Sexualising the Erotic—Marco Polo’s Gaze Distorting Our Understanding of Religious Dances

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The author attempts a bold thesis to explore the cracks and fissures in Marco Polo’s medieval travel logs concerning the nexus of intimacy, eroticism, and dance practices and its relationship to theological practices through an auto-ethnographic analysis that not only identifies the colonialist resonances in contemporary dance practices but also opens onto a new horizon for understanding dance today. The author begins by elucidating insights from a communal reading practice of Polo’s travel logs built on Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed that trends away from colonial, transactional pedagogical practices and towards a communal, shared understanding. In the end, the author does identify these cracks and fissures connected to how Polo used rhetoric from the Christian social imaginary to buttress and benefit a mercantilist, sexualized, and Eurocentric framework. And yet, the author calls into question this framework by foregrounding the agency of the marginalized, the dancing, sexualized women portrayed in Polo's travel account. In doing so, the sacred dance is reconceived as transformative in the joy and pleasure both given and received.

One of the contributions this article makes stems from the reflexive tension expressed by the author that culminates in advocacy for communal, self-reflexive slow reading that embodies both a hermeneutic of suspicion and charity, a hermeneutic of love and idolatry. Another important contribution is the use of social imaginaries to discern a variety of operative frameworks, not only of the various contemporary readers of Polo’s travel logs but also of Polo and the cultures with which he interacted. This helpfully elucidates the author’s intricate analysis of Mongolian ritual dances and their translation through the sexualized gaze of Polo for a European audience, leading to a dynamic reading rather than a merely linear approach.

A disjointed account emerges, however, by prepending methodology to the introduction, leaving one to wonder how the communal reading will interrogate Polo's travel logs until the very end. The methodological section, moreover, could have been an entirely different article on its own and possibly referenced in footnotes or shorter interludes for explaining the author's rationale for particular readings. The auto-ethnographic reflections are important to the conversation but could have been woven into a synthesis of Marco Polo’s travel log, which incidentally comes at the end. Moving the account of Polo’s travels forward in the article after a brief introduction that cogently articulates the author's thesis and rationale would allow the author to enter into a reflexive, dialogical analysis of the travel log using the various espoused methodologies with the stated outcome of identifying the cracks and fissures therein in order to unlearn and envision a new horizon for contemporary dance.

For example, towards the end of the article, the author rightly notes that Polo’s travel logs have already been analyzed using postcolonial theory by Dickason that identifies the “(proto)colonization and inscribing of Christian hegemony over religious and ethnic others.” What is missing, according to the author, is an intermediate step of “unlearning” before articulating resistance and resilience strategies. Placing this account and critique of Dickason via Heng towards the beginning of the article seems to me more suitable to unraveling the initial narrative of communal learning and unlearning that leads to an articulation of the cracks and fissures of Polo’s travel logs shaping contemporary dance. In doing so, the methodological and theological can be better woven into the argument. 

The theological aspect of this article is also disjointed and does little work for the author other than to align with the methodology of Jennings and Coakley. Inherent to both Jennings and Coakley is a theological sense for why these cracks and fissures are problematic. Their theological sensibilities allow for reimagining a new horizon of meaning, for Jennings human dislocation from land that reinvigorates not only a sensing with and attunement to creation but also a longing for the Creator and for Coakley the undoing of our sexual desires that leads toward a longing for the triune God. With these sentiments in place, I’m not sure how the author attempts to employ the theological not only to identify the cracks and fissures but also elucidate a new horizon of understanding for contemporary dance. As it stands, the article ends abruptly with a sociological account of the sacred dances but with little to no horizon for a new understanding of dance today. 

For example, the author rightly concludes: “Stated in another way, the account of Polo/Rustichello utilises conceptual frames from the Christian social imaginary, like the terminology of idols, saints, relics and pilgrimage, in order to form universalising structures that derive from and benefit a mercantile framework.” What’s missing is how the theology of the Christian story subverts the mercantilist framework. By articulating the how, the framework for joy and pleasure in worship attains an unrealized gravitas. I see the potential and possibilities, but the author seems to rely too much on the reader to make these various connections. If the theological better animated the author's expressed thesis, then a new horizon for understanding dance would likely emerge.

