Women Hip-Hop Artists and Womanist Theology

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This article was particularly challenging to review. While it is potentially original and exciting, with a promising and important argument, the lack of a clear  structure and focus and the complicated language prevent its promise from being realized. Therefore, my evaluation is more negative than I would wish it to be, because it requires major rewriting so it is clearer. It was a frustrating article to review, because its underlying ideas are very good, but its style prevents these from being clear to the reader.  

The title needs changing so that it makes sense. I recommend something that focuses more on the theme – for example ‘Women Hip-hop artists and Womanist Theology’, perhaps with a more interesting subtitle. The abstract (and the article in general) need to be understandable for a non-American audience and you should say that the hip-hop that the article focuses on originates from the USA. The article requires subheadings, a clear aim or research question, an introduction that explains what the article will do, and in what order, then clearly signposted sections presenting and building the argument, and finally, a conclusion.

Clarify your disciplinary location or the interdisciplinary fields the article speaks to, especially because it uses language and structure that will not be familiar to scholars in, for example, religious studies, history or political science.

The main issue requiring improvement is the language and style. I am not sure of the (inter?)disciplinary background(s) of the author (perhaps performance studies), but the article is likely to be read by scholars in a range of disciplines, some of whom will not be used to the somewhat performative and exaggerated style in which some of it is written. It is not an easy read, and the reader has to work hard to decipher what is meant in many places. Writing should communicate, and I would recommend some simplification of the language. While the hyperbole (see examples below) may be intended to persuade, it ironically may have the opposite effect.  A few examples of the changes needed are:

• American terms that are not commonly used outside the USA, such as ‘weaponization’ or ‘vibe’, should be defined if they are to be used, or an alternative selected.
• References to divinity as ‘the creator’ assumes there is a creator. While the author and artists discussed may believe so, readers may not, so using phrasing such as ‘to align with a creator’ or ‘to align with their perceptions of a creator God’ will help.
• Line 46 ‘this non-inclusive construct serves as an intolerant cesspool’. Please clarify what the non-inclusive construct is? Christianity? If so, this is hyperbolic language – can you rephrase it? ‘Cesspool’ is not appropriate language for a journal article. Many scholars would agree that American Christianity is beset by white supremacist capitalist patriarchy (to quote bel hooks), so say that instead. Likewise, the idea that Christianity seeks ‘to divide the country for a complete White reign’ (line 48) seems hyperbolic – what about all the progressive churches promoting racial and gender justice?
• Lines 52-53 ‘Black female artivists of Hip-Hop broaden the principles of Womanism to fulfill the preordained prophecy and once again save civilization from self-destruction’. The argument that these Black female artivists broaden the principles of Womanism to challenge society and raise the status of Black women would be a good one, but what is ‘the preordained prophecy’ and how can they ‘once again save civilization from self-destruction’?
• Line 93 ‘it critically identifies American feminism association solely with western White-European culture and its idyllic perspective to life.’ It’s good to see White European culture critiqued but not clear what ‘its idyllic perspective to life’ means. Feminism in Europe has often been deeply pessimistic about the extent of patriarchy and capitalism’s grip on women, so while it’s legitimate to critique neo-liberal capitalism for false promises of hope, it is much less legitimate to critique feminism as influenced by Europe for this. If you wish to retain this critique, please explain or qualify it.
• Lines 98-99 ‘Only the male and female binary is referenced in this writing due to the discussed religion’s recognition of the female and male normative.’ Please rephrase – what is ‘this writing’? Your article? Please clarify what you mean by ‘the discussed…normative’.
• Line 101 ‘an adjuster of gender performative’. The paragraph does explain this but please amend to ‘an adjuster of what performance studies scholar Schechner calls “gender performative”’. The next paragraph then cites Roberts in relation to performative so please clarify whose concept ‘performative’ is.
• Lines 149-50. Please rephrase ‘ to challenge scholarly summaries on the “in the image of God” and martyr to its cause’ to clarify what you mean.

Author Response

I am submitting the revisions of my original research article entitled “Hip-Hop’s Prophesied Trans-Performative Being” with a new name. A new title was suggested for the article by a reviewer, so it is now “Ancestral Theology Births Womanists Hip-Hop.

Per the request of the journal regarding tracking changes, I was unable to fully document and provide a step-by-step layout through the track changes application in Microsoft due to the extensive changes of the document as suggested by reviewers. I did, however, at the suggestion of another academic publisher track the suggestions per each reviewers’ feedback in a table.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This is a great paper and very interesting. Here are a few suggestions.

