‘I Said: Hymn 38!’ The Reception of the Protestant Reformation in The Netherlands at the Turn of the Millennium—The Case of ‘The White Cowboy’

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This is an engaging and interesting discussion of a niche topic that nevertheless appeals to a broad audience, well outside the Netherlands. Having only a rudimentary knowledge of Dutch Protestantism and culture, I learned a lot from this article and wanted to learn more (the sign of a good and important piece of scholarship!). 

My only suggestion (beyond standard spell-check and grammar review) is to rework the conclusion into a narrative rather than a numbered list. The structure of the numbered lists is jarring and less effective than a narrative conclusion. 

Author Response

Dear reviewer, thanks for your generous compliments! But also for pointing out an improvement of the final section of my article, that is, to change the point-by-point sequence of the conclusions into a more pleasing, narrative structure. I have done accordingly. Thanks again!

Reviewer 2 Report

The basis for the conclusion is far too small. Too much information on Dutch Church History needs to be given to have the outsider at least give the impression on what this episode wants to say. 

Author Response

Dear reviewer, thank you your feedback.

I am sorry to read that you apperently were not so fond of my article, judging from your review. Unfortunately, the two sentences your feedback consisted of did not allow me to counter your criticism in its fullest form. Nevertheless, I have included a new paragraph at the beginning of my introduction, giving extra arguments for choosing 'The White Cowboy' as a case study for the Dutch contemporary reception of 'The Churchgoers'). See below:

Of course, ‘The Churchgoers’ is not the only Dutch example of critical reception of the historical reformation in the Netherlands. Other examples include the critically acclaimed novel Knielen op een bed violen (‘Kneeling on a bed of violets’) by Jan Siebelink (2005), including its film adaption in 2016, Dorsvloer vol confetti (‘A Threshing-floor full of serpentines’) by Franca Treur (2009) or De Jacobsladder (‘Jacob’s Ladder’) by Maarten t’Hart (1986). While these and other literary criticisms are not devoid of humour or sarcasm, ‘The Churchgoers’ as a part of The White Cowboy series, is a comedy from start to finish. It is far less subtle than the novels mentioned above, much shorter, in a different medium (film instead of literature) and was aired as a part of a children/young adult television show (I will discuss this aspect later on in full detail). These all are reasons for choosing ‘The Churchgoers’ as a case study in the Dutch reception of the historical Reformation.

Your overall criticism was, fortunatelly for me, not shared by the other two reviewers who shared very enthusiastic and positive feedback.

Reviewer #1.

This is an engaging and interesting discussion of a niche topic that nevertheless appeals to a broad audience, well outside the Netherlands. Having only a rudimentary knowledge of Dutch Protestantism and culture, I learned a lot from this article and wanted to learn more (the sign of a good and important piece of scholarship!). 

Reviewer #2.

As a scholar of (Dutch) religion, who initially specialized in Calvinism and since then moved into contemporary debates about religion, identity and popular culture in the Netherlands, I was pleasantly surprised by the topic and approach of the article. Also for a less informed reader (for instance a non-Dutch reader), this article  has a lot of interesting things to offer. 

Nevertheless, I hope to have countered at least some of your initial feedback.

Reviewer 3 Report

As a scholar of (Dutch) religion, who initially specialized in Calvinism and since then moved into contemporary debates about religion, identity and popular culture in the Netherlands, I was pleasantly surprised by the topic and approach of the article. All the more so, as Te White Cowboy was a well-known frame of reference in my youth, and remains so in my house hold :).

Also for a less informed reader (for instance a non-Dutch reader), this article potentially has a lot of interesting things to offer. The cartoon in which a polite cowboy rids a Wild West town of 'obnoxious' church goers and then rides off into the sunset, is an original entry into the sort of narratives that circulate in secularizing societies. And, one could even say that this is how secularization is made into not just a sociological fact, based on dwindling church numbers and declining votes for confessional political parties, but rather a moral framework in which people ('men') are supposed to behave in a certain way. Actual religion, and its nuances, the different forms of Protestantism, its  historical nature or current role in society, are relegated to a mere symbolic obstacle to the arrival of a happy secular society.

If this correctly summarizes the major line of argumentation of article,  I recommend revisions that draw out the strengths of the article more effectively. As the article stands now, some elements are highlighted a bit too much, whereas other elements, crucial to bring home the argument in my opinon, are developed less extensively.

- What could be reduced? The article delves into an overview of the reformation on pages 3 and 4 and 6,7. Though the religion that is being alluded to in the episode of The White Cowboy has its roots in the Reformation, it does not read a big surprise that a 90s cartoon simplifies its view of history. I would recommend shortening these parts in order to focus on concrete aspects that the episode alludes to and/or simplifies (the part about the Zwarte Kousenkerk and the wearing of hats is informative in that respect).  Also, the speculation about whether the White Cowboy could be a Christ figure seems unnecessary. If indeed, as the author states, this interpretations lacks credibility, why mention it?

- What could be amplified/strengthened?
How I see it: the strengths of this article lie in that it reads the episode of the White Cowboy as a sort of moral narrative of secularization/secularism (I will return to issues of terminology and the difference between secularization/secularism below). I agree with this approach: popular culture is an important vehicle for societial dynamics and identifications. The episode shows secularization is not just a sociological fact but rather becomes a moral imperative. It states, more or less, ‘this is how one should behave apparently, in Dutch society’ (the interpretation of 'men' shines here, I think, and could even be highlighted a bit more as a moral imperative). I think more attention could be paid to more recent history, and to the rise of a moral narrative of secularization as something expected of Dutch people (and of humanity in particular).

