Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jim McDougall
Actually I believe you are, and interesting to see this intriguing European made example of these outstanding Sinhalese knives. This posting was from back in the great discussion days and anything that caught the fancy of B.I. was hardly presented lightly. What we are seeing here is not meant to be a comparison, but a historic instance reflecting international diplomacy and trade and much of what we study here has a great deal to do with history.
I think Ariel has expressed this perspective perfectly.
|
We will have to agree to disagree then. While it may be interesting to discuss how and why this copy was used in international diplomacy and the history of that i see no such discussion on that subject taking place here. Why was this piece created in the first place? Was this a presentation piece? To whom and when? I might see some merit in that discussion if there was some historical perspective to it. As an object on to itself i see nothing particularly fantastic about this piece.
I also disagree that this is the same as outside cultural motifs being incorporated into the art of European culture. Those artist still created something original. This is just a copy and IMHO it has no ethnographic integrity. The Javanese keris may well have it's influences in some Indian dagger form, but it is not a copy of that form. If it were we would find keris forms in India. Those India daggers served as an inspiration for development and the keris evolved in Java as a unique form. And if the Russians made yataghans in Zlatoust, the Venetians copied Moroccan Nimchas, did they cast them in one piece to artsy copper paperweights or were they forging real bladed weapons for real use?