On page 3, line 76 - change White binary genderism to the White gender binary

On page 3, line 94 change association to associated

I loved the distinction between performance and performative

There are some formatting issues throughout on the quotes (e.g., Queen Latifah's quote on page 6 and Missy's on page 20)

After some mention about Latifah and Yo-Yo around page 6, there's not much mention about Hip Hop until around page 15 when there is much more of a connection. There are numerous pages where the paper reads as if it is really more about Womanism and religion and Hip Hop is just an add on.

The discussion of Lil Kim and the later discussion of Missy were really great and filled with a deep contextualization that I was looking for in previous pages.

On page 23, there is some discussion about the multiple elements of Hip Hop the belongs earlier in the article.

There are other formatting issues throughout the paper with how block quotes are presented. Some paragraphs are intended and some are not. The paper would greatly benefit from the use of subheadings to guide the reader through some of the transitions of thought. Right now, it reads as disjointed in places.

Author Response

I am submitting the revisions of my original research article entitled “Hip-Hop’s Prophesied Trans-Performative Being” with a new name. A new title was suggested for the article by a reviewer, so it is now “Ancestral Theology Births Womanists Hip-Hop.

Per the request of the journal regarding tracking changes, I was unable to fully document and provide a step-by-step layout through the track changes application in Microsoft due to the extensive changes of the document as suggested by reviewers. I did, however, at the suggestion of another academic publisher track the suggestions per each reviewers’ feedback in a table.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The author has done a good job of responding to the reviewers’ comments. Four changes are needed.

First, there are corrections needed in phrasing in various places. See the long list below.

Second, there is still sometimes a tendency to essentialize Black women via the phrase ‘the Black woman’. ‘The Black woman’ seems at times essentialized by the author in two ways: 1) portraying Black women as if they were all the same and 2) implying that their or ‘her’ identity is a kind of biological essence rather than being socially constructed. I advise that the author rereads the essay with this in mind and considers some rephrasing to avoid essentialism.

Third, please revise the title to make the content of the article more obvious from the title. Lengthening it will help. This will help increase citations of your article, so it is to your advantage.

Fourth, please rewrite the abstract in a simpler way to ensure that it includes your key argument and methods.

Corrections list

p.1 line 28 change ‘reveals’ to ‘reveal’ (opinions is a plural)

Line 33 ‘range of self’ – please rephrase as it’s not clear what that means

Lines 36 and 37 change ‘paper’ to ‘article’

Line 39. Shouldn’t this be ‘and structure’? Also, ‘Compounding’ isn’t clear here – use an alternative.

Lines 52-53.  Consider rephrasing the sentence as it’s not clear what it means.

Line 87 ‘offset of Christianity’. Use another word than ‘offset’  - what does offset mean here?

Line 100 consider whether ‘her’ and ‘the black woman’ are appropriate in this paragraph or whether ‘some Black women’ and ‘they’ would be better. The paragraph implies that all Black women ‘have’ hip hop or a ‘hip hop understanding of holism’. Surely many aren’t interested in hip hop?

Line 113 ‘Christianity’s performative’. If you’re not going to define ‘performative’ until later, I suggest you add in brackets ‘see p.5 for a definition of performative’.

Line 127 sub title. It feels like words are missing from this – check.

Line 128 Delete ‘Professor’. Journal articles do not refer to academics as Dr or Professor because almost all authors cited have these titles so it’s unnecessary. Likewise delete ‘from Harvard Divinity School’ as it’s unnecessary to name authors’ universities.

Line 173 Change ‘In simplicity’ to ‘Simply’

Line 188 Subtitle. Like line 127, it feels like words are missing.

Line 267-8 Check as there’s something wrong with this sentence.

Line 357 ‘Still more directly…’ is not a complete sentence so rephrase or add punctuation.

Line 368 – rephrase or correct the punctuation

Line 378 Subtitle. This is clearer than some of the previous subtitles but check. Should it be ‘artivists’?

Line 446 ‘She owned an inherent nature’ – please rephrase to avoid essentialism. Line 449 also appears essentialist ‘her Black essence’ so consider rephrasing this.

Lines 478-9. Check and rephrase.

Line 492 change ‘of which’ to ‘from which’

Line 493 change ‘of the Black woman’ to ‘of Black women’.

Line 710 rephrase ‘were truth to’ to clarify what you mean.

Line 726. Should ‘significant’ be ‘significantly’

Line 746. Do you need the words ‘from this writing’? It’s not clear if you mean your article or Alice Walker’s work

Author Response

I am attaching my table, similar to the last revisions. 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Well done! It is more organized and has a more logical flow to do. You provided sufficient examples and contextualized those in the context of Womanism.

Author Response

Thank you for your commentary and I have made new revisions per the request of the other reviewer. 

Round 3

Reviewer 1 Report

I am satisfied with the revisions that have been made.