Roots of 20th-Century Western Counterculture: From Guillem Rovirosa’s Catalonia to Its Antipode
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors• What is the main question addressed by the research?
The main question in “Roots of 20th-Century Western Counterculture: From Barcelona to Manila“: is the life journeys of Guillermo Rovirosa (1915-1934) one of the most important social activists in post-war Spain, especially his early life when he abandoned his Catholic faith and, accompanied by a few friends, embarked on journey of exploration through Esperanto, anarchism, nationalism, naturism, spiritualism and theosophy. The article extended historical and sociological insight to these movements with the key thinkers and promoters.
• Do you consider the topic original or relevant to the field? Does it address a specific gap in the field? Please also explain why this is/ is not the case.
The topic of this article is relevant to sociology of religion. It gives a wide explanation on sociological/religious movement in the 20 century in the world and its reflections in Spain and Catalonia.
• What does it add to the subject area compared with other published material?
I am not proficient to answer this question
• What specific improvements should the authors consider regarding the methodology? What further controls should be considered?
I found this article very wide and it is diverging from the main aim of the article the journey of Guillermo Rovirosa. The title should be more detailed to include this.
• Are the conclusions consistent with the evidence and arguments presented and do they address the main question posed? Please also explain why this is/is not the case.
The author follows the logical argument presentation and presents all the relevant aspects of the main question with an appropriate conclusion consistent with the arguments presented.
• Are the references appropriate?
The article has extensive use of appropriate sources.
• Any additional comments on the tables and figures.
No
Author Response
I modify the title of my article according to the Reviewer1's sole suggestion.
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe article seeks to portray the social context of the early life Guillermo Rovirosa (d. 1964) by surveying a series of contemporary cultural phenomena that had a near-global reach and that came to contribute to the emergence of the 1968 counterculture. The author sketches the life of Rovirosa and his colleagues before examining the cultural movements of Esperanto, anarchism, naturism, anarcho-nudism, spiritualism, and, finally, theosophy. The author offers a fluidly written essay, which is novelistic and somewhat loquacious in style. The novelistic character poses the greatest challenge, which should be addressed prior to publication.
The author provides a series of large claims instead of fine-grained analysis (e.g., Spanish masons disfavored theosophy because they regarded it “as an Anglo-Saxon option” [ll.805f]). Even if true, such claims would benefit from demonstration and/or references. More importantly the bulk of the essay consists of a series of long digressions, whose purpose is not always clear. Indicatively, the digression on Esperanto in China (p.5) is concluded by the author’s realization that “[c]omparisons between Spanish and Chinese anarchism are not very productive.” (l.229) Likewise, the digression on nudism in Chile (p.11) or the specifics of Alan Kardec’s spiritualism (p.12) are merely tangent to the subject. The novelistic character is further emphasized by occasional jocular oversimplifications, e.g., “[t]o simplify somewhat it could be said that they found their own culture but without so many friars” (ll.706-707), and circular arguments (e.g., ll.231-235). In addition, it is surprising that when the author actually talks about Rovirosa (and not about related subjects), s/he frequently omits to provide helpful references. It appears that the author is intimately familiar with Rovirosa’s life and work, but an unfamiliar reader may need references. Finally, the conclusion that the cultural phenomena (e.g., anarchism, naturism, spiritualism) that shaped Rovirosa’s intellectual horizon was not unique to Spain but were globally operative is a rather modest achievement in light of the author’s historical erudition and scholarly enthusiasm.
Further issues that may help in revising the essay are:
- The essay focuses on commonalities, but what about differences? What did Rovirosa not experience or experiment with that his contemporaries did?
- How did Rovirosa’s spiritual quest differ from other well-known examples in history, e.g., St Augustine?
- The very first phrase mentions a “sentence” (“found his life changed by a sentence he overheard”, l.19). It is not clear what the author’s intention is by referring to that unspecified “sentence”.
- The key notion of “identity” (ll.56, 902) is nowhere discussed or defined but taken for granted.
- Why does the title single out “Manila” as the antipode to Barcelona (given that the essay digresses more on China than on the Philippines)?
- Typos: l.6: ‘become’ – ‘became’; l. 72: ‘the recently’ – ‘the then recently’; l.5: ‘Guillermo’ – cf. l.323: ‘Guillem’; l.668: ‘researches’ – ‘research’
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis is an extraordinary contribution to the history of ideas based on through, meticulous research.
The article also provides the author with an opportunity to bring his/her research to the attention of a wider audience.
Perhaps begin with an opening paragraph summarizing major goals; identifying at the outset which threads/connections seem to have been fruitful and which did not and why. Whenever possible, elaborate on findings from previous publications.
Need to clarify exactly how and why Rovirosa became "the heart and soul of one of the first Catholic anti-Franco movements in Spain." Discuss his movement's significance as one of the first movements and the importance as its being both Catholic and anti-Franco.
Connections (and/or lack of connections) between Spiritualism, Esperanto, and naturism are especially notable. Author points out ways that Spiritualism (Kardec and Davis) relate to (or do not relate to) fascism.
Perhaps by trying to cover all Iberian countries, the author has cast his/her net too wide.
Need a brief concluding paragraph summarizing main points. Reiterate as necessary.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
1.Perhaps begin with an opening paragraph summarizing major goals; identifying at the outset which threads/connections seem to have been fruitful and which did not and why. Whenever possible, elaborate on findings from previous publications.
Response: I try to do it in the "Introduction". If I must expand it and there is no problem of space, I would appreciate it if you could specify the points to be developed.
2. Need to clarify exactly how and why Rovirosa became "the heart and soul of one of the first Catholic anti-Franco movements in Spain." Discuss his movement's significance as one of the first movements and the importance as its being both Catholic and anti-Franco.
Response: I have added the name of this movement: the "Hermandad Obrera de Acción Católica (HOAC)". I don't know if it's enough given the space it would take to explain how Rovirosa came to the HOAC and what he did in it. Suffice it to say that he first spent time in prison, accused of collaboration with the Republic during the Civil War of 1936-39 and, despite this, the Cardinal Primate of Spain commissioned him to organize the HOAC. It was a set of facts whose complexity and paradoxical character require a lot of space. Would this sentence suffice?
3. Author points out ways that Spiritualism (Kardec and Davis) relate to (or do not relate to) fascism.
Response: I have found relationships in very different and even opposite directions. For example, the practice of spiritism by presidents of Mexico and many ordinary people.
4.Need a brief concluding paragraph summarizing main points. Reiterate as necessary.
Response: I try to do in final paragraphs with the title "5. A preliminary Conclusion". If it is not enough, I will be grateful if you could specify the points to be developed.