On the whole, this article rightly identifies the necessary step of "unlearning" the (proto)colonialist resonances in dance from Polo's travel logs before articulating strategies of resistance and resilience and thus makes an important scholarly contribution to the conversation. While the cracks and fissures of Polo's medieval dance accounts are identified, the theological rationale for doing so is wanting. This article would benefit, thus, by a more coherent progression of thought that unfolds the communal reading through auto-ethnographic discourse and theological analysis of sacred dance in Polo's travel logs with methodological justifications as interludes to the discussion and/or explicated in the footnotes.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The article has a number of misspellings, typographic errors, fragments, and sentences that lack subject-verb agreement. A thorough editing is needed.

Author Response

Comment one: One of the contributions this article makes stems from the reflexive tension expressed by the author that culminates in advocacy for communal, self-reflexive slow reading that embodies both a hermeneutic of suspicion and charity, a hermeneutic of love and idolatry. Another important contribution is the use of social imaginaries to discern a variety of operative frameworks, not only of the various contemporary readers of Polo’s travel logs but also of Polo and the cultures with which he interacted. This helpfully elucidates the author’s intricate analysis of Mongolian ritual dances and their translation through the sexualized gaze of Polo for a European audience, leading to a dynamic reading rather than a merely linear approach.

A disjointed account emerges, however, by prepending methodology to the introduction, leaving one to wonder how the communal reading will interrogate Polo's travel logs until the very end. The methodological section, moreover, could have been an entirely different article on its own and possibly referenced in footnotes or shorter interludes for explaining the author's rationale for particular readings. The auto-ethnographic reflections are important to the conversation but could have been woven into a synthesis of Marco Polo’s travel log, which incidentally comes at the end. Moving the account of Polo’s travels forward in the article after a brief introduction that cogently articulates the author's thesis and rationale would allow the author to enter into a reflexive, dialogical analysis of the travel log using the various espoused methodologies with the stated outcome of identifying the cracks and fissures therein in order to unlearn and envision a new horizon for contemporary dance.

For example, towards the end of the article, the author rightly notes that Polo’s travel logs have already been analyzed using postcolonial theory by Dickason that identifies the “(proto)colonization and inscribing of Christian hegemony over religious and ethnic others.” What is missing, according to the author, is an intermediate step of “unlearning” before articulating resistance and resilience strategies. Placing this account and critique of Dickason via Heng towards the beginning of the article seems to me more suitable to unraveling the initial narrative of communal learning and unlearning that leads to an articulation of the cracks and fissures of Polo’s travel logs shaping contemporary dance. In doing so, the methodological and theological can be better woven into the argument. 

RESPONSE: Thank you for these important remarks! I have now rearranged the article so that Dickason and Heng's work comes up early on in the article. In addition to this, I have pointed out that the article has two main sections, one describing methods and theoretical frameworks and another one where the described method is applied. In relation to this I have also restructured the auto-ethnographic materials so that they better show exactly how the methodology is intended to function.

Comment two: 

The theological aspect of this article is also disjointed and does little work for the author other than to align with the methodology of Jennings and Coakley. Inherent to both Jennings and Coakley is a theological sense for why these cracks and fissures are problematic. Their theological sensibilities allow for reimagining a new horizon of meaning, for Jennings human dislocation from land that reinvigorates not only a sensing with and attunement to creation but also a longing for the Creator and for Coakley the undoing of our sexual desires that leads toward a longing for the triune God. With these sentiments in place, I’m not sure how the author attempts to employ the theological not only to identify the cracks and fissures but also elucidate a new horizon of understanding for contemporary dance. As it stands, the article ends abruptly with a sociological account of the sacred dances but with little to no horizon for a new understanding of dance today. 

For example, the author rightly concludes: “Stated in another way, the account of Polo/Rustichello utilises conceptual frames from the Christian social imaginary, like the terminology of idols, saints, relics and pilgrimage, in order to form universalising structures that derive from and benefit a mercantile framework.” What’s missing is how the theology of the Christian story subverts the mercantilist framework. By articulating the how, the framework for joy and pleasure in worship attains an unrealized gravitas. I see the potential and possibilities, but the author seems to rely too much on the reader to make these various connections. If the theological better animated the author's expressed thesis, then a new horizon for understanding dance would likely emerge.

