Skip to content
1981
Volume 16, Issue 1
  • ISSN: 2040-4689
  • E-ISSN: 2040-4697

Abstract

Gedog batik products not only have high artistic and craftsmanship value but are also a representation of the traditions of Tuban itself. The current condition of these traditional artefacts is unavoidably experiencing intervention from modernization in the form of trends, technology and market tastes, which demand innovation to maintain their existence. However, this is challenging because modernization is considered to have the potential to threaten the uprooting of the virtues of tradition itself. In 2018, the concept of a traditional artefact innovation pyramid was produced as a guide to bridge the ‘gap’ between tradition and modernity so that we can collaborate to create innovation. This research was carried out by applying the phases in the pyramid guide innovation of traditional artefact concept: (1) conducting a preliminary study to determine the fundamental ground of tradition forming the identity of the tradition and validating using triangulation of data sources; (2) qualitative hybridity analysis by comparing the traditional values of Gedog batik cloth with the factual conditions which have undergone several interventions to produce recommendations for innovation strategies and (3) the strategy is realized into a prototype through the process of exploring the design of the work. It should be possible to produce tradition-based craft products that meet trend needs and are in demand by the market.

Funding
This study was supported by the:
  • DRTPM Research Grant (Directorate General of Higher Education, Ministry of Education and Culture of the Republic of Indonesia) (Award 333/PNLT2/PPM/2023, 003/SP2H/RT-MONO/LL4/2023 and KWR4.090/LIT07/PPM-LIT/2023)
© 2025 Intellect Ltd
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1386/crre_00143_1
2025-04-30
2026-04-22

