New Addition #1 Bugis?

BluErf · 25th November 2008, 01:29 PM

Ah ha, found a pic of a suspected Tok Chu. Note the "fatness"!

David · 25th November 2008, 01:35 PM

I do see the difference Kai Wee, thanks.

So would you then classify Kino's as keris carita then?

BluErf · 25th November 2008, 01:50 PM

Yep, carita it is!

Alam Shah · 25th November 2008, 02:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BluErf

Yep, carita it is!

Hi Kai Wee,
Thank you for the example..

Just a thought..
Does Tok Chu, only focus on one design, or does he have a few, perhaps made for different person with different size, height, etc.. throughout his lifetime or otherwise?

In the Javanese concept, the original blade is added with the prefix 'kyai' (eg. kyai megantara), blades that are made afterwards are added the prefix 'dapur' (eg. dapur megantara).. so likewise, when one says keris 'tok chu', what does it really mean? a blade forged by the known empu, or a design known to be made by him, hence attributed to him? or something else?.. I'm just pondering.. open to opinion, ideas.. etc.

PenangsangII · 26th November 2008, 01:23 AM

actually the fatter / broader one is called tok chu beko, whilst the slimmer one is simply tok chu

BluErf · 27th November 2008, 03:55 PM

Good question - I don't think I can answer that.

Perhaps we could ask ourselves - what is the meaning of 'Pandai Saras'?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alam Shah

Hi Kai Wee,
Thank you for the example..

Just a thought..
Does Tok Chu, only focus on one design, or does he have a few, perhaps made for different person with different size, height, etc.. throughout his lifetime or otherwise?

In the Javanese concept, the original blade is added with the prefix 'kyai' (eg. kyai megantara), blades that are made afterwards are added the prefix 'dapur' (eg. dapur megantara).. so likewise, when one says keris 'tok chu', what does it really mean? a blade forged by the known empu, or a design known to be made by him, hence attributed to him? or something else?.. I'm just pondering.. open to opinion, ideas.. etc.

BluErf · 27th November 2008, 03:56 PM

But the picture I posted above is supposedly a keris made by Tok Chu himself.

A. G. Maisey · 27th November 2008, 08:33 PM

Both of these blades exhibit evidence of being made by people with a high degree of skill in the use of tools. However, using the standards of beauty which I have been taught, the blade in the possession of Kino is far and away superior from an artistic point of view. This blade has flow and harmony, the blade attributed to Tok Chu is not harmonious, and there is no flow:- it is a statement of excellent craftsmanship, but it is not a statement of art.

In the Tok Chu blade, note the poyuhan, ie, the point of the sogokan, this comes to a blocky, abrupt end. This execution just by itself, and even if all other parts of the blade were perfect and beautiful, immediately disallows this blade as an artistic endeavour.

Now have a look at the poyuhan in Kino's blade. Yes, this sogokan appears to lack the necessary cross section that would raise it to a level of brilliance, but the flow of the sogokan, and the harmonious integration of the poyuhan demonstrate a complete understanding of the requirement of harmony in a keris blade.

Its not just the difference in execution of the poyuhan, every feature I can see in Kino's blade speaks of a maker who truly understood the art of the keris. Even from a photograph I can feel the harmony of this blade.On the other hand, the Tok Chu blade, although an example of superb craftsmanship, has absolutely no soul:- it is an essay in excellence, but the proportion --- which translates into pawakan --- and the abrupt workmanship has killed any chance of harmony.

I almost never post on the art of the keris, simply because I find it too difficult to express the necessary ideas in print, however, the contrast between these two blades provides an excellent example of the difference between art and craft.

25th November 2008, 01:29 PM	#1
BluErf Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Singapore Posts: 1,180	Ah ha, found a pic of a suspected Tok Chu. Note the "fatness"! Attached Images

25th November 2008, 01:35 PM	#2
David Keris forum moderator Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Nova Scotia Posts: 7,218	I do see the difference Kai Wee, thanks. So would you then classify Kino's as keris carita then?

25th November 2008, 01:50 PM	#3
BluErf Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Singapore Posts: 1,180	Yep, carita it is!

26th November 2008, 01:23 AM	#5
PenangsangII Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 401	actually the fatter / broader one is called tok chu beko, whilst the slimmer one is simply tok chu

27th November 2008, 03:56 PM	#7
BluErf Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Singapore Posts: 1,180	But the picture I posted above is supposedly a keris made by Tok Chu himself.

27th November 2008, 08:33 PM	#8
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,015	Both of these blades exhibit evidence of being made by people with a high degree of skill in the use of tools. However, using the standards of beauty which I have been taught, the blade in the possession of Kino is far and away superior from an artistic point of view. This blade has flow and harmony, the blade attributed to Tok Chu is not harmonious, and there is no flow:- it is a statement of excellent craftsmanship, but it is not a statement of art. In the Tok Chu blade, note the poyuhan, ie, the point of the sogokan, this comes to a blocky, abrupt end. This execution just by itself, and even if all other parts of the blade were perfect and beautiful, immediately disallows this blade as an artistic endeavour. Now have a look at the poyuhan in Kino's blade. Yes, this sogokan appears to lack the necessary cross section that would raise it to a level of brilliance, but the flow of the sogokan, and the harmonious integration of the poyuhan demonstrate a complete understanding of the requirement of harmony in a keris blade. Its not just the difference in execution of the poyuhan, every feature I can see in Kino's blade speaks of a maker who truly understood the art of the keris. Even from a photograph I can feel the harmony of this blade.On the other hand, the Tok Chu blade, although an example of superb craftsmanship, has absolutely no soul:- it is an essay in excellence, but the proportion --- which translates into pawakan --- and the abrupt workmanship has killed any chance of harmony. I almost never post on the art of the keris, simply because I find it too difficult to express the necessary ideas in print, however, the contrast between these two blades provides an excellent example of the difference between art and craft.