The Kingdom.

[A. G. Maisey]

Michel, it grieves me that you regard my remarks as harsh. I my feeling was that I was providing a gentle prompt that might cause a few people to begin to think about things other than the names that might be applicable to any particular form or design motif, if indeed the object under discussion was in fact of that form.

What I can see is a lot of people doing something that I myself once did, that I now consider to have been largely a waste of time.

However, this does depend upon what one's objective is in taking an interest in the keris.

If the objective is to accumulate a large number of keris of various forms, carrying various pamor motifs, with various iconic representations depicted in the blade carving, and from diverse areas of SE Asia, then the ability to affix names to each of those keris and to provide an approximation of age and point of origin is a worthwhile and necessary part of that person's interest.

However, if the objective is to create a collection of excellence, rather than a collection of diversity, then names and points of origin are really only of secondary interest. Possibly the collector who seeks excellence would serve his interests better by attempting to gain an understanding of the elements of quality in craft and artistic expression, as those concepts apply to the keris.

It may be that the interest of the person involved lays in attempting to gain an understanding of the origin and nature of the keris. If this is the case, then such a person needs to attempt to extend his learning and investigation into areas that may not seem to relate directly to the keris.

Ultimately the direction that one takes in pursuit of one's interest is one's own choice, and a reflection of one's own nature.

The person who wants a large, diverse collection is no more worthy of respect, nor of contempt, than the person who wants a collection which enshrines artistic excellence, and neither of these people are any more worthy of respect, nor of contempt, than the person who does not own a single keris, but who has an in depth understanding of the keris in Jawa during the 14th. Century.

In fact, the separate interests of each of these people supports the interest of each of the others. If the World of the Keris is viewed as a large organisation, an organisation that now has a multi-national nature, each person in our Keris World has a role to play. The person who is the pure collector is no less important than the person who is the pure researcher. Probably most of us combine several functions relating to keris interest, but have a tendency to favour one over another.

Imagine for a moment that in our World of the Keris there were no pure collectors. None to accumulate, name, record and file. If these people did not exist, how could the pure researcher function? In fact, he could not, as he would have nothing to research.

No Michel, I was not being harsh. I was trying to very gently cause those of us with an interest in the keris to ask themselves if perhaps there might be more to be gained from that interest if they altered only a little, their orientation to the subject.

Consider this:- if I were to come across a puzzling carving on a blade that depicted a singa barong wearing a tophat, what would be the most valuable information, the name of a keris with such a carving, or its meaning? What did its original owner call it---if indeed he called it anything---or why did its original owner order its production? Perhaps its production was not ordered at all, so why did its maker invest time and money in its production?

When we attempt to come to an understanding, on any level, of the keris, there are many questions that can be asked.

Sometimes it can be more difficult to construct an adequate question, than it is to provide an adequate answer to a question.

My remarks were not intended to be harsh:- they were intended to prompt thought.

[Michel]

Alan, your posts are always interesting,they achieve their objectives and they force us to think.
I reacted essentially because of your sentence : I think that possibly only one time during the period I have taken an interest in this discussion group have I seen evidence that somebody was really thinking outside the square, followed by David information, that that question was "the OM/ron dha theory".

I have not understood the question but translated it for myself with about the same meaning as: if I were to come across a puzzling carving on a blade that depicted a singa barong wearing a tophat, what would be the most valuable information, the name of a keris with such a carving, or its meaning?

In a brutal summary, this meant that the few thousands posts of warung kopi were almost wasted and that we were, with a few exceptions, a happy bunch of brainless junior clerks concentrating on a wrong approach to the keris. I am convince that that was not what you meant to say, but that is what I understood.

The difference of level between your knowledge about Indonesia, the keris, its symbolism, Buddhism, Islam, Hinduism, the geography of Indonesia and the related local cultures and my culture on the same subjects is so large that words may not carry the same messages and meaning. The question of
"the OM/ron dha theory" is a good exemple. It was meaningless for me.

Secondly if you and a few others are really studying and making research on the keris, it is certainly not the case of many members who are just trying to understand what is a keris, why is it so important, why isn't it a weapon only (or at all), why is it so decorated, complicated to produce, why so many pamor, dapur, areng, etc.

As you have said in your last post, there are many ways of being a keris collector, each one of us looks for something different and excellence may not be the criteria of selection that can be afforded !

