Thank you, Pak Alan, for remind me that keris have always been commodity. Yes, it is, it was and it will. We both know that keris as a product could be divided roughly into two groups: Keris Gramen (made without any specific order=commodity which will be sold readily in open market) and Keris Yasan (Keris which is made under commision). Most of kerises, even the old ones, are gramen. The high-quality keris are not for everyone, as not many peoples could afford it. Even if ones could afford, in the old days, it would be restricted for him, and depended heavily on his social status. And in fact, keris knowledges were not for everyone, makes keris surrounded with many myths and stories.
I don't mind certain keris become commodity nor for keris artisans to develop his special ability and making money from it. It was done before. But it doesn't mean all have to be commodity and commercial. Today's keris 'industry' has gone too far. They're losing grip on the meaning of 'tosan aji'. It is not just about 'beauty'. It has a deep spiritual aspect in it. O'Connor in "Metallurgy and Immortality at Candi Sukuh" simply wrote, "The perfection of spirit is figured in the perfection of metal, and, in a sense, imposes itself in the poetic logic of the metal workers' physical operations." Without some 'spiritual involvement', it is imposible to make a real 'tosan aji'.
I don't mean every keris makers should become hermit or priest, or should conduct 'slametan' or give some offerings when working. What I mean is, they should consciously honor the tradition on keris making, or at least, bear in mind what they're doing. In some extend, I envy the Japanese traditional sword makers, and I wish keris makers could match their devotion.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ganjawulung
I appreciate very much your valuable dialog on this keris making topic. Even in Indonesian keris forum, or Indonesian keris dialog, I think it never happened talking of keris making -- between "Jogja-school" and "Solo-school" (sorry, if it is not a proper term for you) -- in a friendly manner such this.
|
Mas Ganjawulung, I don't think that there would be much differences in keris making between Jogja and Solo. Style, perhaps. But even so, I remember Empu Djeno once told me that his father used to sold his keris (gramen) in Pasar Gede, Solo. His father, certainly working under Jogja's school. And at the time he was living, there were much more 'keris literate' people in Solo than today, and the shadow of rivalry between Solo and Jogja should be much more felt than today. But he managed to sell it.
I don't understand the Solo School much. But I get impression, until now, that the Solo school emphasize on learning the technical aspects and details. OTOH, I get impression, until now, that Jogja school emphasize on learning about the 'perfect metal', mainly the iron (tosan) and 'overall appearance'. Under the Jogja school, it is the tosan (iron) which makes an iron object such as keris qualified as 'tosan aji' or not. Other things like dhapur, details/ricikan, pamor motif and tangguh come later. However, after the tosan meets the standart, those factor then come into account. But I must admit, it is practiced under a very limited circle only, mainly kraton-linked. It doesn't mean that Solo neglect tosan, and Jogja neglect the technical and detail. I've found Solo kerises which has good iron, too. It is just a different priority on keris appraisal.
Unaware of this different approach would certainly result in unnecessary endless debate, and possibly harasment.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Rick
This raises a question for me ; I hope I can express it correctly .
When judging the work of an empu class artisan where does one draw the line between proper form/dhapur and individual creativity on the part of the maker ?
Is there room for imagination and innovation in the process ?
|
The proper form/dhapur in 'classical keris school' has already prescribed. It is hard for today empu, or even the old times empu, to make a new dhapur, as 'classic dhapur' aren't just about beauty, but more importantly, it have symbolic meaning. The Javanese empus could not easily alter the shape of greneng, as it was done by Sundang maker for example, as greneng has a prescribed form as 'dha' character. But as your handwriting, it is open for creativity, as long as it could be recognized. For example, you have your own stroke and shape to write 'd' as I have mine, but our 'd' shouldn't go too far from prescribed 'd' universally agreed. So, there are rooms for creativity, such as 'sogokan kandas palemahan/waja' (sogokan was made deep enough until the steel core revealed), square shape pejetan, sogokan 'nyucuk dhandang' ('crow beak' sogokan), tikel alis nerjang/nratas gandhik (tikel alis cut acros gandhik) etc. If some particular details was executed by a particular group of empus attached to a Kraton/Kingdom or certain area, then it might become a Tangguh's marks. But there are so many details in keris, that tangguh would leave some 'unprescribed'. Some of this particular details might be specially prescibed by the court, though, and thus, not an empu's creativity. But it is also possible that some particular style of ricikan/details once belonged to certain empu, then copied by another makers, since it looked beautiful, or was preferred by 'the market'. It's about 'fashion's trend' then.
Alternatively, empu might invented or employed a special technique or 'character' on forging, especially when applying the pamor. He might make the pamor look bolder or tighter or to reflect chatoyancy, etc. Dimension, could be also 'played'. However, as Pak Alan said, ones need an ample artistic talent and experience to appraise/identify whether a particular keris was the work of empu or not.
I understand that under Surakarta's Court, the keris shape was stricly prescribed. I've been told that there are 'master keris models' found in Kraton Surakarta, made of wood/bronze/brass (?). Master models, that every Court's empus had to conform. I know today's respected Solo keris maker who used to bring vernier caliper, and make his keris to exact milimeter and angle.
Kraton Yogyakarta, on the other hand, seemed not so strickly prescribe it's keris measurement as Surakarta did. Until now, no keris model has ever found. Empu Djeno worked without a 'master model' as long as I know, and so did his father. But it didn't throw the Yogyakarta keris to the chaotic order. The style was prescribed and strickly controlled, but the control was based more on 'rasa/feeling' rather than from model. It was important for both court to produce a high quality kerises, as it reflected it's cultural sophistication. Which one is better ? Both are.
The 'gramen keris', from Karsten's Krisdisk