Nomadic Sensibility: Materiality and the Politics of Shelter in Merz and Kato’s Artistic Practices

Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. Please find the detailed responses below and the corresponding revisions/corrections highlighted/in track changes in the re-submitted files in red.

I have expanded the conclusion reframing both the initial question and highlightening the concept of affirmative potentiality potentias as articulated by Braidotti.

I have included a section 1.1. in the introduction titled 1.1. Methodological approach: materials and artist’ words que enmarca el enfoque metodológico del studio en dos fuentes primarias: las entrevistas a artistas y las obras de arte, en concreto, su dimensión material. He dedicado cuatro párafos a enmarcar la metodología de la “material complicity” para contextualizarlo en el cuerpo teórico de los Nuevos Materialismos.  

I have also completed the year of publishing in the marked authors and moved Fig.1. 

Thank you again for your careful reading. 

Response to Reviewer X Comments

1. Summary

Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. Please find the detailed responses below and the corresponding revisions/corrections highlighted/in track changes in the re-submitted files.

2. Questions for General Evaluation

Reviewer’s Evaluation

Response and Revisions

Does the introduction provide sufficient background and include all relevant references?

Yes/Can be improved/Must be improved/Not applicable

See Response 3 on Methodological approach.  

Are all the cited references relevant to the research?

Yes/Can be improved/Must be improved/Not applicable

Is the research design appropriate?

Yes/Can be improved/Must be improved/Not applicable

See Response 3 on Methodological approach.  

Are the methods adequately described?

Yes/Can be improved/Must be improved/Not applicable

See Response 3 on Methodological approach.  

Are the results clearly presented?

Yes/Can be improved/Must be improved/Not applicable

See Response to comments 1-5

Are the conclusions supported by the results?

Yes/Can be improved/Must be improved/Not applicable

Conclusions have been expanded. See point 5.

3. Point-by-point response to Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Comments and Suggestions for Author.

This essay focuses on a comparison of two artists from different generations and backgrounds through the lens of nomadism and performativity. This is an interesting proposal, however, the piece needs to be revised extensively before publication on both structural and argumentative grounds. Please find suggestions and questions below that can be used as a guideline for revision.

- the piece is notably short and thus leaves little room for in-depth discussion, particularly when it comes to Kato's work and theoretical framing

- how does the topic of this year's Biennale (Foreigners everywhere) relate to the topic? It seems an important reference to mention when it comes to nomadism and performativity

- why were these two artists chosen for comparison? the choice seems slightly at will and should be explained, otherwise it appears somewhat random. Do they stand for an approach that could also be detected in the work of other artists? what are the bigger points to be drawn from the author's choice of examples? Kalman Varady's Gypsy Warriors come to mind here as another appropriate example

- change terminology. The use of the word "primitive" without commas is inappropriate in reference to nomadic peoples. Also be aware that the distinction between indigenous peoples and non-indigenous peoples cannot be built on a binary of nature–culture, modernity–tradition, etc. Rather, this might express how the artist's in question approach the topic and should thus be read critically and in consideration of the idealisation and appropriation that relates to the uses of such binaries

- please revisit literature on Roma, nomadism and bohemianism, starting with Mike Sell's text on the "Real avant-garde". While Baker's text is a good choice, it needs to be grounded in a much wider literature on the topic, which is sensitive to artists' appropriation of concepts of bohemianism and the avant-garde that cannot be separated from the topic discussed 

Comments 1: [Paste the full reviewer comment here.]

The piece is notably short and thus leaves little room for in-depth discussion, particularly when it comes to Kato's work and theoretical framing.

Response 1: -

Thank you for pointing this out. I agree with this comment. Therefore, I have expanded to four paragraphs that situate Kato’s work as part of diasporic art citing Mosquera’s seminal essay “From Latina American Art to Art from Latin America”(2003). Mosquera voiced his concern in 2003 of the risk of self-exotization among artists of the Global South and I relate this with some critics of tokenization raised by the recent Venice Biennale (2024).

Secondly, I have included a paragraph explaining the concept of liminality applied to artistic performance as the genealogy of Kato’s performatic installation. Performativity in the exhibition where the artwork was exhibited, titled Liminal State, is grounded on Arnold van Gennep’s Rites of Passage Theory and Carlson’s application of this theory in the arts.  Page 11  and 12 of 15. Last paragraph. Lines 490 to 497.

Thirdly, I have included a paragraph on Colombian artist Doris Salcedo to expand the idea of bodily discomfort to convey the theme of forced migrations and violent politics. See page 12, paragraph 5, lines 529- 540

Comments 2: - how does the topic of this year's Biennale (Foreigners everywhere) relate to the topic? It seems an important reference to mention when it comes to nomadism and performativity

[Paste the full comment here.]

Response 2: Agree. I have, accordingly included a paragraph regarding Pedrosa’s Venice Biennale in relation to diasporic contexts. Page 10 of 14. Paragraph 2 Lines 392-401.

- Comments 3:  why were these two artists chosen for comparison? the choice seems slightly at will and should be explained, otherwise it appears somewhat random. Do they stand for an approach that could also be detected in the work of other artists? what are the bigger points to be drawn from the author's choice of examples? Kalman Varady's Gypsy Warriors come to mind here as another appropriate example-

Response 3: Thank you for pointing this out. The artists were not chosen randomly. To clarify the methodological reasons for choosing these two artists, I have included a new section in the introduction titled 1.1. Methodological approach: materials and artist’s words.

