Yep, I've seen a piece of cardboard used to support keris dress. Obviously not a keris.
Why?
If I can consider something that is of very inferior workmanship a keris, why can I not consider a piece of cardboard, or a piece of wood a keris if it looks like a keris and fulfills the function of a keris?
The reason is that cardboard and wood cannot be tosan aji :- honoured iron. Iron is the essential component. Doesn't really matter how rough the work is, provided it vaguely resembles what it is intended to be, provided it is made of iron, it qualifies as tosan aji. The form represents an idea, just as two rough sticks crossed represent an idea to a Christian, and the honour of the idea comes from man.
At the present time in Bali, one of current working pande keris is recognised as the only true pande keris because he knows the correct mantras and observances for the making of a sacred keris. Such a keris from his hands will cost much more than a piece of high art from any of the other makers. But do not expect high art from this man's hands. The keris that he produces are not of any value artistically, but they are of high value talismanically.
When we raise the question of things made in traditional fashion, we need to ask just exactly what that "traditional fashion" is.
Does "traditional fashion" need to incorporate the washing of iron to make it usable? Does it need to incorporate different metals to create contrast in a blade?
The palace guards of the Mangkunegaraan were armed with tombak and pedang that were made from homogenous steel. This was used to replace the old multi-folded material as soon as it became available.
Empu Jayasukadgo of the Karaton Susuhunan made a number of keris and other weapons from modern, homogenous steel. Other pande keris working in Jawa also used modern steel for weapons as soon as it became available.
Why?
It was superior material. They still made pamor blades when required, but these were made primarily for their talismanic properties, not to use as weapons.
Craftsmen have always used the most modern technology available to produce their craft. It is not the way that something is made that makes it a traditional artefact, it is the way that the people who own the culture that owns that artefact regards it that validates its authenticity.
Once again using Christianity as an example.
Does a cross need to be made in a particular fashion in order to make it a legitimate symbol of the Christian faith?
I rather think not. It is the way in which a Christian regards that cross that gives it its legitimacy.
It is no different with the keris.
I have no problem at all in accepting that many collectors will not accept as collectable items, keris such as are under discussion in this thread, however, it is simply not possible to deny that those non-collectable items are keris.
|