- The article's strengths lie in understanding this moment of time, in which a criticism of (simplified) religion is made a part of a collective morality ('men') through popular culture. It could include some more work that has been done on this theme, about how secularization is, in the Dutch context, a moral framework that is expected of people. There is literature on this topic that could be mentioned. Nationally, one can think of the work of Jan Willem Duyvendak, Evelien Tonkens, Peter Geschiere, James Kennedy. Internationally, there is a lot of work on how secularization is a problematic moral framework (Juergensmeyer, Burchardt, Asad, Mahmood). One could think of the work of Charles Taylor who has outlined secularism as a 'social imaginary' in which certain behavior comes to be expected. I am not saying that all sources should be used, but rather that the harvest of this article seems to lie in contributing to understanding how secularism is a moral imagination and not a sociological fact or historically accurate representation. One or two conceptual sources that highlight such elements of secular morality would suffice.

- The history of the VPRO as a secularized instrument of pillarization, is as the author rightly stated, a very interesting example of precisely such developments. But unfortunately, the article does not delve deeper into the role of the VPRO. There is more to be said here. In particular this article could and perhaps should highlight how the episode of the White Cowboy illustrates the way in which instruments of pillarization in the second half of the twentieth century  contribute to moralizing secularity.

So my feedback amounts to: I suggest reducing the historical and theological criticism a bit (that a 90s cartoon is not the most accurate representation of Reformation history or theology is not surprising), and to focus more on inserting the reading of the episode in contemporary debates about secularization. This way, the article presents a stronger case that this episode of the White Cowboy is something more than an example of bad criticism of religion: it is part of a larger dynamic in society in which a morality (involving a historically inaccurate and crude view on religion) in instilled in populations.

This would also result in a stronger case for the ‘Communication-Oriented Analysis of Texts’: after all if the episode is presented as a moral narrative of sorts, it is of interest to highlight how it tells this narrative, how the audience is taken up into its performance. I feel that some of the analysis could be tightened up a bit, and some elements could be expanded on a bit. For instance, the (very interesting) fact that the episode ends with a projection screen further enhances what I see as the strength of this article: the White Cowboy is an example of stories societies tell themselves. We, as Dutch citizens, are in effect, analogous to the audience in the episode: we are presented with moral narratives that claim to solve the problem of religion (and we are expected to applaud).

Apologies if this review has become too long: please take it as my attempt to communicate enthusiasm for this article and as indicative of my hope that it gets published in its most affective and effective form!

Author Response

Dear reviewer, thank you for the valuable feedback. I have incorporated the your feedback as follows:

The requested reduction of the history of Dutch protestantism is a bit problematic, if I see that another reviewer applauded this part of the article specifically. In less tha a 1000 words I adress the history of Dutch protestantism, including the phenomenon of pillarization and de-pillarization. That is 1/9 of the whole article in terms of words. I would like to keep it that way.

The request for the deletion of the 'positive' theological interpretation of the White Cowboy as a Chirst-figure, I would like to maintain too. But I understand the weakness in my argumentation, pointed out by the reviewer. Since, I still want to argue that such an interpretation in possible if one sees secularisation as a (historical) product of Christianity itself, I have added an entire new paragraph at the end of my 5th section to adress this explicitly within the context of The White Cowboy. I quote:

However, such a theological interpretation might be thought of as over-stretching the narrative. Even thought this might be understandable, I would like to argue in favour of maintaining this interpretational possibility by pointing out that secularisation itself has been seen as a product of Western Christianity itself. As scholars like Charles Taylor (2004) and Prosman (2011) have argued that the profane-sacred distinction has always been a part of Christianity, also in its premodern iterations: the necessity to distinguish between state and church. If the White Cowboy is to understand as a stand-in for Christianity, the closing of the church’s doors is nothing but an expression of the idea that Christianity has produced secularism, and therefor dug its own grave, so to speak. The White Cowboy, as image of a secularised but still (in that sense) Christian culture and society, makes obsolete what had created it in the first place.

To incorporate the reviewer's observations on the (problematic nature) of secularisation as a moral framework, I have inserted two new paragraphs under the 4th section precisely discussing this aspect in the context of the communication analysis of 'the Churchgoers'. In quote:

The fact that ‘The Churchgoers’ is narratively speaking a film-within-a-film, starring and watched by the same people, turns the episode into a collective-moral narrative. The film shows what ought to be and how people should act and feel within that collective, that is, religion-critical and secularized. Taken into its Dutch context, the episode informs and enforces the film audiences’ self-identification (both of the embedded text’s viewers in the in-film ‘cinema’ and the basic text’s viewers in the real world) as secular. This self-identification is not only meant as being factually but also as a moral imperative, as scholars like Jan Willem Duyvendak (2006) and James Kennedy (2009) have argued. And even more, other authors have voiced concerns about the problematic nature of this kind of framework, not per se in the Dutch context, but internationally (Asad 2003), because of the inherent discriminatory characteristic of any dominant social mechanism.

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The article has improved by the addition of the two pargraphs.

Reviewer 3 Report

The article has improved in my opinion. I support publishing it.