In this section I explain that I have chosen to work with the language of materials rather than the language of words or images. For this reason, this article is grounded in two primary sources: interviews with artists and the artworks themselves, with particular emphasis on the materials. The choice to focus on Jimena Kato, rather than on other widely studied artists such as Colombian Doris Salcedo—whose installations also engage the viewer kinesthetically—allows for the exploration of new categories and alternative cartographies. Kato’s Peruvian nationality is enriched by her Japanese heritage, enabling a unique intersection of cultural influences that broadens the scope of this investigation. Secondly, by examining the concepts outlined so far —materials and artists’ words—I focus on two primary sources prioritizing qualitative and experiential research methods, including artist interviews, firsthand observation of artworks, and direct experiential analysis, over purely cognitive and theoretical approaches or representational and symbolic methods. In the case of Peruvian artist Jimena Kato Murakami, an in-depth qualitative interview was conducted in her studio, along with a detailed analysis to ensure a profound understanding of her work. For Mario Merz, published interviews between the artist and his trusted art critic, Germano Celant, were consulted, complemented by direct observation and analysis of his works during the exhibition ·Mario Merz: El tiempo es mudo [Mario Merz: Time is mute, Reina Sofía Museum), 2019-2020.

Kalman Varady's Gypsy Warriors is a powerful artwork. However, it does not relate to the concept of sheltering and dwelling nor does it interact kinesthetically with the viewer. The idea of vertigo, balance and unbalance that is pervasive in Merz, Kato and Salcedo’s installations, are absent in Gypsy Warriors. Also, I have not had the opportunity for direct observation of the artwork thus cannot apply a qualitative and direct experiential analysis.

- Comments 4:

- change terminology. The use of the word "primitive" without commas is inappropriate in reference to nomadic peoples. Also be aware that the distinction between indigenous peoples and non-indigenous peoples cannot be built on a binary of nature–culture, modernity–tradition, etc. Rather, this might express how the artist's in question approach the topic and should thus be read critically and in consideration of the idealisation and appropriation that relates to the uses of such binaries.

Response 4:  The use of the word “primitive” has been omitted. This article is grounded on New Materialism’s theories, in particular, Braidotti’s philosophy. As she has written extensively, nomadic subjectivity and posthumanism are theoretical figurations that move away from binary oppositions (culture / nature but also human/non human, thus the emphasis here on the agency of materials) to reassert the idea of a convergence. Merz work may have created this opposition of archaic/modern but, as express in page 6, paragraphs 1-5, it is part of his politically committed position. Recent scholarship has highlighted this often ignored but fundamental dimension in his artistic practice.

Secondly, Merz’s igloos allows for an analysis of the performative and potentiality of materials. His igloo’s present an embodied materialism that engages the viewer in a dynamic and relational way. I have added two paragraphs expanding on the history of matter (opacity and transparence) to frame this analysis from the perspective of the language of materials.

Please read page 4 and 5, lines 177-193.

- Comments 5:

- please revisit literature on Roma, nomadism and bohemianism, starting with Mike Sell's text on the "Real avant-garde". While Baker's text is a good choice, it needs to be grounded in a much wider literature on the topic, which is sensitive to artists' appropriation of concepts of bohemianism and the avant-garde that cannot be separated from the topic discussed.

Response 5: 

Thank you for pointing this out. In section 2.2. Nomadic sensibility I have added the connection between Baker’s writings and artwork and Braidotti’s theories. See page 7 lines 284 to 303 and page 7-8 last paragraph, lines 317 to 326.

I quote Baker’s definition of “nomadic sensibility” from the Posthuman Glossary, Edited by Braidotti and Hlavajova (2018) and emphasize the non-logocentric mode and how Roma aesthetics offers a vocabulary of materials as a way of communication, much like Merz’s and Kato’s material vocabulary.

As Roma, nomadism and bohemianism is not the core of my article, I have excluded Baker’s mention in the article’s abstract as it seems to distract the attention from the main purpose, that of answering these questions: how can precarity, migration and dwelling be conveyed through art? How can these complex concepts be expressed without relying on words? Grounded in Braidotti’s theoretical framework, this study has sought to examine embedded and embodied materialist artistic practices. Both Mario Merz and Jimena Kato evoke nomadism by activating the performative and potentiality of materials, a form of embodied materialism that engages the viewer in dynamic and relational ways.

4. Response to Comments on the Quality of English Language

Point 1: Comments on the Quality of English Language

- please use more sensitive language when referring to nomadic communities 

Response 1:   

As English is not my first language, I have asked a native English speaker to revise the text. The adjective “primitive” has been omitted.

5. Additional clarifications

The conclusions have been expanded to four additional paragraphs explaining how the gravitational pull and sensations of imbalance and vertigo in the viewer evoke the precarity and urgency of transient existence. The last paragraphs also highlight the affirmative power of potentia – a concept that, in my opinion, traverses the artistic practices of Merz, Kato, Salcedo and Baker.

See page 15, paragraphs 1-7, lines 542-585.