Finally Alan and David, (as I think David understood you better than most) if we do it wrong, can you help us, guide us, on the right way ? But please remember that there is a large gap of knowledge between your knowledges and mine (and may be of others) and if the complete Mahabharata has to be read and understood to be able to raise a question as the "singa barong with a tophat"(!) I at least will need some time!
I remember Dietrich Drescher : there are many many more questions about keris, than answers.
I think that your remarks achieved your objective: provoke thoughts.
Thank you Alan.
Kind and respectful regards
Michel

[A. G. Maisey]

Michel, as I have already said, my intention was not to be harsh, not to be hypercritical, and certainly not to dismiss all posts except the one about the ron dha/OM theory as childish.

However, if we were to go back through all the posts that have ever put up in our warung, or in the old forum, how many times would we come across evidence of a new idea?

We can find plenty of basic questions, the answers to most of which are covered somewhere in the published literature. We can find plenty of questions in the nature of "what is it, and where does it come from?" I have no criticism of this type of thing, especially so as I realise only too well that the vast bulk of people who read and contribute to this discussion group are not really all that interested in what the Hindu priests of Majapahit had for breakfast.

All these questions I think we can consider as being "in the square", that is, they are the normal, standard type of fare for general discussion amongst a group of people with a shared interest.

However, consider this:- for how much longer can this discussion group survive by repetition of the same questions in different phrasing?

We could become a "show and tell" group. Probably not too bad a thing for some of us, although I personally have reservations about this type of content.

Or we can try taking a slightly more in depth approach to the subject of the keris.

The two people whom I regard as my most important teachers of the keris never actually "taught" me anything. They would only answer a question if I raised that question. Once I asked one of them why he would not sit down and tell me everything he considered that I needed to know. He responded that when I had sufficient knowledge to ask the right questions the answers would come. I now consider this to be the best and most useful way in which to gain knowledge about the keris. I can align this approach to that used in my own profession, and I find that --- except for the window dressing--- it is the same.

Imagine for a moment that this discussion group were to be centered around drag cars, or mountain bikes, or even fishing. Discussion about these subjects, and other subjects like these subjects, seems to consistently throw up ideas on how to improve something. The contributors to the discussion are actively thinking about the subject of discussion. Yes there is a basic difference between drag cars and keris:- one is an active subject, the other is passive. However, questions can be generated by both, once we take the point of view that the keris is not simply an object divorced from its origin and environment, and frozen in time.

Michel, you have very clearly identified a number of questions that could be raised for discussion; a couple of these questions could be considered as "big questions", questions that may not have an answer that we can uncover. These would make wonderful questions to be raised for discussion.

Keris discussion has been going on in this site for a number of years. A little while ago the Warung began as a specialist place for keris discussion. I think that we can now say that we are well established as the place to come to for those people who want to talk about the keris in the English language. The dues have been paid.If we are to move to the next level it I suggest that perhaps the time is ripe for some slightly more thought provoking questions to be raised.

[Michel]

Alan, thanks a lot for your kind answer.
The subject of this thread, is related to the basic question of acquisition of knowledge and more specifically on knowledge about keris.
To do that, three elements are required :
1) information
2) experience
3) intelligence
You have the three, I have big gaps in the 2 first and may be am I boasting but I hope to have enough of the third.
Various ways exist to complete my lack of 1 and 2.
Good questioning is one way that enables to increase both 1 & 2.
But good questioning is difficult, in particular when you are short on N°1 and 2.
Before asking a question we then should ask ourselve :
Is this a content question ?
Is this question useful for the warung Kopi members or just for me ?
Is this question necessary or can the warung kopi members live without it?
Will this question bring results to the warung kopi members ?

I guess that this procedure would raise the level of questions but also probably reduce their number.

You said : Quote :"Once I asked one of them why he would not sit down and tell me everything he considered that I needed to know. He responded that when I had sufficient knowledge to ask the right questions the answers would come. I now consider this to be the best and most useful way in which to gain knowledge about the keris" unquote
I like very much the answer of your teacher (who did not teach) but made you think. I will try next time to raise the level of my questions !
Kind regards
Michel

[A. G. Maisey]

Michel I would suggest that all that is necessary for a question to be raised is that an answer be required. I don't really think that it is necessary for us to examine the quality of the question, nor the necessity of its answer to other people. But I do think that as well as the classification type questions, some other matters dealing with historic, socio /cultural implications, or technical considerations could be opened.

[David]

Thanks Alan. I couldn't agree with you more. Hopefully this thread will serve as a catalyst for exactly this type of indepth discussion.
Smoke 'em if you got 'em gentleman. Bring your questioning mind forth.

[Jussi M.]

A bump for a worthy thread.