Metrics

Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Achjadi, J. K. and Natanegara, N. (2010), Tenun Gedog: The Hand-Loomed Fabrics of Tuban, East Java, Jakarta: Media Indonesia Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Amrita, B. and Pallavi, R. (2023), ‘Design thinking: Construction of a meme-based model for culture-specific design’, Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 14:1, pp. 1856–69, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-022-00954-7.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Castelblanco, S. P. (2022), ‘Craft as resistance: A case study of three Indigenous craft traditions’, Craft Research, 13:2, pp. 387–409, https://doi.org/10.1386/crre_00085_1.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Chen, X., Xie, W. and Li, H. (2020), ‘The spatial evolution process, characteristics and driving factors of traditional villages from the perspective of the cultural ecosystem: A case study of Chengkan village’, Habitat International, 104:1, p. 102250, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2020.102250.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Ciptandi, F. (2018), Transformation on Design of Gedog Weaving and Traditional’ Tuban’Batik Decoration Through Visual Characteristic Experiment, Bandung: Institut Teknologi Bandung.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Ciptandi, F. and Arumsari, A. (2024), ‘The existence of aesthetic transformation in traditional batik colors based on the review of memetics theory (Case study: Traditional batik in Tuban, East Java, Indonesia)’, Harmonia: Journal of Arts Research and Education, 24:1, pp. 177–91, https://doi.org/10.15294/harmonia.v24i1.43243.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Ciptandi, F., Morinta, R. and Lukman, M. (2022), ‘Application of batik technology in the development of motif design for traditional batik craftment’, Fibres and Textiles, 29:2, pp. 27–43.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Ciptandi, F., Rosandini, M. and Nafi’ah, U. (2023), ‘The transformation of Tuban Batik colours: Perception and value in modern society’, Dewa Ruci: Jurnal Pengkajian dan Penciptaan Seni, 18:1, pp. 16–27, https://doi.org/10.33153/dewaruci.v18i1.5184.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Csurgó, B. and Melanie, K. S. (2021), ‘The value of cultural ecosystem services in a rural landscape context’, Journal of Rural Studies, 86:1, pp. 76–86, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2021.05.030.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Djumena, N. S. (1990), Batik dan Mitra, Batik and Its Kind Jakarta, Indonesia: Djambatan.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Dmitry, E. and Alexander, E. (2021), ‘Memetic approach to cultural evolution’, Biosystems, 204:1, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystems.2021.104378.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Grünewald, D. A. (2002), ‘Tourism and cultural revival’, Annals of Tourism Research, 29:4, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-7383(02)00005-1.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Heringa, R. (2010), Nini Towok’s Spinning Wheel: Cloth and the Cycle of Life in Kerek, Java, Los Angeles, CA: Fowler Museum at UCLA.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Holmquist, A., Magnusson, M. and Livholts, M. (2019), ‘Reinventing tradition: Exploring the creation of new meaning through innovations involving craft-based design’, Creativity and Innovation Management, 28:1, pp. 124–37, https://doi.org/10.1111/caim.12297.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Hurcombe, L. (2014), Archaeological Artefacts as Material Culture, London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Jonathan, W. L., Frank, K. L., Ron, W. G. and Benrita, M. B. (2020), ‘How traditional tribal perspectives influence ecosystem restoration’, Ecopsychology, 12:2, pp. 71–82, https://doi.org/10.1089/eco.2019.0055.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Krippendorff, K. (1989), ‘On the essential contexts of artifacts or on the proposition that “design is making sense (of things)”’, Design Issues, 5:2, pp. 9–39, https://doi.org/10.2307/1511512.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Leong, D. and Clark, H. (2003), ‘Culture-based knowledge towards new design thinking and practice: A dialogue’, Design Issues, 19:3, pp. 48–58, https://doi.org/10.1162/074793603768290838.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Manningtyas, R. D. and Katsunori, F. (2022), ‘Traditional ecological knowledge versus ecological wisdom: Are they dissimilar in cultural landscape research?’, Land, 11:8, p. 1123, https://doi.org/10.3390/land11081123.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Niedderer, K. and Townsend, K. (2021), ‘Craft between tradition and adaptation’, Craft Research, 12:2, pp. 175–81, https://doi.org/10.1386/crre_00048_2.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Norman, A. D. (2004), Emotional Design, Why We Love (or Hate) Every Thing, New York: Basic Books.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Nugraha, A. (2012), Transforming Tradition: A Method for Maintaining Tradition in a Craft and Design Context, Finland: Aalto University and School of Arts, Design and Architecture.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Połeć, W. and Daria, M. (2021), ‘The social constraints on the preservation and sustainable development of traditional crafts in a developed society’, Sustainability, 14:1, p. 120, https://doi.org/10.3390/su14010120.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Purwaningsih, L. (2022), ‘Relasi Motif Kain Lurik Jawa dan Makna Spiritualitasnya: Kajian Filosofis, Sosiologis, dan Fenomenologis’, Concept: Journal of Social Humanities and Education, 1:4, pp. 127–36, https://doi.org/10.55606/concept.v1i4.86.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Tirta, I. (2009), Batik Sebuah Lakon, Jakarta: Gaya Favorit Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Tsaknaki, V. and Ylva, F. (2017), On the Surface of Things: Experiential Properties of the Use of Craft Materials on Interactive Artefacts, Rotterdam: TU Delft Open.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Väänänen, N. and Pöllänen, S. (2020), ‘Conceptualising sustainable craft: Concept analysis of literature’, The Design Journal, 23:2, pp. 263–85, https://doi.org/10.1080/14606925.2020.1718276.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Widiana, M., Retnowati, N., Slamet, A. and Sagirani, T. (2020), ‘The improving of the quality resources of Gedog batik craftsmen in Tuban regency’, Indonesian Journal of Cultural and Community Development, 7:1, https://ijccd.umsida.ac.id/index.php/ijccd/article/view/683. Accessed 4 March 2025.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Yuan, Q., Xu, S. and Jian, L. (2018), ‘A new method for retrieving batik shape patterns’, Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 69:4, pp. 578–99, https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23977.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1386/crre_00143_1
Loading
Development of Gedog batik crafts using pyramid guide innovation of traditional artefacts
Craft Research 16, 73 (2025); https://doi.org/10.1386/crre_00143_1
/content/journals/10.1386/crre_00143_1
/content/journals/10.1386/crre_00143_1
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Article
Keyword(s): cloth; craftsmanship; rustic; textile; traditionJavanese culture; transformation; weaving

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a success
Invalid data
An error occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error
Please enter a valid_number test