On the whole, this article rightly identifies the necessary step of "unlearning" the (proto)colonialist resonances in dance from Polo's travel logs before articulating strategies of resistance and resilience and thus makes an important scholarly contribution to the conversation. While the cracks and fissures of Polo's medieval dance accounts are identified, the theological rationale for doing so is wanting. This article would benefit, thus, by a more coherent progression of thought that unfolds the communal reading through auto-ethnographic discourse and theological analysis of sacred dance in Polo's travel logs with methodological justifications as interludes to the discussion and/or explicated in the footnotes.

RESPONSE: I am very grateful for this comment as well. It made me realise both what was unclear and where I have been taking for granted that the reader follows my arguments based on assumptions I should not have about the level of theological training a reader may have. Now I have added both more meta-text with explicit theological analysis and the framework of a liturgical gaze, contrasted to the mercantile gaze, so that the how of my argument becomes clearer. I also hope to show more clearly in this new version how Coakley and Jennings contribute to my re-reading of the dances as theologically significant.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

See the comments > PDF reviewed. 

The author embraces a theme that is pertinent to be addressed in the disciplinary context of decolonial and feminist studies. It also coherently considers the following perspectives: socio-political, cultural and ethnographic. The methodology (organizing the experimental situations and obtaining data in directly “performance”) is appropriate and the author uses the strategies underlying the field approach, perceptively analysing the actions and emphasizing the aspects that could be overlooked. The articulation of theoretical foundations/references between specialists contributes to clarify and/or support the data obtained in experiential terms. Nevertheless, references to Marco Polo are initially sparse, but it can be seen that they act as an impetus for procedures, critical analyses and reflections. Perhaps the author could emphasize more, in the first part of the paper, a few direct references to Marco Polo, since he/she titles the paper after this traveller. Finally, and even if it is quite expectable that the author is finalizing the paper, making considerations and reflections, it should include a section directly titled "Conclusion". In order to understand when does the conclusions begin.

 

Author Response

Thank you for the comments!

I have both restructured the text in order to make the part on Marco Polo clearer and added a real section with Conclusions. 

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article is interesting, insightful, and valuable, with a clearly stated objective. However, for greater clarity, it requires revisions. It is preceded by an excessively long introduction, which also explains the research method. However, the clarity of the argument sometimes diminishes due to lengthy digressions, interrupted by long quotations. In the very lengthy introductory section, there is a lack of clarity and precision, and the main idea becomes diluted. I suggest greater discipline and shortening this part.

Furthermore, there are occasional observations that seem somewhat disconnected from the main narrative, such as comments about Ibn Khaldun, who worked in the 14th century, and the sources he used, which are quite complex. It is also a pity that it was not mentioned that the description of the Assassins' paradise garden (the first case) is the result of the imagination of Western authors, without confirmation in Muslim sources (cf. Daftary, The Assassin Legends, for example).

Author Response

Thank you for the suggestions and comments.

I fully agree that there was a lack of clarity and precision in the text. I have now restructured the work into two distinct sections of methods and actual procedure. I hope this provides a better setup for the mixing of auto-ethnographic materials and other types of critical reading of the historical manuscript. 

I removed the section with Ibn Khaldun altogether as it really was not necessary and provided more content for the section with the Assassins.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The author has made substantial changes to the original version that has significantly enhanced the quality, organization, and coherence of the article. By weaving the various communal readings into the methodological section, along with several explanatory sections regarding purpose, the author sets forth a more compelling argument for the communal, hermeneutical approach that embraces both suspicion and charity. In doing so, the expanded theological layer comes into view and provides the basis for an imaginative (re)reading and revisioning of contemporary dance praxis.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The article would benefit from a thorough editing for grammar, style, etc. as I found a number of typos, misspellings, fragment sentences, misaligned subject-verb agreement, etc. While conversational tone suggests a more intimate reading, it often serves to proliferate these grammatical and stylistic errors. Consider using more active voice constructions with the occasional passive voice / conversational tone. These improvements will only enhance the article and prove less of a distraction to the reader. 

Author Response

This is a language-proof version (by a professional and native speaker) where I also take into consideration all the important and valuable remarks by the reviewers about what could and should be improved. I am very happy with the feedback I received and have followed the suggested lines for more clarity and precision as good as I could.