem to have resulted in the production of not only keris, but many types of ethnographic artefacts that were intended for sale to visitors to the old Dutch East Indies.

During the period between more or less 1940 & 1950 there were probably a very few keris made and these would have been intended exclusively for local use.

The revival of keris culture began in the late 1960's or early 1970's, as it has progressed it is probably true that all actual making of keris has been for local consumption, every Javanese man who wishes to dress in formal attire must wear a keris, so this local need for keris is the biggest single factor in keris production.

But not all keris made were prepared for sale to only the local market, nor were keris produced only as items of formal attire. The collector market in Indonesia is extremely active, many keris were & are prepared for this market. Some keris were & are made as sophisticated works of art.

In fact, the market for keris outside Indonesia is something that receives very little attention from Indonesian craftsmen & dealers, the local market is where the money is.

Visitors to Indonesia who wish to take one or more keris home to their own country with them face quite a few hurdles, so sales to tourists are now so few that general dealers who once sold keris now focus on more easily transportable items.

Thank you, Maisy. So in conclusion, in the 19th century and the first half of the 20th century, there were probably more keris supplied to Western exotic enthusiasts, while in the second half of the 20th century, after World War II, keris were mainly supplied to the local market. Is that correct?